Thanks, Bobby! I think the Q theory is definitely viable within the frameworks I talked about in the post. I was mostly interested in how memories of Jesus came to be put in written form (so many years after his death) and yet were considered reliable, especially if/when the written accounts of his life were written down by people who were not firsthand eyewitnesses. Luke acknowledges that there are other written accounts (probably more than we know of--and perhaps Q was one of them). Other scholars have done great work examining theories about which Gospels were written first and which relied upon other Gospels (and/or upon Q). Joshua Jipp, in his book Reading the Gospels as Christian Scripture, does a nice job of summarizing the different theories.
This is interesting! Where would Q come in? Is the theory of Q predominately espoused by those in the literary or rabbinical model camps?
Thanks, Bobby! I think the Q theory is definitely viable within the frameworks I talked about in the post. I was mostly interested in how memories of Jesus came to be put in written form (so many years after his death) and yet were considered reliable, especially if/when the written accounts of his life were written down by people who were not firsthand eyewitnesses. Luke acknowledges that there are other written accounts (probably more than we know of--and perhaps Q was one of them). Other scholars have done great work examining theories about which Gospels were written first and which relied upon other Gospels (and/or upon Q). Joshua Jipp, in his book Reading the Gospels as Christian Scripture, does a nice job of summarizing the different theories.
Thanks! I just bought the Jipp book a few weeks ago - can’t wait to dig in.
I really enjoyed it! Dr. Bates used it as a text in his class this past fall, and I'm so glad he did!