Journal: Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society
Volume: JETS 26:1 (Mar 1983)
Article: Evangelical Implications Of Matthean Priority
Author: James Breckenridge

---

JETS 26:1 (March 1983) p. 117

Evangelical Implications Of Matthean Priority

James Breckenridge*

Johann Griesbach (1745–1812) firmly supported the tradition of Matthean priority against the then innovative view of Marcan primacy. The similiarity of Mark to Matthew and Luke, his lack of an independent chronology, the obvious interdependence of Matthew and Luke, plus external evidence and logical historical development all seemed to declare both the dependent and subsequent nature of Mark as well as the priority of Matthew.1 Griesbach’s hypothesis was soon discarded, however, in the frantic scramble to refute the mythologizing of David Friedrich Strauss. The blade nearest to hand was Marcan priority, by which it was hoped to discredit Strauss’ source theory, the same Griesbach hypothesis, and thus parry the thrust of his argument.

Having achieved ascendancy the Marcan hypothesis, and subsequently the two-source theory, has reigned in NT scholarship for the past century. Inevitably this position has made itself known in the writings of evangelical authors. Robert Gundry, in his recent commentary on Matthew, presumes that “the comparison undertaken here will show that the peculiarities of Matthew derive almost wholly from his own revisions of and additions to Mark and the material shared only with Luke.”2 Donald Guthrie projects a six-stage theory of origins in which Mark reduced the content of Peter’s preaching to his action gospel, which was then expanded by Matthew.3 Donald A. Hagner assumes Matthew and Luke’s use of Mark and Q, supposing that Matt 15:1–20 adapts Mark 7:1–23 to make it acceptable to Jewish readers and that Matt 19:17 is a revision of Mark 10:18.4 Grant R. Osborne maintains that the two-source theory should be applied to all the gospels5 —but he is also well aware that other options may be available:

The priority of Mark … can no longer be considered a given. Recent challenges to the “sacred” two-document hypothesis have established problems that cannot be answered by so simplistic a theory.6

*James Breckenridge is professor of New Testament at Northwest Bible College in Minot, North Dakota.

JETS 26:1 (March 1983) p. 118

That other options are indeed available is confirmed by the appearanc...

visitor : : uid: ()