The Q Gospel EXPLAINED

Another educational/informational video explaining what the Q source or Q gospel is, and analyzing a bit of Greek as an example of why Q is theorized.

Yes, I got the date of the Nag Hammadi discoveries wrong. I said 1954, it was actually 1945. My bad.

I probably misspoke a couple of times throughout this video; I wasn't going off of a script. If there's a case where what I'm saying contradicts the words on the screen, the text is probably correct.

The Crossan book I cite:

My own book on the historical Jesus from a Marxist perspective! ^-^

The BH Streeter reading about the "minor agreements" I read from in pdf form:

For further reading on Q, look at the works of John S. Kloppenborg and Burton Mack.

Support me on Patreon!

[rickjensen]

"When the name jesus is spoken, the angels sing in rejoice." As a sinner, i will defend this forever.

[josepheridu]

I do not get why Q is used as an argument against Christianity if it is inconsequential for gospels being real or not.

[treejelloman]

I highly appreciate your tenacity in research. 🧐 Body of Christ needs and appreciates your service. I love the teacher spirit.

[nettejohnson]

The Gospel of Thomas (also known as the Coptic Gospel of Thomas) is an extra-canonical sayings gospel. It was discovered near Nag Hammadi, Egypt, in December 1945 among a group of books known as the Nag Hammadi library.

[kearlanventures]

Probably the most useful argument for “Q” I’ve seen. Thanks. But still, can’t this all be explained, logically, by Matthew writing first and Mark and Luke following? At the very least matthew before luke? Matthew has all the elements you cite right?

[Edits_Panic]

That Baal may leave your heart my brother

[kyledefranco]

The transmission theories are not wholly mutually exclusive. The process of codifying the Gospels could have taken a century. A century of people copying bits from here and there. So the 2-source and 4-source theories can both be true.

[cripmccrypto]

The very young pastor brought up the "Q Source" at St. Clement's this morning. Very interesting... So what about Josephus ? Was that bogus? Maybe a dumb question but could Q = J ?

[reazonozaer]

I've heard of Q before. I've wondered if Q wasn't perhaps the oral traditions. Of course some far more educated person than me has probably already addressed this.

[mimi]

Where is the gospel of John ? are there not consequences to adding or taking away ?

[jonathantshibula]

Confess that Jesus is Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, and you will be saved..Be baptized and repent of your sins. Repent simply means to turn away from your sins.

[megenberg]

the message gets through despite all of the hairs being split, unsurprisingly.

[cheryldeboissiere]

Take a look at the Gnostic text known as the Gospel of Thomas, you will find the same quotes with lengthen statements, also quotes that exist elsewhere. The major problem with Thomas is the later remarks are inconsistent with the whole text. This is much like the False Teachings of Buddha, Buddhists, unlike Christians, have no problem identifying them. It looks like people had no problem with adding on to later Greek text. The original is held to have been written in Aramaic. The Christian problem tends to be the expanded remarks such as “find and you will be confused/troubled then you will marvel.” Give it a glance and you will quickly realize the Book of Thomas is Q. If it is not, how did Thomas know all the same quotes, even with the lengthier statements, they are the same quotes?

[alloneinchristchurch]

That's because it's all from the Gospel of the Holy Twelve

[alloneinchristchurch]

It's all from the Gospel of the Holy twelve

[marecofason]

Don't believe the traditional date of the gospels bro in fact gamalie made a parody of Matthew that and paul quotes the gospels way before his death, they date it later so the gospels can loss its credibility plus some of the scholars don't believe in prophecy

[petermitchell]

The four Gospels in the bible all share one thing in common. Neither of the writers had ever met or knew Jesus, who had died many years before they were born. There WERE Gospels written at the time of Jesus by people who actually knew Jesus personally such as Philip and Mary Magdalen, but they do not appear in the Bible.

[paxsw]

You seem to totally ignore the Gospels were NOT written by strangers to Jesus, they were written by men who WALKED and LIVED with Jesus during His ministry (other than Mark who was younger but did follow Jesus and later traveled with Paul). Why do you think they were incapable of remembering occurrences independently that they all were witness to and participated in as a group? They all remember the same things and use pretty well the same words because they were there to witness it.

You also seem to discount the Spirit of God having anything to do with inspiring the Apostle's accurate retelling of a life they were all witness to and personally participated in. It was their COMMISSION by Christ to go out and tell the world about Jesus, and they spent the rest of their lives doing just that. They must've repeated what Jesus told them and what they witnessed firsthand hundreds maybe even thousands of times, that would burn it into their memories. I still remember much less important things verbatim I set to memory when I was a child, and I'm 71 now.

[HopeinJesus-]

Cussing while explaining the bible??Bible??? 🤮

[nitamaas]

This is undermining the holy Spirit inspired scripture. Very Suttle BS.