Document Q contains no concept of a suffering Jesus

[Aramis]

Hi

But the most telling feature of the Q Jesus has proven to be the most perplexing, for he seems to bear no relationship to Paul’s. Scholars continue to puzzle over the fact that Q contains no concept of a suffering Jesus, a divinity who has undergone death and resurrection as a redeeming act.
pages.ca.inter.net/~oblio/partthre.htm

Any commets, please.

Thanks

Taking a look at the root level of the site in question (pages.ca.inter.net/~oblio/) reveals a mind set on destroying christianity by undermining its scripture.

As to the Q hypothesis, it’s about 100 years old; the specific flavor of it is younger. If Q existed, then the Gospel of Thomas (not part of Canon) must have shared the same source, and each is a subset of Q, or each is a superset of a subset of Q.

Heck, Thomas correlates highly to the synoptic gospels anyway. It seems far less inspired, however, as it is, like the supposed q1, merely a collection of sayings and parables.

Even the heretical Gnostic Gospels match up in many points to the Synoptic Gospels. (But differ in MANY more).

One viable alternative is that Christ himself is Q, or that Q is in fact the Holy Spirit.

Also, Justin Mrtyr’s writings may have suffered multiple translation error, thus causing a perceived difference where none actually existed.

 

[ralphinal]

What I have always loved about this Q argument is the placement of Jonh’s Gospel. IT is great for discussing the synaptics, but John sort of hangs out there. He shows us a suffering Jesus, and a great miracle worker. Q be hanged for that.

RightlyDivided, using a his high level of Bible Knowledge shows us good reason that this Q source idea is problematic. Other posters on here have done so as well. We should also remmember that each Gospel had a primary target audience and all taken as a whole are for the whole world. Luke was for the Greek, Matthew for the Hebrew, Mark for the new Christians, and John to show what the others may not have covered, lest it be lost.

Suppose I go into some great work of ficiton, like the Karate Kid movies. I then write all of the quotes of Mr. Miagi, the greatest martial arts teacher ever in the Movies. I then say, “look at how the quotes all flow together. They must be from an earlier source. I will call this source M.” What have I proven? Only that a coherent work will always have quotes that go together and do not contradict. If man can do this with fiction, why can God not do it with Fact?

 

[scott1228]

So the whole theory originates because it is based on the supposition that the “Jesus of faith” is different than the “Jesus of history.”

Well, that is a supposition that I don’t accept.

And if you look at the epistles, they do have the “stuff” of the Lord’s teaching in them… all over. Paul says if I have faith and can move mountains but don’t have love, what use is it? Obviously he is recalling the Lord’s teaching on faith.

 

[paarsurrey]

So the whole theory originates because it is based on the supposition that the “Jesus of faith” is different than the “Jesus of history.”

Well, that is a supposition that I don’t accept.

And if you look at the epistles, they do have the “stuff” of the Lord’s teaching in them… all over. **Paul says if I have faith and can move mountains **but don’t have love, what use is it? Obviously he is recalling the Lord’s teaching on faith.

Hi

Then my friend; Paul only says things he never does those things, in my opinion, which Jesus said as per NT a believer must do them. Perhaps Paul did not have faith equal to or more than a mustard seed as Jesus said in the NTGospel.

I respect your religion

Thanks

 

[jimmy]

Hi

But the most telling feature of the Q Jesus has proven to be the most perplexing, for he seems to bear no relationship to Paul’s. Scholars continue to puzzle over the fact that Q contains no concept of a suffering Jesus, a divinity who has undergone death and resurrection as a redeeming act.
pages.ca.inter.net/~oblio/partthre.htm

Any commets, please.

Thanks

Too bad Q doesn’t exist and never has.

 

[scott1228]

Well, I am going to go out on a limb, and suggest that moving the mountains was a figure of speech.

If we could really move mountains, literally, wouldn’t California be in an awful lot of danger?

 

[jimmy]

Hi

Then my friend; Paul only says things he never does those things, in my opinion, which Jesus said as per NT a believer must do them. Perhaps Paul did not have faith equal to or more than a mustard seed as Jesus said in the NTGospel.

I respect your religion

Thanks

And how do you know Paul never did things that he was called to do? Where do you get the concept that Paul was only talk? Paul was impaled by the Romans for the love of God. He suffered a martyrs death. He did exactly what he preached.