Click here to get the answers to the most commonly asked RBL questions.

Review of Biblical Literature Blog

The Case for Proto-Mark: A Study in the Synoptic Problem
Burkett, Delbert

TŁbingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2018 pp. xiv + 316. $201.00

Series Information
Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament, 399

Description: The most common explanation for the material shared by Matthew and Luke (the double tradition) is that Matthew and Luke both used a source now lost, called Q. If we adopt the Q hypothesis to account for the double tradition, then what theory best accounts for the material that Matthew and Luke share with Mark? Three main theories have been proposed: Matthew and Luke used the Gospel of Mark as a source (the standard theory of Markan priority), Matthew and Luke used a revised version of Mark's gospel (the Deutero-Mark hypothesis), or all three evangelists used a source similar to, but earlier than, the Gospel of Mark (the Proto-Mark hypothesis). Delbert Burkett provides new data that calls into question the standard theory of Markan priority and the Deutero-Mark hypothesis. He offers the most comprehensive case to date for the Proto-Mark hypothesis, concluding that this theory best accounts for the Markan material.

Subjects: Bible, New Testament, Synoptic Gospels, Mark, Literature

Login to Read the Review(s)

You must be a member of SBL to read the review(s). In May 2019, SBL improved security of its main site with a new login procedure that requires an email address and a password, instead of an SBL member number. RBLís login procedure is now synched to SBLís. Please use your email address and SBL password to log in to RBL. Your use of this site indicates your acceptance of RBLís Terms of Use.

Email Address
SBL Password
 Forgot Your Password
 Join SBL or Renew Membership

Review by Austin Busch
Published 6/4/2019
Citation: Austin Busch, review of Delbert Burkett, The Case for Proto-Mark: A Study in the Synoptic Problem, Review of Biblical Literature [] (2019).

Adobe Acrobat Reader
All RBL reviews are published in PDF format. To view these reviews, you must have downloaded and installed the FREE version of Adobe Acrobat Reader. If you do not have the Reader or you have an older version of the Reader, you can download the most recent version now.


Privacy PolicyTerms of UseContact Us