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 Gospel of Mark [a] is the second of the four canonical Gospels and one of the three synoptic Gospels. It tells of the ministry of Jesus from his baptism by John the Baptist to his death, the burial of his body, and the discovery of his empty tomb.
Casey's work argued strongly for Aramaic sources behind the New Testament documents, specifically for Q and the Gospel of Mark. [10] [11]Casey's Aramaic ideas were challenged by Stanley E. Porter in Excursus: A response to Maurice Casey on the Languages of Jesus [12] citing modern scholarship, [13] that the linguistic environment of Roman Palestine was probably multilingual.
Aramaic Sources of Mark's Gospel is a book by Maurice Casey, who is a reader in early Jewish and Christian studies at the University of Nottingham. Casey takes four passages from the Book of Mark and reconstructs what an original written Aramaic source would have said if the Book of Mark was a translation of that source.
Marcan priority (or Markan priority) is the hypothesis that the Gospel of Mark was the first of the three synoptic gospels to be written, and was used as a source by the other two (Matthew and Luke).
The two-source hypothesis (or 2SH) is an explanation for the synoptic problem, the pattern of similarities and differences between the three Gospels of Matthew, Mark, and Luke. It posits that the Gospel of Matthew and the Gospel of Luke were based on the Gospel of Mark and a hypothetical sayings collection from the Christian oral tradition ...
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.
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 ...