The Synoptic Problem

Markan Priority

The observation that manuscripts remind of mark in the second and third century are as sparse as those of some non-canonical gospels

Gospels usually circulated individually, not in codices containing the four canonical gospels

Data suggests that mark was less widely circulated after Matthew and Luke entered into circulation

One would expect the gospel of mark to appear more frequently

Q Source

Neither marks gospel nor Q were considered authoritative scripture when Matthew and Luke had written their gospels

Q factor in as a solution to the synoptic problem

The synoptic problem

Solution to the synoptic problem to help us interpret the synoptic gospels

the overlap of written and oral traditions during the first and second centuries makes the mix of semantic overlap and variation that one observes in Q and Gos

The use of Q in a minimalist sense as a hypothetical source to explain how Matthew and Luke composed their gospels can be left indefinite

Many lists of Q will be more conservative, listing only the passages in which theres is a clear verbal overlap b/w Matthew /Luke that hadn't been derived from mark

evidence to support theory that mark was written first

Marks gospel appears to have been the earliest written narrative to combine an account of Jesus ministry with a report about his final days in Jerusalem

To ask whether Q is or was a gospel is a stable textual object that does not exist.

its possible that later scribes introduced elements from the other gospels into mark

Neither mark's gospel nor Q was considered authoritative scripture when Matthew and Luke wrote their gospels.

The evangelists have a close and dynamic relationship to the faith and practice of christian communities

if the author or johns gospel was not familiar with the synoptic gospels then such narrative sequences that coincide with mark might indicate a pre-markan form of the story

Both johns gospel and sayings collection Q begin the story of Jesus with John the baptist

Most have agreed that some version of the two source theory is the most fruitful interpretation

the overlapping material in Matthew and Luke derives from different collections or from assemblages that were always in transition, due to real performance, and never existed in a stable form

They continue to debate both the developmental stages of Q and the kind of christian community which produced it

the Peter example shows that interpreters can agree about how the gospels are put together and still disagree over the meaning of those observations

A comprehensive explanation for all the data generated by detailed comparisons of the gospels would be more complex than the basic "two source" model