It’s a thing. try to stop your message being interpreted differently from how you meant it. One of many determinisms that are a thing, unless they are not.
Determinism Types & Examples | What is Determinism? - Video & Lesson Transcript | Study.com
The idea that things are or aren’t deterministic in texts is wrong. Everything is subject to some, in differing amounts. That’s how it works. ie: “There is one main message that the author is trying to teach the children that are watching and there is no room for question the points that the author is bringing forward. In complex television like The Soprano’s, there is room for interpretation….”
Chapter 6: Interpreting and Decoding Mass Media Texts
Within this chapter Interpreting and Decoding Mass Media Texts, I will cover the concept of semiotics, Ideological State Apparatuses, Stuart Hall’s Encoding/Decoding, Reception Theory and how they …
Crash course does a good explanation here https://youtu.be/AD7N-1Mj-DU makes sense. and making sense to most people is likely all we try to do when transmitting a message.
Over three-quarters of Mark’s content is found in both Matthew and Luke, and 97% of Mark is found in at least one of the other two synoptic gospels. Additionally, Matthew (24%) and Luke (23%) have material in common that is not found in Mark.
The gospels of Matthew, Mark, and Luke are referred to as the synoptic Gospels because they include many of the same stories, often in a similar sequence and in similar or sometimes identical wording. They stand in contrast to John, whose content is largely distinct. The term synoptic (Latin: synopt... Read more
Most scholars agree that Mathew is a propaganda version of Marc that was put in its place at the start of the new testament. Not just fudging it with obvious additions that Jesus was descended from Abraham/Moses/David etc, but also that he got stuck in Egypt, was a Nazarean, and all the other stuff that needed to be ticked in order for existing Jews to accept they had a new messiah on their hands. Pretty obvious to those who actually read the bible in a historic context. Watch this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hCyFw3jnoUk
To be fair many educated jews spotted right away that Mathew just added a bunch of stuff that would allow us to follow Christ without rousing rabbis – little did they know the book they wrote was a hit with gentiles, which was a bit lucky (in that it gave rise to the biggest world religion within a few hundred years). Funny old world.
Many say that Mark is more of a sermon version of Mathew – and try not to focus on the idea that Mathew just added a bunch of prophecy fulfilment passages to help woo the jew.
It’s a thing. try to stop your message being interpreted differently from how you meant it. One of many determinisms that are a thing, unless they are not.
The idea that things are or aren’t deterministic in texts is wrong. Everything is subject to some, in differing amounts. That’s how it works. ie: “There is one main message that the author is trying to teach the children that are watching and there is no room for question the points that the author is bringing forward. In complex television like The Soprano’s, there is room for interpretation….”
Crash course does a good explanation here https://youtu.be/AD7N-1Mj-DU makes sense. and making sense to most people is likely all we try to do when transmitting a message.
Over three-quarters of Mark’s content is found in both Matthew and Luke, and 97% of Mark is found in at least one of the other two synoptic gospels. Additionally, Matthew (24%) and Luke (23%) have material in common that is not found in Mark.
All reconstructions are fantasies… I highly recommend the best study on the subject and the amazing AS.
Same story – different spin – blatant that they kept all versions in there – a good way to give a bit of what everyone needs to belive, I guess.
Most scholars agree that Mathew is a propaganda version of Marc that was put in its place at the start of the new testament. Not just fudging it with obvious additions that Jesus was descended from Abraham/Moses/David etc, but also that he got stuck in Egypt, was a Nazarean, and all the other stuff that needed to be ticked in order for existing Jews to accept they had a new messiah on their hands. Pretty obvious to those who actually read the bible in a historic context. Watch this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hCyFw3jnoUk
To be fair many educated jews spotted right away that Mathew just added a bunch of stuff that would allow us to follow Christ without rousing rabbis – little did they know the book they wrote was a hit with gentiles, which was a bit lucky (in that it gave rise to the biggest world religion within a few hundred years). Funny old world.
Many say that Mark is more of a sermon version of Mathew – and try not to focus on the idea that Mathew just added a bunch of prophecy fulfilment passages to help woo the jew.