Dr Alan Garrow presents a studio version of the paper presented at the NT Research Seminar of the University of Durham on Monday 12 January, 2015 (h/t: Chris Tilling):
“Streeter’s ‘Other’ Synoptic Solution: The Matthew Conflator Hypothesis”
A published version of this paper is available here: Alan Garrow, “Streeter’s ‘Other’ Synoptic Solution: The Matthew Conflator Hypothesis“, New Testament Studies 62, no. 2 (April 2016): 207-226.
However, Mark Goodacre (NT Blog) points out a serious flaw in Garrow’s argument. Garrow argues that that when Matthew uses Luke alone, there is a high level of verbatim agreement; but when Matthew uses Luke and the Didache (which Garrow identifies with Q), there is a low level of verbatim agreement. According to Garrow, Matthew gets distracted when he uses two sources, and is less verbatim. However, Goodacre points out that we would then expect a similar pattern when Matthew uses Luke and Mark. But that is not the case. When Matthew uses Luke and Mark, there is still a high level of verbatim agreement – which is not what we would expect if Garrow’s theory were correct.
Reblogged this on Talmidimblogging.
LikeLike
[…] In this paper, Garrow argues that the Didache is one source of the material which makes up Q (the source of material shared by Luke and Matthew which is not in Mark). The paper, which is scheduled for publication in New Testament Studies in July 2016, follows on from Garrow’s earlier paper in which he argues for Matthew’s dependence on Mark and Luke (and…. […]
LikeLike
[…] for Alan Garrow’s solution to Synoptic Problem: Matthew used Mark and Luke, stay for a link to Mark Goodacre pointing out a serious flaw in […]
LikeLike