Adding Marcion

Hi there--haven't posted in a while.  I've been busy ruminating on the major/minor agreements.  But as a result, I have a new diagram.

I've decided Farrer must be in part correct: canonical GLuke did use canonical GMatt, one way or another.  (I'm also moving to the following nomenclature: GMatt, GMark, GLuke, GJohn, but will still use the standard abbreviations for apocrypha, i.e. GHeb, GPet, etc.)

But the problem is there's so much language that Luke did not use from GMatt.  Goulder can sometimes explain this, but not always.

I stumbled upon a solution, however: if Marcion's gospel were a source for Matthew...and if Luke revised Marcion using Matthew...then that would explain a lot of phenomena.

Importantly, it would explain the minor agreements, but would also explain why so much Matthean vocabulary is unique, or nearly so.  It would also finally resolve the question of which came first, GLuke or Marcion's gospel (which I abbreviate "Mc" though this is irregular).

It would also explain why some of the minor agreements are not to be found in Marcion--like in the passion narrative, for example.  How?  Because...Marcion didn't use GMatt.

He used Q/GHeb.

It also pleases me because it finally decides a place for Marcion's gospel, which I really wondered about.  It thus increases the scope of the HSH, giving Mc a vital place as the source for both GMatt and GLuke.  I've also now placed one of the last remaining major gospels into my solution.  (Next stop: GThom!)

Did Mc invent the Q sayings?  I don't know.  My hunch is no, he didn't (I think they had significant presence in Q/GHeb; remember, GHeb was said to be a mutilated version of GMatt) but he might have revised them heavily.

So there's a new diagram: ETA: I no longer equate GPet with Q/GHeb, and regard the latter as equivalent to GEbi.

(I've redone everything using Photoshop.  Here I use the old nomenclature for comparative purposes.)