A Broad Perspective on Mental Healing

Home | About | Alternative Health | Contact

phraseology between Mark and each of the other two Synoptics while sometimes the accounts are almost identical. It seems, then, that either all three Synoptists made use of the same strands of oral tradition or that Matthew and Luke copied from Mark. The latter is the more likely hypothesis and, if it does not lend support to the belief that Mark was written at Peter's dictation, it at least shows beyond any doubt that Mark's Gospel was accepted as true by the first generation of Christians, and it is safe to conclude that everything of historical value is to be found in it.
Scholars are fairly unanimous in their acceptance of the views outlined above, but Crum 42 thinks that our analysis of the Synoptic problem can be carried one stage further. He says : ' As the recognition of the priority of St. Mark has made it possible to measure the change of thought which has taken place between the writing of St. Mark's Gospel and the copying of it by St. Matthew and St. Luke, so it is possible to distinguish in St. Mark itself two " strata ", between the formation of which there has taken place a change in the Church's mind and language.' The phenomena to be accounted for are the existence, side by side, of incompatible elements. Cheek by jowl are to be found two stories, of which one is about incidents and sayings such as Simon Peter might tell in Rome and Mark record homely, vivid, frank, giving such reminiscences as would convey an impression of what Jesus of Nazareth had said and been to His first disciples : while the other is in a different vocabulary, implies a different Chris-tology, is metaphorical or allegorical, setting out the mystical implications and divine significance of the bare facts of the Lord's personality and activities. Crum believes that the two strata can be distinguished and that the places where one work interrupts the other can,