Are Mark and Luke Compatible?

[POI]

By 'compatible', I mean (alternative facts) may be presented. Which would then mean these two publications are not 'compatible'. Was it merely a differing perspective, issued from differing witnesses and viewpoints, (or), were there instead irreconcilable changes -- which makes these two documents no longer logically compatible with one another?

For debate:

1) Is the Gospel of Mark and the Gospel of Luke compatible with one another?
2) If you state (yes), please address the video below, as I do not want to write up a "text wall" -- in which few might read. In a nutshell, the video demonstrates that these two Gospels are not logically compatible with one another.
3) If you state (no), then please do not even bother engaging this discussion, except to challenge any folks who answer (yes) to question 2)

[AchillesHeel]

You are making lot of baseless claims. No good reason to believe the claims about erasing or altering, when it is easily possible that he just wrote only the parts he knew, which can be true at the same time with the other texts.

But he knew what Mark said and changed it. You do realize the author of Luke was copying from Mark's gospel, correct?

That was the whole point of citing Markan priority above. Why did you fail to address that relevant aspect of the argument?

[POI]

Why did you fail to address that relevant aspect of the argument?

You will soon find out that some here do this. Case/point, in this thread, post(s) 281/283, 1213 did the same thing and completely ignored relevant observation(s). -> (http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 1#p1160761)

[1213]

But he knew what Mark said and changed it. You do realize the author of Luke was copying from Mark's gospel, correct?

There is no good reason to believe he changed anything. Neither there is any good reason to believe he copied Mark's, especially as you point out, his text is different, which is why it is irrational to say he copied. If he would have copied, the text would be exact the same.

[1213]

...The storylines between Mark and Luke are incompatible. ....

If that is so, why can't you show that with the scriptures?

[POI]

...The storylines between Mark and Luke are incompatible. ....

If that is so, why can't you show that with the scriptures?

Others have already done that, and you merely hand-wave those examples away.

[1213]

...The storylines between Mark and Luke are incompatible. ....

If that is so, why can't you show that with the scriptures?

Others have already done that, and you merely hand-wave those examples away.

I disagree with that. Giving a poor interpretation of the scriptures doesn't make Bible wrong, or the scriptures incompatible.

[POI]

...The storylines between Mark and Luke are incompatible. ....

If that is so, why can't you show that with the scriptures?

Others have already done that, and you merely hand-wave those examples away.

I disagree with that. Giving a poor interpretation of the scriptures doesn't make Bible wrong, or the scriptures incompatible.

Well, I disagree with everything you just stated above. Instead, "poor interpretation" = hand-waving.