Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
Griesbach, noticing the special place of Mark in the synopsis, hypothesized Marcan posteriority and advanced (as Henry Owen had a few years earlier [55]) the two-gospel hypothesis (Matthew–Luke). In the nineteenth century, researchers applied the tools of literary criticism to the synoptic problem in earnest, especially in German scholarship.
The four winged creatures symbolize, top to bottom, left to right: Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. Matthew the Evangelist, the author of the first gospel account, is symbolized by a winged man, or angel. Matthew's gospel starts with Joseph's genealogy from Abraham; it represents Jesus's incarnation, and so Christ's human nature. This signifies ...
Griesbach's main support for his thesis lies in passages where Matthew and Luke agree over and against Mark (e.g. Matthew 26:68; Luke 22:64; Mark 14:65), the so-called Minor Agreements. A related theory has Luke drawing not directly from Matthew, but from a common source, seen as a proto-Matthew.
The Critical Edition of Q. Synopsis Including the Gospels of Matthew and Luke, Mark and Thomas with English, German, and French Translations of Q and Thomas. Managing Editor: Milton C. Moreland. Peeters Press, Leuven 2000, ISBN 978-90-429-0926-7 / Fortress Press, Minneapolis 2000, ISBN 978-0-8006-3149-9
In summary, the two-source hypothesis proposes that Matthew and Luke used Mark for its narrative material as well as for the basic structural outline of chronology of Jesus' life; and that Matthew and Luke use a second source, Q (from German Quelle, "source"), not extant, for the sayings (logia) found in both of them but not in Mark.
A modern tweak of this view that maintains Matthaean priority is the two-gospel (Griesbach) hypothesis which holds that Mark used both Matthew and Luke as a source (thus, in order, Matthew—Luke—Mark). [23] This view envisions a Mark who mostly collected the common material shared between Matthew and Luke.
However, postulating Luke's acquaintance with the gospel of Matthew overcomes these same problems and gives the source for the common material. The most notable argument for the Farrer hypothesis is that there are many passages where the text of Matthew and Luke agree in making small changes to that of Mark (what is called the double tradition ...
Matthew has 600 verses in common with Mark, which is a book of only 661 verses. There is approximately an additional 220 verses shared by Matthew and Luke but not found in Mark, from a second source, a hypothetical collection of sayings to which scholars give the name Quelle ('source' in the German language), or the Q source. [30]