|A more detailed look at the minor agreements.|
|The “minor agreement” category, 212, is another important category in supporting the FH, and the 3SH, over the 2SH.
(see all hypotheses here)
(see category descriptions here)
(see all results here)
Here are some relevant results:
The first thing to notice here is that 212 is significantly related to the Matthian categories 211, and 210, and not significantly related to the Lukian categories 112 and 012. This strongly suggests that the “minor agreements” are Matthian in origin and that Luke has copied or remembered small parts of Matthew while working with Mark’s text.
On the 2SH, we would expect 212 to be roughly equally related to the Matthian and Lukian categories, and this is not the case. However, the lack of a finding does not prove that the 212 is not related to the Lukian categories, so we can not dismiss the 2SH based on this. All we can say, is that this finding fits much better with the FH, and the 3SH, than it does with the 2SH, and thus makes the 2SH less probable that its competitors here.
Another thing to notice here is the degree of relatedness in the categories 212, 211, and 210. If these are all authored by Matthew, and subjected to editing by Luke then the following is true:
210 represents large sections of text authored by Matthew, and ignored by Luke, and are therefor unaffected by Luke’s style.
211 are Matthian words rejected by Luke.
212 are Matthian words accepted by Luke.
If this is the case then we would expect 210 to be somewhat intermediary between 211, and 212. And we would expect 210 to be more related to both 212, and 211, than 210 and 211 are related to each other. This is exactly what we see.
So, what we can say, in closing here, is that everything the study found is very consistent with the minor agreements being authored by Matthew, and edited by Luke.
|Back to synoptic main page|