The groundbreaking discoveries just keep coming. My signals triangulation analysis proves definitively the briefer version of the Transfiguration found in GMarc actually comes from Qn. Not only that, given the lack of a baptism narrative in Qn and its description of Mary Magdalene as the one who first anoints Jesus as the Messiah, the Transfiguration in Qn has a crucial, unique significance. The Transfiguration is THE FIRST TIME in Qn that Jesus is recognized publicly as the Messiah, all atop a mountain and accompanied with a heavenly portent and declaration of his Davidic sonship in keeping with Ps 2.
In my view, more work needs to be done to see if GMarc 9.31a attests to “his exodus.” My hunch is that this Exodus/Passover reference is original to Qn, that Mark and Matthew left out this revolutionary motif, only for Late Luke to include it yet tie it to Jesus’ pilgrimage to the doomed city of Jerusalem.
Mark borrows the Qn Transfiguration language and imagery of heavenly portents and divine sonship and copies it back into the Baptism of Jesus. Hence the Markan redundancy in having two such portents.
Matthew follows Mark yet binds the narrative (pun intended) to the Akedah of Isaac (Gen. 22), lending the pall of Abrahamic drama to the forthcoming sacrificial death of Jesus as the unique divine son.
Late Luke follows the Qn script as the default but still manages to borrow transitional terms and the Akedah typology from Matthew.
Transfiguration mysteries solved!!!
On to the next discovery!
Other scholars are welcome to join in the fun any old time you want. 😉 I’m feeling ridiculously spoiled enjoying all of these scholarly finds and riches!