The Contents of Reconstructed Mark

In the table that follows, items in bold indicate agreement in substance and order in Matthew and Luke, where the reconstruction is thus most secure. Items in normal (roman) type are ones that Matthew and Luke have in common, but not in the same order. Items in italics are ones that would look peculiar to Matthew or Luke but might arguably find their way into the reconstruction. Those in blue italics derive from Matthew while those in green italics come from Luke.
Sometimes the inclusion of Sondergut from one or other Evangelist arises where the other has a loose but different parallel that might lead a reconstructor to assume a common source in RMk; elsewhere Sondergut is included to supply what might otherwise be an obvious lacuna in RMk. Where Matthew and Luke have non-Q material in common but not in the same sequence, the Lukan order has generally been preferred. Exceptions to this are indicated by blue roman type which denotes that such material has been placed in its Matthean sequence. Verse numbers in red indicate material that, in my opinion, would be omitted from RMk. Bold Italics indicates common material that occurs in the same sequence in Matthew and Luke but where the absence of a common context might militate against its inclusion in RMk. A question-mark denotes uncertainty about the location of material in roman type, or about the inclusion of material in italic type.

Note that the table that follows should only be taken as a first approximation to RMk as it might turn out. No doubt if an international team of scholars got to work on it and expended as much effort on this thought experiment as has been put into reconstructing Q, there would be a large number of refinements!

Last Updated on 10/09/2002
By Eric Eve