enow.com Web Search

Search results

  1. Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
  2. 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 ...

  3. Monarchian Prologues - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monarchian_Prologues

    The prologue to Mark in the Drogo Gospels , a manuscript from around 850. The Monarchian Prologues are a set of Latin introductions to the four canonical gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. They were long thought to have been written in the second or third century from a Monarchian perspective, hence their name.

  4. Marcan priority - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcan_priority

    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—LukeMark). [23] This view envisions a Mark who mostly collected the common material shared between Matthew and Luke.

  5. Synoptic Gospels - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synoptic_Gospels

    Over three-quarters of Mark's content is found in both Matthew and Luke, and 97% of Mark is found in at least one of the other two synoptic gospels. Additionally, Matthew (24%) and Luke (23%) have material in common that is not found in Mark. [1] The calming of the storm is recounted in each of the three synoptic gospels, but not in John.

  6. Anti-Marcionite prologues - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Marcionite_Prologues

    The prologue to Luke in the 11th-century Greek minuscule 1828 [1] The anti-Marcionite prologues are three short prefaces to the gospels of Mark, Luke and John. No prologue to Matthew is known. They were originally written in Greek, but only the prologue to Luke survives in the original language.

  7. Four-document hypothesis - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four-document_hypothesis

    The four-document hypothesis or four-source hypothesis is an explanation for the relationship between the three Gospels of Matthew, Mark, and Luke.It posits that there were at least four sources to the Gospel of Matthew and the Gospel of Luke: the Gospel of Mark and three lost sources (Q, M, and L).

  8. Two-source hypothesis - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two-source_hypothesis

    The traditional view is represented by the Augustinian hypothesis, which is that the four gospels were written in the order in which they appear in the bible (Matthew → MarkLuke), with Mark a condensed edition of Matthew. This hypothesis was based on the claim by the 2nd century AD bishop Papias that he had heard that Matthew wrote first.

  9. Two-gospel hypothesis - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two-gospel_hypothesis

    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.