The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia - Vol. 4

By Geoffrey W. Bromiley; Everett E. Harrison et al. | Go to book overview

q
Q.
I. Definition
II. Data
A. Arguments For Postulating Q
B. Arguments Against Postulating Q
III. Provenance and Purpose
IV. Theology

I. Definition.–A close inspection of the Synoptic Gospels shows that some material is common to Matthew and Luke but does not appear in Mark. Q (from Ger. Quelle. “spring, source”) is the name given to the hypothetical body of teaching from which this common material was derived. (On the origin of the siglum Q see W. F. Howard, Expos.T., 50 "1938/39", 379f.; supplemented and corrected by H. K. McArthur, Expos.T., 88 "1976/77", 119f.; L. H. Silberman, JBL. 98 "1979", 287f.; J. J. Schmitt, JBL. 100 "1981", 609-611.) Q also stands for the theory of Gospel origins that combines the notion that Mark was the first Synoptic Gospel to be written (so C. H. Weisse, in 1838) with the hypothesis that Matthew and Luke each drew on both Mark and non-Markan material.

The supposition of Q has, however, come under close and critical scrutiny beginning in the 1950's. Some opponents of the theory have become so emotionally stirred as to register their disavowal of the hypothesis in terms like “unnecessary and vicious” (B. C. Butler, Originality of Matthew "1957", p. 170). C. S. Petrie (Nov.Test., 3 "1959", 28-33) commented. “'Q' stands for 'quirk' and should be wholly forgotten and promptly dispatched to the limbo of forlorn hypotheses,” on the ground that the number of hypotheses about Q have predisposed scholars to doubt its existence. J. Moffatt (Intro, to the Literature of the NT "3rd ed. 1918|, pp. 194-204) listed no fewer than sixteen attempts to reconstruct the scope of Q. Other doubts regarding Q's inferred existence will be discussed later.

II. Data.–A. Arguments for Postulating Q. 1. Matthaean and Lukan Diction. Over two hundred verses (225 is the number usually assigned in recent criticism) in Matthew and Luke have similar content and diction. In several the agreement is verbally exact. Mt. 3:7-10 par. Lk. 3:7-9 have a precise agreement of 61 out of 63 words in the Greek, with only minor variations within the text. Two of the differences are clearly Luke's stylistic improvements, such as árxēsthe (“begin”) for dóxēte (“presume”), and an adverbial kaí. Other instances of such parallel reporting — and in some cases verbatim correspondences — are Mt. 6:24 par. Lk. 16:13 (27 out of 28 words identical); Mt. 7:7-11 par. Lk. 11:9-13; Mt. 11:21-23 par. Lk. 10:13-15 (in the woes on the Galilean towns 43 words out of 49 are the same); Mt. 12:43-45 par. Lk. 11:24-26: cf. J. A. Fitzmyer, p. 151.

But the two Gospels sometimes diverge in what is ostensibly the same account of Jesus' teaching. V. Taylor (JTS, 4 "1953), 27-31) examined these passages and suggested four reasons for the divergence in seven of them (Lk. 10:25-28 par. Mt. 22:34-40; Lk. 12:54-56 par. Mt. 16:2f.; Lk. 13:23f. par. Mt. 7:13f.; Lk. 13:25-27 par. Mt. 25:10-12; Lk. 14:15-24 par. Mt. 22:1-10; Lk. 15:4-7 par. Mt. 18:12-14; Lk. 19:12-27 par. Mt. 25:14-30). (1) Each evangelist had the liberty of making minor editorial alterations when transmitting the text. (2) There may be different recensions. One may cite here a few cases not in Taylor's list: Mt. 5:3f. par. Lk. 6:20f.; the two versions of the Lord's Prayer (Mt. 6:9-15; Lk. 11:2-4). G. Bornkamm (Jesus of Nazareth "Eng. tr. 1960", p. 218) used this flexibility to argue, “Q is still relatively close to the oral tradition, and remained exposed to its continuing influence.” (3) Differing diction in two parallel accounts may have been caused by overlap of Q and Matthew's special source, his Sondergut (sometimes called M). In these cases Luke would have followed Q (and it is generally conceded that Luke presents the original order of Q), and Matthew M. Thus the verbal disagreements are ascribed to Matthew's conflating of M and Q, as V. Taylor argued (Expos.T., 46 "1934/351, 68-74). J. P. Brown similarly thought that Matthew's version of Q blended material from Mark to produce “a larger sayings-document Qmt” (NTS. 8 "1961/62", 27-42; see Fitzmyer, p. 169). (4) The idea of a composite Q document has been proposed to account for the discrepancies between Matthew and Luke. The theory is that there were two editions of Q, the Aramaic source R (showing variations between Matthew and Luke) and the Greek source T (showing close agreement). This view has been criticized severely (T. W. Manson, pp. 20f.), although C. K. Barrett defended it (Expos.T., 54 " 1942/43J, 320-23). In a modified form, however, it has been refurbished in the more recent idea that Matthew's Q is a Greek production, whereas Luke's Q is a primitive translation from Aramaic (so M. Black, Aramaic Approach to the Gospels and Acts "3rd ed. 1968|, pp. 270ff.). But this translation hypothesis is weak in view of N. Turner's strictures (Expos.T., 80 "1969", 324-332).

2. Matthaean and Lukan Sequences. The two Gospels record common teachings in basically the same order, but there are divergences, which have raised the question of

-1-

Notes for this page

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
One moment ...
Default project is now your active project.
Project items

Items saved from this book

This book has been saved
Highlights (0)
Some of your highlights are legacy items.

Highlights saved before July 30, 2012 will not be displayed on their respective source pages.

You can easily re-create the highlights by opening the book page or article, selecting the text, and clicking “Highlight.”

Citations (0)
Some of your citations are legacy items.

Any citation created before July 30, 2012 will labeled as a “Cited page.” New citations will be saved as cited passages, pages or articles.

We also added the ability to view new citations from your projects or the book or article where you created them.

Notes (0)
Bookmarks (0)

You have no saved items from this book

Project items include:
  • Saved book/article
  • Highlights
  • Quotes/citations
  • Notes
  • Bookmarks
Notes
Cite this page

Cited page

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

(Einhorn, 1992, p. 25)

(Einhorn 25)

1

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited page

Bookmark this page
The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia - Vol. 4
Table of contents

Table of contents

  • Title Page iii
  • Contributors† v
  • Abbreviations xiii
  • Q 1
  • R 27
  • S 247
  • T 695
  • U 937
  • V 963
  • W 1001
  • X 1161
  • Y 1162
  • Z 1167
Settings

Settings

Typeface
Text size Smaller Larger Reset View mode
Search within

Search within this book

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

Full screen
/ 1212

matching results for page

Cited passage

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn, 1992, p. 25).

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn 25)

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences."1

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited passage

Welcome to the new Questia Reader

The Questia Reader has been updated to provide you with an even better online reading experience.  It is now 100% Responsive, which means you can read our books and articles on any sized device you wish.  All of your favorite tools like notes, highlights, and citations are still here, but the way you select text has been updated to be easier to use, especially on touchscreen devices.  Here's how:

1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
2. Click or tap the last word you want to select.

OK, got it!

Thanks for trying Questia!

Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

For full access in an ad-free environment, sign up now for a FREE, 1-day trial.

Already a member? Log in now.