>>17787339
Yeah this never made sense to me
>It's good Jesus died because it paid for our sins
>But it's bad the jews killed Jesus
>And it needed to happen because of blood sacrifice rules
>But it removed the need for any blood sacrifices

Personally, I think there was a proto-Luke without chapters 1-2 and much less material from chapter 3. Probably less material in general where canonical Luke expanded it. I think Proto-Luke was edited by Marcion, rather than Marcion's gLord being original, it suspiciously lacks references to John the Baptist and the jewish scriptures which are present in the other gospels, including Mark which was a source for (proto-)Luke. Then proto-Luke was used as a source by canonical Luke, who also used gMark, gMatthew, and gJohn, in the early 2nd century. I never understood the argument that gLuke used gLord, why would a proto-Orthodox take a gospel he considered heretical and meticulously add elements found in gospels he agreed with, when he could have used the gospels he agreed with? I think proto-Luke makes more sense.

As for gLuke using gJohn, I'm surprised it's not a more popular hypothesis, there are lots of details only found in those two gospels and not gMark and Matthew.