Subject: Re: Bob Schact's stats Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 09:22:27 GMT From: "Mark Goodacre" Organization: University of Birmingham To: crosstalk@info.harpercollins.com Sorry; I did not realise that Bob's statistics were based on 3 adjacent sayings in Thomas // 3 adjacent sayings in the Synoptics because the original post made clear that the sequence I was referring to was Thom. 63-65 // Luke 12, 14, 20 as follows: > Not at all may be too strong for Luke, though not for Q. The order of sayings > 63-65/66 follows Luke's (relative) order -- Rich Fool (Thomas 63 // Luke > 12.15-21); Great Supper (Thomas 64 // Luke 14.15-24); Husbandman (Thomas 65 // > Luke 20.9-19). It may well be coincidence. If not, then this is evidence of > Thomas's use of Luke because we have here L + Q + Mk material, i.e. the order > is Luke's and not a source's. It was this statement that led to the thread on the stats. and I must confess (sorry Bob!) that I did not read the hard sums carefully enough to realise that the discussion was relating now not to the specific sequence I was referring to but rather to the abstract possibility, without specific examples, of three adjacent sayings in Thomas // three adjacent sayings in the Synoptics. But I have read the posts properly now and can see that this is what was being discussed. Sorry folks; I'll try and pay more attention in future, even when it's sums : ) Mark ------------------------------------------- Dr Mark Goodacre M.S.Goodacre@bham.ac.uk Dept of Theology, University of Birmingham Recommended New Testament Web Resources: http://www.bham.ac.uk/theology/goodacre/links.htm World Without Q: http://www.bham.ac.uk/theology/q Homepage: http://www.bham.ac.uk/theology/goodacre