Sectional Analysis

We find here first of all only the sort of differences we would expect in an oral transmission process and/or translation process. Mark and Matt use slightly different forms of the same word to express the fate of the Temple and the movement of Jesus. Mark meanwhile offers clear personal, Petrine eyewitness touches: the exclamation of the witness; the specific names of the disciples present, and the location seated across from the Temple. Matthew shows more sophistication in use of terms like parousia and technical terms like the "end of the age". Luke specifically avoids these references, which makes sense if he is presenting his material in a politically sensitive situation (as a brief to a Roman official). Luke also modifies the opening statement to fit in with his unique account prior of the widow and her mites versus the gifts being put into the treasury.

"Misleads" in Mark and "lead astray" in Matthew are forms of the same Greek word, differing in only one letter. Once again variations between three two are within what would be expected of oral transmission, note-taking, or translational differences. On why Luke composes differently see here.

Once again we argue that we have a case of Mark and Luke preserving an order originally found in Ur-Matthew. Greek Matthew, in line with its methods, moves much of this to Matthew 10:17-22 into the middle of a discourse directed to the apostles prior to a local mission (and is not found in the Lucan parallel in Luke 10). Note how Luke expresses the last promise in his own language (cf. Acts 27:34).

Once again we see differences that would arise of independent translation (there is a different Greek word for "field" in Mark and "open spaces" in Luke) or else to make the passage more intelligible (Luke's Roman man would not understand why people would be on a housetop!; plus the interpretation of what the abomination of desolation will mean).

It is in this passage that one of the slender threads holding up Markan priority is found. As Stein argues [SSG, 38-9] the parenthetical comment "let the reader understand" is something that is said to the reader of Mark. On other grounds he rejects (and we agree) that Mark did not copy Matthew, and he supposes it could not be part of an oral tradition; hence Matthew must have copied Mark.

Other more likely options present themselves, however:

1. This could be an area in which, as the classical scholar Kennedy suggested, Greek Mark was in a position to influence Greek Matthew. Under our paradigm this could be supported by the idea that Luke does not have this comment, and that this is because Ur-Matthew did not have it; but it would be more likely because Luke does not stress the Danielic connection for the sake of his Gentile readership less informed of the OT background (as well as his interpreting of the discourse as noted here. Owing to the mysterious nature of the passage, the use of this parenthetical comment may have caught on.
2. This could be rather a reference telling the reader of Daniel to understand. For the same reason as above, this would explain Luke's omission of the comment. Stein rejects this idea on the grounds that the text does not say "let the reader of Daniel understand." However, both Mark and Matthew already refer to Daniel in the same sentence (though for some reason, Stein does not show this in Mark!). Furthermore, if Matthew slavishly copied this parenthetical comment, it is odd that his word order in this sentence otherwise differs, and that he interprets Mark's "where not it ought" to the more specific "holy place". Finally, given that (see link above) the reference was in fact to the Roman attack on Jerusalem (as also per Luke's interpretation), the reason for the comment would be that the relevant portion of Daniel was "politically sensitive" (per suggestion of Keener, Matthew commentary, 576). This also fits in with the recognition that the events of Daniel were being fulfilled at this time (see here).

Thus, despite Stein, there is no grounds for saying that this looks "far more" like an appeal to the reader of Mark vs. the reader of Daniel.

Yet again between Matt and Mark, we have differences easier to explain as the result of independent translation (i.e., slightly different word form between "will be cut short" and "he shortened"). QM theorists argue that Matthew is copying Mark and correcting his grammar and literary miscues. It is much easier to see a Mark less competent with Aramaic to Greek translation, and combined with the rough language of a Galileean fisherman, on one hand, and Matthew independently and more competently translating on the other. It is also interesting that Luke, supposedly copying Mark, omits the "great" before "distress" that is found in Matthew but not Mark. He does however as expected omit the allusion to Daniel in the OT.

Ur-Matthew Reconstruction

Oddly enough Mark of all three of these has likely preserved the most original form, other than the Petrine eyewitness touches.

Jesus said to-them Not you-see all these? Truly I-say to-you Not at-all will-be-left here stone on stone which not at-all shall-be-thrown-down. sitting And He on the Mount of Olives came-up to-Him the disciples aside privately saying Tell us when things will-be And what the sign when are-about all these-things to-be-completed? the And Jesus answering to-them began to-say Beware not anyone you misleads many For will-come on the name of-me saying that I AM! And many will-lead-astray. But to-hear of-wars and rumors of-wars. See not-do be-not-terrified must for-all things happen. But not-yet is the end. will-be-raised For nation against nation and kingdom against kingdom and there-will-be famines and plagues and earthquakes against places. all But these beginning of-throes. look out But you yourselves they-will-deliver-up for you to sanhedrins and to synagogues you-will-be-flogged and before rulers and kings you-will-be-led for-the-sake of-me for a testimony to-them. And to all the nations must first be-proclaimed the gospel. when And they-lead-away you delivering, not be-anxious before what you-shall-say nor meditate but what ever is-given to-you in that the hour this speak, not for are you one speaking but the Spirit the Holy. will-deliver-up But brother a-brother to death and a-father a-child and will-rise-up children upon parents and put-to-death them. And you-will be-hated by all on-account-of the name of-me. he But enduring to end this will-be-kept-safe. And will-be-proclaimed this gospel in all the inhabited-earth for testimony to-all the nations and then will-come the-end. when But you-see the abomination of-desolation that spoken by Daniel the prophet standing where not ought [he reading let-him understand] then those in the Judea let-them-flee into the mounts he and on the housetop not let-him-descend into the house nor let-him-enter to-take a a-thing out-of the house of-him. And the one in field being not let-him-go-back to the things-behind to-take the garment of-him. woe And to ones in womb having and to-the suckling in those (the) days. pray And that not will-occur the flight of-you of-winter nor in sabbath. will-be For the affliction great such as not has-occurred from beginning of-world until the now neither never occur. And except were-cut short the days those not would be-saved any flesh because of-but the elect will-be-cut-short the days those.