 previous article in this issue | next article in this issue  |
Preview first page |
Document Details : Title: The Minor Agreements and Proto-Mark Subtitle: A Response to H. Koester Author(s): NEIRYNCK, F. Journal: Ephemerides Theologicae Lovanienses Volume: 67 Issue: 1 Date: April 1991 Pages: 82-94 DOI: 10.2143/ETL.67.1.542214 Abstract : Helmut Koester's recent book on Ancient Christian Gospels includes a revised vision of his essay on the Gospel of Mark, which was first published in 1983. His theory can be described as a defense of the Proto-Mark hypothesis. However, a terminological preliminary is needed here. Koester shows an obvious aversion to "the futile pursuit of an Urmarkus", to "searching for the Urmarkus ... that was 'more primitive' than any text that can be reconstructed on the basis of external evidence". But he himself arrives at the conclusion that "the earliest version" of Mark was first "amplified by the Bethsaida section" and then further expanded in a new edition (our canonical Mark) "characterized by various features not paralleled in either Matthew or Luke". The "external evidence" here means the parallel text in the Synoptic Gospels, The missing section Mk 6,45-8,26 in Luke and the minor agreements of Matthew and Luke against Mark. His opposition to Urmarkus concerns "(misguided) attempts to reconstruct and older form of the Gospel of Mark that would bring us even closer to the actual life of Jesus". |
|
