Q and other Source Documents

Discussion in '2003 Archive' started by Dr. Bob, Oct 15, 2003.

  1. Dr. Bob

    Dr. Bob
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2000
    Messages:
    29,402
    Likes Received:
    12
    The obvious parallels and overlaps within the synoptic Gospels has brought as many opinions as there are Bible scholars!

    Matthew's account
    Mark's account
    Luke's account part 1
    Q (quelle) unknown source document account
    Logia
    Didache
    ???

    How did they use each source, if they did?

    What "priority" is there in the Gospel accounts?

    Looking forward to a profitable discussion. [​IMG]
     
  2. Forever settled in heaven

    Forever settled in heaven
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2000
    Messages:
    1,770
    Likes Received:
    0
    interesting question, Dr Bob. i'd always assumed that the Synoptic problem was irrelevant to Bible translation.
     
  3. Dr. Bob

    Dr. Bob
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2000
    Messages:
    29,402
    Likes Received:
    12
    Probably correct, although it drifts into some of the versions. And certainly into the whole scope of Bibliology.

    Keeping it here temporarilly, as this is where the "ending of Mark" discussion was the prompted the thread. May move it to Theology. Hmmm
     
  4. aefting

    aefting
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2002
    Messages:
    874
    Likes Received:
    0
    I'm assuming this is where we would hold discussions on underlying text issues. It certainly comes up a lot.

    I never thought these source discussions were very interesting. God inspired the gospels and that's all I needed to know. I guess it does matter, though, if you are trying to get your hands around other problems, such as the longer ending of Mark.

    I'm a novice in this subject area so I look forward to hearing what other people have to say.

    Andy
     
  5. Matt Black

    Matt Black
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2003
    Messages:
    9,141
    Likes Received:
    0
    I think we can rule the Didache out as a source document - that's early 2nd century at best, although it's a useful interpretative tool eg: re the Pastorals' 'offices' - "appoint for yourselves bishops and deacons" (italics mine) - how very Baptist!

    Yours in Christ

    Matt
     
  6. mioque

    mioque
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    May 23, 2003
    Messages:
    3,899
    Likes Received:
    0
    Q= a list of remarks made by jezus similar in shape (but not contend) to the gospel of Thomas.

    Mark's account is first one written down still in existance. Q is probably a little older, but it is possible it was never written down untill it was hopelesly corrupted.

    Mark's account + Q + a 3rd source (possibly an Aramaïc text) = Matthew's account

    Mark's account + Q + a 3rd source (RC tradition suggests Mary) = Luke's account part 1
     
  7. timothy 1769

    timothy 1769
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2002
    Messages:
    1,323
    Likes Received:
    0
    I too believe the similarities between our Gospels must be due to some common underlying influences on their composition.

    IMO these influences were the Holy Spirit and the real people and events documented.
     
  8. Nomad

    Nomad
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2003
    Messages:
    105
    Likes Received:
    0
    I think it's funny to read books that not only tell us what Q said (although no text exists) but also what the "Q community" believed and taught. Imaginative reconstructions abound.

    If Q existed, it may have been similar to the Logia mentioned by Papias, although no one knows for sure. (Matthew wrote the Logia, according to Papias.) Peter's preaching probably was the source for Mark's gospel; and Luke likely researched his while Paul was held in Caesarea. And it may well be that the old belief in a common oral tradition underlying the Synoptics is the right answer after all.
     
  9. Pastork

    Pastork
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2002
    Messages:
    434
    Likes Received:
    0
    I hold to the traditional view that Matthew was the first Gospel to be written, and I do not have a "synoptic problem" (or is that "synaptic problem").

    I would recommend a few books:

    1. John Wenham's Redating Matthew, Mark and Luke:A fresh Assault on the Synoptic Problem

    2. Eta Linnemann's Historical Criticism of the Bible: Methodology or Ideology--Reflections of a Bultmannian Turned Evangelical and Biblical Criticism on Trial: How Scientific is "Scientific Theology"?
     

Share This Page

Loading...