Quote:
No, because their readers already knew the material and its focus-points from the period in which Jesus' sermons were circulated as small compositions. Those who already knew how the "Little Apocalypse" source which underlies Mark 13 (which, in turn, underlies Matthew 24 and Luke 21) should be digested would know how these source-dependent portions in the Gospels should be digested.
What evidence do you have for these small compositions? What makes you think the people who got the anthologies were familiar with the small compositions?
Quote:
I'm saying that Jesus' statements did not seem garbled to the disciples on the scene or to the recipients of the Gospel of Matthew. You just needed to know what to expect, somewhat like one needs to know what to expect in the organization of a city-newspaper to read an entire news-story.
Why would Jesus jump back and forth in his response to the two questions? Certainly it would make more sense to answer the questions separately in order to keep the listeners from being confused. And if he was going to jump back and forth, why not make clear delineations? Continuing with your newspaper anology we see that newspapers make clear distinctions between articles. When articles need to be separated by page breaks there are clear indications that this is so, and clear indications where the stories continue.
Jesus' speech, if your analysis is correct, would be akin to a newspaper with all headines, "continued on page...", and "continued from page" removed. Jesus would have to be insane to talk like this.
If God wanted us to be Atheists we'd be born that way.
