studies on the gospels

[Net2004]

"Matthew’s Use of Mark: Did Matthew Intend to Supplement or to Replace His Primary Source?*" by David C. Sim [School of Theology/Centre for Early Christian Studies, Australian Catholic University]

"Most scholars acknowledge Matthew’s debt to Mark in the composition of his own Gospel, and they are fully aware of his extensive redaction and expansion of this major source. Yet few scholars pose what is an obvious question that arises from these points: What was Matthew’s intention for Mark once he had composed and circulated his own revised and enlarged account of Jesus’ mission? Did he intend to supplement Mark, in which case he wished his readers to continue to consult Mark as well as his own narrative, or was it his intention to replace the earlier Gospel? It is argued in this study that the evidence suggests that Matthew viewed Mark as seriously flawed, and that he wrote his own Gospel to replace the inadequate Marcan account."

http://journals.cambridge.org/action/di ... id=8196377

It costs £20 to read this journal. so i thought that it is better for me to purchase a book about why scholars think matthew wanted to replace mark. does any one know any latest titles on the subject? thank you

[Toto]

There are some reviews of the article:

Critical Review: “Matthew’s Use of Mark: Did Matthew Intend to Supplement or to Replace His Primary Source?” by David C. Sim

and The Reception of Mark by Matthew

You might try to find the article in a library. Books on the subject tend to be expensive if they are meant for a specialist audience.

Also:

Mark Goodacre review of The Gospel of Mathew and Christian Judaism: The History and Social Setting of the Matthean Community

[Toto]

Duvduv's hobby horse has been split off here.

Please stay on topic.