The Synoptic Problem - Did Luke rework Matthew's Gospel? Q Source with Dr. Mark Goodacre

Dr. Mark Goodacre is the Frances Hill Fox Professor of Religious Studies at Duke University, North Carolina, USA. He earned his MA, M.Phil and DPhil at the University of Oxford. His research interests include the Gospels, the Apocryphal New Testament, and the Historical Jesus. Goodacre is the author of four books including The Case Against Q: Studies in Markan Priority and the Synoptic Problem (Harrisburg, PA: Trinity Press International, 2002) and Thomas and the Gospels: The Case for Thomas's Familiarity with the Synoptics (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2012). He is well known for creating web resources on New Testament and Christian origins, including his podcast, the NT Pod. Goodacre has acted as consultant for several TV and radio programs including The Passion (BBC / HBO, 2008) and Finding Jesus (CNN, 2015-17). Goodacre is currently working on a book on John's knowledge of the Synoptic Gospels.

Dr. Goodacre believes he has solved the synoptic problem. The Farrer Hypothesis (FH) proposes that Luke reworked Matthews Gospel. Did the Q source exist? Dr. Mark Goodacre doesn't believe in the Q source.

==========================================================

Cashapp: 👉 $rewiredaddiction
Venmo: 👉 @Derek-Lambert-9
Twitter: 👉 @DerekPodcast
Instagram: 👉 @dereklambert_7

=========================================================

Index of topics & illustrations with timestamps:
0:00 - start
6:05 - What is Q?
8:10 - Distribution of Synoptic Gospel material (chart)
13:57 - Markan priority
15:28 - ‘Death of John the Baptist’ (illustration): Mt 14.1-2; Mk 6.14-15; Lk 9.7-8
18:05 - Dating of Matthew vs Luke
19:30 - Synoptic Gospels’ Markan structure (illustration)
22:46 - The Farrer Hypothesis
27:38 - So-called “Minor Agreements” between Matthew and Luke
30:30 - ‘Before the High Priest’ (illustration): Mt 26.67-68; Mk 14.65; Lk 22.63-64
31:57 - ‘John the Baptist Preaching’ (illustration): Mt 3.11; Mk 1.7-8; Lk 3.16-17
34:00 - Matthean Posteriority (Wilke hypothesis) - did Matthew rework Mark & Luke?
37:12 - Proto-John (Signs/Semeia Source) - source for John and Mark?
41:00 - Ex eventu prophecy for dating the Synoptics after 70 AD
42:40 - Jesus ben Ananias’ predicting the destruction of Jerusalem (*Josephus’ citation)
46:48 - ‘Destruction of Jerusalem’ and the Nations (illustration): Mt 24.15-16, 21-22; Mk 13.14, 19-20; Lk 21.20-21a, 23b-24
50:50 - ‘Do Not Worry’ - Nations vs Gentiles (illustration): Mt 6.32; Lk 12.30
53:55 - Matthew’s Jewish inclinations vs Luke’s Gentile inclinations
55:12 - ‘The Annunciation’ - “he will save his people” (illustration): Mt 1.21; Lk 1.31
55:45 - ‘Syrophoenician / Canaanite Woman’ (illustration): Mt 15.21-26, 10.5-6; Mk 7.24-27, 6.6-8; Lk 9.1-2, 10.1

[MythVisionPodcast]

Index of topics & illustrations with timestamps:
6:05 - What is Q?
8:10 - Distribution of Synoptic Gospel material (chart)
13:57 - Markan priority
15:28 - ‘Death of John the Baptist’ (illustration): Mt 14.1-2; Mk 6.14-15; Lk 9.7-8
18:05 - Dating of Matthew vs Luke
19:30 - Synoptic Gospels’ Markan structure (illustration)
22:46 - The Farrer Hypothesis
27:38 - So-called “Minor Agreements” between Matthew and Luke
30:30 - ‘Before the High Priest’ (illustration): Mt 26.67-68; Mk 14.65; Lk 22.63-64
31:57 - ‘John the Baptist Preaching’ (illustration): Mt 3.11; Mk 1.7-8; Lk 3.16-17
34:00 - Matthean Posteriority (Wilke hypothesis) - did Matthew rework Mark & Luke?
37:12 - Proto-John (Signs/Semeia Source) - source for John and Mark?
41:00 - Ex eventu prophecy for dating the Synoptics after 70 AD
42:40 - Jesus ben Ananias’ predicting the destruction of Jerusalem (*Josephus’ citation)
46:48 - ‘Destruction of Jerusalem’ and the Nations (illustration): Mt 24.15-16, 21-22; Mk 13.14, 19-20; Lk 21.20-21a, 23b-24
50:50 - ‘Do Not Worry’ - Nations vs Gentiles (illustration): Mt 6.32; Lk 12.30
53:55 - Matthew’s Jewish inclinations vs Luke’s Gentile inclinations
55:12 - ‘The Annunciation’ - “he will save his people” (illustration): Mt 1.21; Lk 1.31
55:45 - ‘Syrophoenician / Canaanite Woman’ (illustration): Mt 15.21-26, 10.5-6; Mk 7.24-27, 6.6-8; Lk 9.1-2, 10.1

[epiphanydrums]

I really appreciate this guests skills and demeanor. I plan on finding more of his work and lectures. Bravo!

[mtnshow]

I've been watching your channel for a while. I have to say that this was your best interview (minus Rabbi Singer who is the GOAT). It was a home-run on every level. The production value, your interview skills, Dr. Goodacre's responses. Clear, intelligible in every regard. I was most impressed with the homework you did in preparation for this. Seriously, great work.

[matthewsmolinsky]

Gotta give Derek a lot of credit, he is getting well known and influential scholars on a regular basis.

[wallycleaver]

i love Dr.Goodacre's easy scholarly approach! aewsome show!

[Will-zyru]

Goodacre is a wealth of knowledge. Great stuff.

[janestill]

How enjoyable.... Dr Goodacre is so clear and easy to listen to; I was happy to find your interviewing him on his own. Thank you.

[TeleNikon]

Goodacre is a clear, organized communicator. Such a pleasure to listen to him.

[ardalla]

Presently I'm reading R.G. Price "Deciphering the Gospels." His idea is that Mark is a fleshing out of Paul's epistles and that Q never existed as a independent, written document. Very interesting and convincing book. A quote from Price, "I went into this book with my own preconceived case against Q, but was convinced that Prof. Goodacre's case is better than my prior conception." Price's contention is that what we call Q is based on an extended text of Mark that we no longer possess, but Mathew and Luke utilized. He provides quite a bit of evidence and analysis as to why he believes this. Well worth reading.

[chrismcdonaghsignwriting]

Fascinating interview.
Very convincing take on Q.

[newareopagus]

Great episode, Derek. Loved this conversation.

[gregrhodes]

Great podcast Derek..!!! I truly enjoyed Dr. Mark and his views on some of the important questions your fans here at “MythVision” share... I hope your able to have him back soon...Thank you for sharing your passion to all of us.. It’s such a wonderful gift you give.

[mthokozisilanga]

Excellent work Derek as usual. Thank you DR. Mark Goodacre. I am buying those books.👊🏿👊🏿👊🏿

[cedricspencer]

This is perfect. I just got the case against Q in the mail last night!!!

[cpnlsn]

This is fantastic. Great interviewer, great interviewee.

[erenunal]

Derek Thank you for bringing Dr. Goodacre on your show, I do personally feel enlightened and enjoyed every second of this conversation. Please do keep in touch with him and if possible you should absolutely do another one with Dr. Goodacre about the Historicity. Thank you.

[iwasjustintrance]

Bruh. Mythvision gets the best guests!

[matthewsmolinsky]

Damn, I gotta say that him and Carrier are convincing me Q is a myth. I love Dr. Price and Dennis Ronald Macdonald, but I think they might be wrong on this issue. Great show.

[thinkingaboutreligion]

More Goodacre. Please.
I could watch for hours...

[unicyclist]

Really smooth editing Derek, and a fascinating interview with a brilliant guest 🙂