Scholarly Doubt about Q/First Gospel Contents is the Best Predictor of GMarc Attestation (LODLIB v2.03)

Lot’s of progress made in today’s upload. We’d specifically like to call attention to an expansion to our statistical proofs, especially in conversation with Daniel Smith’s 2019 chapter in BZNW 235 focusing on a statistical analysis of GMarc. In the interest of facilitating access for readers, we present the bulk of the content found on the page in our LODLIB that details our finding, building on Smith’s verse counts but nuancing them and challenging his starting goal (“On Not Dispensing with Any of Q”) and ultimate conclusions.

…………..

Smith Verse Count: GMarc Attested as a Percentage of Lk2

Tradition TypeGMarc Verses AttestedLk2 VersesGMarc Attested / Lk2
Single13549827.1%
Double/Q12823155.4%
Markan/Triple21642251.2%
Total479115141.6%

Even without questioning or changing any of the traditional contents considered secure for Q, according to Smith’s verse count approach, Q verses are the best attested of any tradition type. That is a highly significant finding on its own.

But what happens if we adjust our method to account separately for the 83 verses considered but doubted or rejected within CEQ? … [more below the fold]

Read More »

History of Stylometric and Statistical Scholarship on GMarc Debuts in First Gospel LODLIB v1.54

Today’s upload has many new updates, most notably several new pages on the history of statistical and stylometric scholarship on Marcion’s Gospel, from William Sanday to John Knox to Joseph Tyson and most recently, Daniel A. Smith of Huron University, who earned his PhD under Kloppenborg and whom I had the pleasure of meeting at KU Leuven several years ago. This history of scholarship culminates in a close comparison of Smith’s work and mine, summarized in this table:

The subsequent conclusions explain and evaluate the differences between Smith’s numbers and mine, conceiving of each approach (passage counts, verse counts, word counts) as lenses with increasing levels of magnification or granularity. Smith’s findings dovetail significantly with my own, that Q (in some version) and Mark (in some version) were both sources of GMarc.

Following continuous cycles of improvement, we have made many other content and formatting updates but will leave these for our readers to discover and enjoy. Every week our LODLIB gets a little better!

If there are institutions interested in hosting this work in a short- or long-term research fellowship or position, please let me know.