tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1230344530531927799.post5514123585299465036..comments2023-04-28T06:59:37.174-04:00Comments on twoTwentyEight: Principles of Literary InterdependenceJoseph Howellhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00339898114118904716noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1230344530531927799.post-37952289884863796352017-08-18T12:35:27.870-04:002017-08-18T12:35:27.870-04:00Excellent brief summary of literary dependence, Jo...Excellent brief summary of literary dependence, Joe! I can think of any number of examples, right off the top of my head, to match these tendencies of which you spoke. For instance, while all three Synoptics describe the incident when Jesus was accused of expelling demons by the power of Beelzebub, only Mark has the lines about Jesus' family attempting to remove him from public view because they thought he had become mentally unbalanced (cf. Mk. 3:21). The idea that Jesus was thought to be "out of his mind" by his own mother and brothers was something Matthew and Luke preferred not to include, not because it wasn't true, but because it was embarrassing did not fit their literary purpose. Similarly, while both Mark and Matthew talk about ceremonial defilement by eating with unwashed hands, Matthew sees no need to use Mark's editorial interlude about the Pharisees and their practice of washing cups, pitchers and kettles (Mk. 7:3-4), likely because Matthew was writing to an audience that already understood this very well, while Mark's audience, presumably in Rome, did not.Dan Lewisnoreply@blogger.com