enow.com Web Search

Search results

  1. Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
  2. Two-gospel hypothesis - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two-gospel_hypothesis

    Approximately 25% of Matthew and 25% of Luke are identical, but are not found in Mark. This has been explained in the two-source hypothesis as coming from the hypothetical Q document . By the two-gospel hypothesis, this material was copied by Luke from Matthew, but not testified to by Mark because Peter had not seen it.

  3. Genealogy of Jesus - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genealogy_of_Jesus

    A minority view holds that while Luke gives the genealogy of Joseph, Matthew gives the genealogy of Mary. A few ancient authorities seem to offer this interpretation. [64] Although the Greek text as it stands is plainly against it, it has been proposed that in the original text Matthew had one Joseph as Mary's father and another as her husband.

  4. Three-source hypothesis - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three-source_hypothesis

    The three-source hypothesis is a candidate solution to the synoptic problem.It combines aspects of the two-source hypothesis and the Farrer hypothesis.It states that the Gospel of Matthew and the Gospel of Luke used the Gospel of Mark and a sayings collection as primary sources, but that the Gospel of Luke also used the Gospel of Matthew as a subsidiary source.

  5. Genealogies in the Bible - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genealogies_in_the_Bible

    The New Testament provides two accounts of the genealogy of Jesus, one in the Gospel of Matthew and another in the Gospel of Luke. [6] [non-primary source needed] Matthew starts with Abraham, while Luke begins with Adam.{Luke 3:23-38} The lists are identical between Abraham and David but differ radically from that point.

  6. Two-source hypothesis - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two-source_hypothesis

    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. [5]

  7. Marcan priority - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcan_priority

    Supporters of Marcan priority see this as Matthew and Luke improving the style of the material they incorporate from Mark. Supporters of Marcan posteriority, however, see Mark as recasting material from Matthew and Luke in his own peculiar style, less like lofty literature and more in a vivid, fast-moving style befitting oral preaching.

  8. Four-document hypothesis - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four-document_hypothesis

    According to B. H. Streeter's analysis the non-Marcan matter in Luke has to be distinguished into at least two sources, Q and L.In a similar way he argued that Matthew used a peculiar source, which we may style M, as well as Q. Luke did not know M, and Matthew did not know L. Source M has the Judaistic character (see the Gospel according to the Hebrews), and it suggests a Jerusalem origin ...

  9. Matthean Posteriority hypothesis - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matthean_Posteriority...

    Gottlob Christian Storr, in his 1786 argument for Marcan priority, [1] asked, if Mark was a source for Matthew and Luke, how the latter two were then related. Storr proposed, among other possibilities, that the canonical Matthew (written in Greek) was translated from the original, which was written in either Hebrew or Aramaic (the logia spoken of by Papias) by following Mark primarily but also ...