enow.com Web Search

Search results

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

  3. Q source - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Q_source

    The "Two-source Hypothesis" proposes that the Gospels of Matthew and Luke were written independently, each using Mark and a second hypothetical document called "Q" as a source. Q was conceived as the most likely explanation behind the common material (mostly sayings) found in the Gospel of Matthew and the Gospel of Luke but not in the Gospel of ...

  4. Two-source hypothesis - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two-source_hypothesis

    The 2SH explains the features of the triple tradition by proposing that both Matthew and Luke used Mark as a source. Mark appears more 'primitive': his diction and grammar are less literary than Matthew and Luke, his language is more prone to redundancy and obscurity, his Christology is less supernatural, and he makes more frequent use of ...

  5. Synoptic Gospels - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synoptic_Gospels

    A hybrid of Two-source and Farrer. Q may be limited to sayings, may be in Aramaic, and may also be a source for Mark. Wilke (MarkLuke) Double tradition explained entirely by Matthew's use of Luke. Four-source (MarkQ/M/L) Matthew and Luke used Q. Only Matthew used M and only Luke used L. Matthaean priority: Two‑gospel (Griesbach ...

  6. 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.

  7. Farrer hypothesis - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Farrer_hypothesis

    The Farrer theory has the advantage of simplicity, as there is no need for hypothetical sources to be created by academics. Instead, advocates of the Farrer theory argue, the Gospel of Mark was used as source material by the author of Matthew. Lastly, Luke used both of the previous gospels as sources for his Gospel. [2]

  8. Multi-source hypothesis - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multi-source_hypothesis

    The Multi-source hypothesis is a proposed solution to the synoptic problem, holding that Matthew, Mark, and Luke are not directly interdependent but have each drawn from a distinct combination of earlier documents. It encompasses a family of theories differing in the particulars of the nature and relationships of these earlier documents.

  9. Augustinian hypothesis - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Augustinian_hypothesis

    The Augustinian position, and the similar Griesbach hypothesis, has drawn recent interest, especially from B. C. Butler, John Wenham, W.R. Farmer, and others as an alternative solution to the synoptic problem, and has been employed as a scholarly refutation of Marcan priority, the Q hypothesis, and the two-source hypothesis.