Why "Q" makes no sense to me

[whowantsumadebo]

Texan in DC:

I will not carry out this arguement, because it is pointless.
Bottom Line
I see the truth within his work and it enhances my Catholic faith.

Yah, sorry about my percieved biting tone; it was pretty late. I’ll play devil’s advocate for a sec. I have my reservations about that book, but I could be wrong of course. The Book of Acts has some decidedly hellenistic epic-type stories in it, such as Peter’s miraculous escape from prison, and Paul’s shipwreck. It is worth noting that Paul recalls several shipwrecks and the basket incident in his letters, so obviously the epic actually happened. In that light it is possible for Mark to take events Jesus actually took place in, and use language which draws upon Hellenistic stories. In many places, the Gospel authors simply use language which draws upon Old Testament stories.
That said, anything that increases your faith is good, but I’m still a skeptic about HEatGoM.
Somehow this whole thread got way off subject.

 

[Texan_in_DC]

whowantsumadebo:

Yah, sorry about my percieved biting tone; it was pretty late. I’ll play devil’s advocate for a sec. I have my reservations about that book, but I could be wrong of course. The Book of Acts has some decidedly hellenistic epic-type stories in it, such as Peter’s miraculous escape from prison, and Paul’s shipwreck. It is worth noting that Paul recalls several shipwrecks and the basket incident in his letters, so obviously the epic actually happened. In that light it is possible for Mark to take events Jesus actually took place in, and use language which draws upon Hellenistic stories. In many places, the Gospel authors simply use language which draws upon Old Testament stories.
That said, anything that increases your faith is good, but I’m still a skeptic about HEatGoM.
Somehow this whole thread got way off subject.

 

[Texan_in_DC]

whowantsumadebo:

Yah, sorry about my percieved biting tone; it was pretty late. I’ll play devil’s advocate for a sec. I have my reservations about that book, but I could be wrong of course. The Book of Acts has some decidedly hellenistic epic-type stories in it, such as Peter’s miraculous escape from prison, and Paul’s shipwreck. It is worth noting that Paul recalls several shipwrecks and the basket incident in his letters, so obviously the epic actually happened. In that light it is possible for Mark to take events Jesus actually took place in, and use language which draws upon Hellenistic stories. In many places, the Gospel authors simply use language which draws upon Old Testament stories.
That said, anything that increases your faith is good, but I’m still a skeptic about HEatGoM.
Somehow this whole thread got way off subject.

Maybe on a new thread I would love to discuss in greater detail about the above subject, it was probably my fault of getting off course, when I saw the subject of Q I junped to these books that discuss the Q and make very intersting comparisons. Again I would love to get some Catholic insight on this subject, my father reads the above books with more of a gnostic belief and I read it with a Catholic belief base, not bad for a former Southern Baptist!

 

[TEME525]

I would like to add another consideration for this thread, which is not meant to be a proof of its reality but of its possibility.

If we put the Gospels aside for a few minutes and turn to the letters of Paul, which most scripture scholars, conservative and liberal, are older works than the Gospels and Acts (Paul never quotes any of the Gospels nor makes any reference to them) an important element becomes clear and may effect of discussion about “Q” or any outside source.

When studying Paul’s letters to the Thessalonians there was a Church wide expectations that Christ’s Second Coming was imminent, that is it could happen at any second. And we see a gradual evolution in Paul’s letters away from this expectation to where in Roman’s he seems to admit that the parousia may not be imminent and no one really knows when it will take place.

If this was the case and practically all Christians firmly believed that Christ would appear at any time then it would stand to reason that the very early Church was not concerned with a written narrative of Jesus’ life.

But from what I have read, two factors began to change this expectation. First, after a few years or a decade later, the Second Coming hadn’t occured. This did cause a change in the Church’s outlook and it effected our own (that is the Church’s) understanding of itself and its own Christology. Again, I refer to Paul’s writtings as a source for this thought.

The second event in the Church’s life was that the eye witnesses of the Resurrection began to die. James the Just’s martyrdom had to greatly effect the Church and its expectations of the Parousia.

With the obvious delay of the Second Coming and the death of the eyewitnesses of the Resurrection (ref. 1 Cor 15: 6) I can see a natural rise in the interest in the historical Jesus and what he taught. From this I think it is reasonable to think that there could have been a list of sayings of Jesus and or some stories of His life begin to be written and circulated.

Also, and this point is also proclaimed by the Dogmatic Constitution on Divine Revelation that the Gospels are faith documents developed as a faith response. Christ’s life death and resurrection effected different people in different ways just as Christ continues to do so today. Studies have shown that each of the four Gospels were written from and for particular faith communities (ex Matthew’s Gospel is written for a community of Jewish origin).

Therefore, for me atleast, the possibility of the existence of an unknown source or sources were used and may be found in the Four Gospel is not unreasonable and that these sources, having been used and incorporated into the Gospels fell out of use by themselves and cease to exist as a seperate entity. As for why are they not found as a whole in each of the Gospels again I go back to the fact that the Gospels are faith documents from a faith response to the Gospel message and the meaning of Christ for each community therefore, some sayings or some stories were given more weight than others because of the way they reflect the communities own Christology. And this is even alluded to in John’s Gospel where he states clearly that not everything Jesus said and done was recorded in his Gospel. If this is true then there must be sources not used. What were those sources?

 

[buffalo]

While not admitting there is a “Q” source, did anyone ever think that if there was it was not a document at all, but the Holy Spirit?

 

[JimG]

I don’t believe that Q was ever a separate document.

But it does exist. It is material which exists in the gospels.
It exists as a literary definition.

Q is by definition the material that Luke and Matthew have in common but which is not in Mark.