2007-02-22 02:05:34 · 6 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
If you take a look at Matthew, Mark and Luke in parallel
http://www.utoronto.ca/religion/synopsis/meta-syn.htm
You can see they follow a definate same structure. Biblical scholars persume their was a Gospel that all these writers copied from, which they named Q.
2007-02-22 02:22:55 · answer #1 · answered by By Any Means Necessary 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The Q source is the unknown source that the synoptic gospels used when writing their gospels. John didn't use any sources like the others because he is very differnet. Mark is the earilest of the 4 gospels. Matthew and Luke are similar in nature and many things that are in Mark are used in the other two. People believe that they both used the book of Mark as a source. This is very believeable if you look at all three books carefully. However, Matthew and Luke also have other information, so it is believed there is a second source, called the Q source. This is called the document hypothesis. Yes, it's hypothetical, but there is evidence for it. You are allowed to carry your own opinion on it. However, I do believe in the Q source. It doesn't hurt my faith that authors of the gospels researched what they wrote. It shouldn't hurt yours either.
Amanda
2007-02-22 10:15:09 · answer #2 · answered by One Odd Duck 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Some "scholars" believe a document existed, a common source, now lost, that was the source text for the Gospels.
It is mere theory, but proponents of this make good sounding arguments. Nonetheless incorrect.
To say such a document existed would be equal to saying the individual Gospels were not inspired of God, that they were only copied out verses chosen from some other text.
2007-02-22 10:13:11 · answer #3 · answered by Jed 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Some Biblical scholars believe that the gospels of Matthew and Mark, (possibly Luke) came from a common source. They don't believe they were eyewitness accounts, but accounts written by different men using what is termed the Q document for lack of a better term. No such document has been found, it is pure speculation on the part of Biblical scholars.
2007-02-22 10:12:29 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
The Gospels--The Debate Goes On :
- Are the Gospel accounts of the birth of Jesus Christ true?
- Was Jesus really resurrected?
- Did he actually say: "I am the way and the truth and the life"?
http://watchtower.org/library/w/2000/5/15/article_01.htm
The Gospels--History or Myth?
http://watchtower.org/library/w/2000/5/15/article_02.htm
2007-02-22 10:12:41 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
It is hypthetical, as is JED and P. We have no original or even copies or shreds of copies of them.
2007-02-22 10:13:20 · answer #6 · answered by Aspurtaime Dog Sneeze 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋