The Synoptic Problem

[NotWorthy]

Hmm, well, I’ll have to look into that - but I can’t believe the majority of Bible scholars hold to the two source hypothesis if it has been so satisfactorily disputed.

I actually don’t mind either way, at least it’s not something absurd like Matthean priority.

Also have you heard of the idea that the Gospel of the Hebrews may by identical to Q?

OK, now I’m confused.

Two points I’d like to make on your last two posts.

Why couldn’t Luke have taken out some of the things from Matthew’s Gospel. If Luke’s audience (Gentiles) didn’t care about all the Jewish prophecies that Jesus fulfilled, wouldn’t he have taken it out of his Gospel accounts? Remember these Gospel writings were probably the written version of 1000’s of homilies.

2nd, if the early Church believed in Matthean priority, when did it become considered “absurd”?

For an extreme example to illustrate my point on Luke taken out the “boring things”, simply look at CNN and Foxnews discuss the same topic of balancing the budget. CNN focuses nearly 100% on how tax increases are necessary, while Foxnews focuses nearly 100% on how government spending is necessary. Each network tailors their message to their audience.

That’s why Matthew, written to the Jews concentrates on the Jewish prophecies, while Luke tends to focus on much different matters, and Mark does as well. Mark, for instance, is thought to be taken from St. Peter’s sermons, which would help explain why St. Peter’s role in the Gospel is downplayed so much.