|previous article in this issue||next article in this issue|
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
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".