Great stuff. I've thought for a long time there was something fishy about the hometown story, because it isn't named, and the only reason everyone "knows" that it was Nazareth is they are reading the later gospels back into Mark. Capernaum is the Galilean town that keeps being mentioned in Mark. Also revealing that when Matthew was writing he said Jesus came down from Galilee (to John by the Jordan) , referencing the only time in the entire gMark where the word Nasaret is used. Which tells me it wasn't in Mark at the time Matthew was written, but added later. Another thing I find interesting is how gJohn paints Thomas in such a negative way, in specific ways that tell me our version of John postdates the gospel of Thomas and is targeting this more gnostic gospel and/or its community. I fully agree about the proto-Luke, which basically obsoletes the idea of "Q" (unless we say it was Q), and is why the double tradition material appears more primitive in Luke. Matthew rewrites it and arranges the material in larger blocks. I would add an arrow back from Matthew to canonical Luke because some stuff from Matthew made it into the finished Luke, like some "minor agreements", and his added birth narrative was written after the one in Matthew I think. It just makes a lot of sense that Matthew is a full orthodox rewrite, which is why it then became the favored gospel of the church. I think your theory makes a lot of sense and explains what we see better than mainstream theories.

Im definately getting this book!

You definitely have to make a series of videos on your hypothesis discussing it with Barth Ehrman and other scholars. It would be fascinating

“Proto-Mark” was a comedy stage play. Matthew rewrote it as a Tragedy.

Your idea of the sower parable reflecting the apostles. Is that an idea unique to you from what you’re aware? Or had you found the seed of that idea elsewhere and worked on expanding it.

Genuinely an amazing thing to spot or at least deduce

This is very interesting. I found you through history valleys page. I would love to show you some links and parallels i have found between the roman aristocracty and the new testament. I feel if goes hand in hand with what you are illustrating

Good brain food

While I wouldn't dismiss these ideas out of hand, a lot of this is forcing the data to conform to theory, rather than the other way around. You can't just say, "This would make more sense if it read differently." Rather, you need to make sense of things given how it actually reads.

I'd love to read your book but I refuse to pay 60 dollars for a paper back book FFS!