Argument Summary: Mark has a great deal of "rather clumsy redundancy" not found in Matthew (or Luke). For example: "That evening at sundown" (Mark 1:32) vs. "That evening" (Matt. 8:16) and "when the sun was setting" (Luke 4:40). Redundancy is an obvious Markan stylistic feature. It is easier to believe that Matt and Luke made use of Mark and often eliminated the redundancies than that Mark added them [Stein, 63f].

Since we will not dispute Luke's use of Mark, our only question remains, is this redundancy evidence for Mark's priority over Matt? But even here Stein leaves out (having disposed of it elsewhere out of hand) the idea that Mark and Matt are independent products. While the redundancy argues against Mark copying Matt, does it also argue against our view?

Stein gives some numbers comparing how the Markan redundancy is paralleled in Matt and Luke: how many times each has one but not the other, or has both. For our purposes (Luke did use Mark; Matt and Mark are independent products) the only ones of effect are these:

• Matt has one half -- 74 times
• Matt has both halves -- 37 times
• Matt has no parallel -- 63 times

Total: 174

The raw numbers may seem impressive, but by themselves tell us nothing. In what context do these redundancies appear? If they appear in the words of Jesus, then one may ask whether they are also a stylistic method of Jesus himself. (At least 1 example Stein offers, Matt. 12:3-4, does come from the words of Jesus.) The fact that Mark's redundancies appear in Matthew only 37 times out of 174 certainly does not evidence Markan priority over Matthew. Stein gives no list of these redundancies. Hawkins [139] lists only where Matt and Luke use one half. We continue to look for a full list.