Stefan Kristensen wrote:A compilation can't possibly have a thematic as well as a narrative unity the way gMark does. .
Yet is does.
Its not that difficult to redact traditions into a story based on not just what people thought took place, but what they wanted to take place.
This is completely non sequitur to a Pauline Markan relationship.
The style, vocabulary, characters, scene-building, etc. are extremely consistent throughout which would not be the case if it were a mere compilation.
Your dead wrong here. Its how we know its a compilation, because it is obvious to the trained eye.
The way people shared information changed forever with the fall of the temple, this was a way for one community to address the need to save tradition and proselytize their theology.
They were pros at compiling traditions, even though this author/s was less skilled then others.
we are dealing with a very conscious storyteller. Using extremely subtle symbolism. That's just one of many examples.
Nothing in your statement discounts a compilation. The above took place with said compilation.
No one is stating it was "only" a compilation
YOU have to place yourself in the actual community writing said text, in the house in the oil lamp lit room with people making ink while the scribe is actually writing.
Are you telling me they had no oral or written traditions to go on and just imagined this book into existence? of course not. They had traditions both oral and written.
ALL of our gospel text was a compilation. It is the nature of selling theology. You have theology, and you think of better ways to sell it.