Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
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 ).
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.
The Matthean Posteriority hypothesis is similar to the Farrer hypothesis but has Matthew using Luke as a source (Mark → Luke → Matthew), rather than vice versa. A final hypothesis holds that Matthew and Luke have no literary relationship beyond their dependence on Mark, but rather each supplemented the triple tradition with oral sources.
The Independence hypothesis is a proposed solution to the synoptic problem. It holds that Matthew , Mark , and Luke are each original compositions formed independently of each other, with no documentary relationship.
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 → Mark → Luke), 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.
Matthew and Luke, however, also share large sections of text which are not found in Mark. They suggested that neither Gospel drew upon the other, but upon a second common source, termed the Q. [1] This two-source hypothesis speculates that Matthew borrowed from both Mark and a hypothetical sayings collection, called Q.
The hypothesis favored by most experts is Marcan priority, whereby Mark was composed first, and Matthew and Luke each used Mark, incorporating much of it, with adaptations, into their own gospels. Alan Kirk praises Matthew in particular for his "scribal memory competence" and "his high esteem for and careful handling of both Mark and Q", which ...
Matthew contains a number of doublets (two tellings of the same story) which is presumably the result of Matthew taking one from Q and one from Mark. Sometimes the version Matthew takes from Q meets the criteria for primitivity against Mark's and appear to have even served as a source for Mark's version. There exist non-doublets in Matthew ...