Ian Mills the PHD candidate who hosts the ** you do not have permission to see this link ** on the YouTube. (Nice discussion of the problems with Papias as well.)
I have to confess I don’t find arguments against Markan Priority very interesting because if there is one issue that seems settled to me in NT studies it’s this one. But it’s still important to understand why the consensus is what it is. Kudos to Mills.
21 mins into the video there’s a claim of editorial fatigue by Matthew in the calming of the storm.
The claim is Mark originally has a great “windstorm” happened, and when Jesus wakes up he calms the “wind”.
Matthew changes this to an “earthquake” happened but keeps Marks original Jesus wakes up and calms the “wind”.
Thus Matthew’s change to the original is highlighted by the discontinuity, in Mark the waves are caused by the wind so Jesus calms it, in Matthew the waves are caused by an earthquake yet Jesus still calms the wind.
The word Matthew uses however is σεισμὸς and this word can be used for any general commotion, of the air or the ground. Thus this observation becomes irrelevant for deciding on priority.
Next is a comparison of Mark and Luke’s feeding of the five thousand. While this does show that Luke secondary the argument works equally well for Matthean priority, Luke editing Matthews version.
Next is Herod “grieving” when he is tricked into have John the baptist killed. The claim is Matthew says Herod wanted John dead so why would he grieve? But the greek can mean to be distressed or sorrowful. In Matthew, Herod wants to kill John but is afraid of the crowd who consider him a prophet. He doesnt want the stigma of being a prophet killer (Josephus says this was why he he lost his kingdom). Herodias tricks him and now he is greatly distressed that he will be known as a prophet killer. There is no difficulty for Matthean priority here.
BDEhrman
FreedomBen
evgendob
Robert
1 Guest(s)