What is the 'Q Gospel'?

Dr. Bergsma talks about why the Q Document hypothesis fails.



We get a small kick back from affiliate links.

[DebraL]

This scholar is so easy to listen to because he has a great speaking voice, does not get rattled, and is open about where or how he arrives at his conclusions. A pleasure to watch and hear the two of you talking. Great historical perspective.

[collegepennsylvania]

“The gospel is that I am so sinful that Jesus had to die for me, yet so loved and valued that Jesus was glad to die for me. This leads to deep humility and deep confidence at the same time. I can’t feel superior to anyone, and yet I have nothing to prove to anyone.”
- Tim Keller

[billdestroyerofworlds]

I have heard the theory that the Q Source didn't even exist as an actual document, which would mean that the Q Source was just the existing mass of oral stories among Christians at the time--those stories that everyone would have known because they heard it a million times.

[mattm]

Basically skeptics put the NT gospels thru a trial that they do to no other ancient document. Somehow two biographies written by two different people are expected to be identical...it's like they have 0 clue how eyewitness testimony works or how people tell stories. The funny thing is if Luke and Matthew were alot more similar, they would accuse one of copying the other.

[gereralshenx]

The first time I heard about Q was in high school. My NT teacher essentially called it hogwash and showed materials that even suggested Mark was the last of the synoptic gospels written. I personally don't really care.

[gracealone]

The problem with typical discussions about the synoptic problem is that we fail to recognize that there was a lot of oral teaching before the Gospels were written and that there was constant communication between the churches of the first century. As such, we cannot determine order or dependency with any certainty.

[gregorybarrett]

Something that I have heard is that Matthew was universally recognised as primary, with Mark, then Luke, and eventually John taking their cues from what went before to provide the context within which to emphasise what they found would be meaningful for their audience.

Late to the scene, a German scholar published a work positing Marcan primacy, which was universally excoriated, and the author banished into academic oblivion. Shortly thereafter, the Kaiser sought means to express independence from Rome over Catholic education in Germany. The Kaiser interfered in higher education, taking the unprecedented steps both of firing the orthodox university dean and replacing him with the discredited academic. The Kaiser's motive was to undermine Matthew's gospel, which alone recorded Jesus' giving the keys to Peter. German scholars got the message loud and clear: support Marcan primacy or face oblivion at the hands of the Kaiser. Thereafter, German scholars started publishing works attacking Matthean primacy and defending Marcan primacy. From there, the perspective gradually found broader acceptance.

The genesis of Marcan primacy is then both late and motivated, not simply from considerations unrelated to relevant questions but from political machinations and careerist self-interest.

[aiRRsofte]

This … this … this is not the same “Q” I initially thought it was.

[markiangooley]

Leave Q to James Bond movies and Star Trek…

[john-paulgies]

"Q" is one of those hypotheses with plausible deniability built in; clearly its main purpose is to cast aspersions on the veracity of Scripture as Revelation.
"We don't have a reliable testimony in the Gospels because the _real_ firsthand accounts are found in 'Q' and we don't have that, so..." etc. It's an unfalsifiable "claim" (really just an inference left as an exercise for the reader).
"Except it's technically not, because we might find "Q" one day, so let's act like it might exist..." which inevitably degrades into "Let's act like it does exist" in practice.

[AaronPICAR]

The main source for the synoptic Gospels is Peter. Q is not a document but a person and it’s Peter.

[gudea]

The Case Against Q is a New York Times best seller in the making if it’s marketed just a little differently

[samuellefischer]

The ultimate thing is that that secular scholars are so convinced by the things the writers say because they’re all so similar yet different that they’re looking for some sort of document to disprove the gospel

[dcndaviddbrockman]

Matthew and Luke both new the Blessed Mother, who in Luke's Gospel is mentioned as "...and she treasured these things in her heart"...was the Blessed Mother the "Q" source for Matthew and Luke?

[MikePasqqsaPekiM]

It’s difficult to find charitable intentions for creating the hypothesis for Q. I’m guessing that it is the result of people who did not read the Church Fathers.

Frankly, if we ever found another gospel, we would definitely dig into it, because Christians are not afraid of the truth.

That being said, it is a fair argument to make that if God is indeed guiding the church, then He would have provided us this fifth gospel if it was essential. Clearly, it is not, and it is very doubtful it exists at all.

[crushtheserpent]

I thought the Q gospel was a conspiracy theory 😆

[wouven]

Luke explain it as follows:
Luke 1:1
[1]Forasmuch as many have taken in hand to set forth in order a declaration of those things which are most surely believed among us,
Luke 1:2
[2]Even as they delivered them unto us, which from the beginning were eyewitnesses, and ministers of the word;
Luke 1:3
[3]It seemed good to me also, having had perfect understanding of all things from the very first, to write unto thee in order, most excellent Theophilus,
Luke 1:4
[4]That thou mightest know the certainty of those things, wherein thou hast been instructed.
(KJV)

[gavasiarobinssson]

Q is the guy giving Bond his funny toys.

[cosmologium]

Considering what I know about oral tradition, it feels so much more likely that the "sayings Gospel" was just an oral tradition of the sayings of Jesus, which were transmitted to paper at a later date. This is what happened with the Ramayana and the Quran, a common practice among ancient peoples.

[martinmartin]

90% of the known world around the time of Jesus were illiterate writing material and books were very expensive and were for the rich alone so people learned orally so books and letters weren’t readily available and you treasured them and didn’t pass them around because they may be damaged or lost etc you kept them hidden under lock key.
The fact that the New Testament is so accurate is down to the oral tradition and the Holy Spirit guiding the church.
Also there were over 90 gospels and the church had to decide what was scripture and what was not.