More About Q and the Gospel of Thomas

An accidental discovery in Egypt seems to confirm the existence of the 'lost' gospel of Q.

https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/religion/story/qthomas.html

Some Thoughts on Q

The reason people talk about it is that there are about 235 verses in Matthew that are paralleled in Luke but not in Mark or John.

This is a significant number. Matthew has 1071 verses and Luke has 1151. If they both have 235 verses uniquely in common with each other then that’s quite a substantial portion of the two gospels—more than a fifth.

This is a significant enough portion that many have felt it isn’t due to random chance and there must be a reason.

One reason could be that Luke drew upon Matthew for these verses. Alternately, Matthew could have drawn upon Luke for them.

Today most scholars don’t think that either of these was the case, however. Instead, they think that Matthew and Luke wrote independently of each other, which would suggest a different source for this material.

In the 1800s, this source was dubbed “Q,” allegedly from the German word Quelle (“source”), though this is unclear.

https://www.catholic.com/magazine/online-edition/some-thoughts-on-q

The Q Source Used by Matthew and Luke

If Mark was the first Gospel written, as I tried to explain in my previous post, and it was used by both Matthew and Luke, how do we explain that there are many places in Matthew and Luke that agree with each but are not in Mark.? They didn’t get these passages from Mark, but if they agree word for word in places, there must be copying. What are they copying? Welcome to the world of Q!

Q is the hypothetical source that scholars believe was used by Matthew and Luke to supplement the materials they got from Mark (“hypothetical” because it no longer survives – which is true, of course, of the vast majority of the earliest Christian writings). The Q hypothesis was developed in the 19th century and has been the dominant view of scholarship for the past century, but it has come under attack in recent years (as I mention below). But it continues to be the most widely accepted hypothesis to help solve the Synoptic Problem, for reasons I’ll explain in a later post.

For now: here is what I say about Q in my textbook, The New Testament: A Historical Introduction to the Early Christian Writings 7th ed (Oxford University Press).

https://ehrmanblog.org/the-q-source-used-by-matthew-and-luke/

What is the Q gospel?

The gospel of “Q” gets its title from the German word quelle which means “source.” The whole idea of a Q gospel is based on the concept that the Synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke) are so similar that they must have copied from each other and/or another source. This other source has been given the name "Q." The predominant argument for the existence of a Q gospel is essentially this: (1) The Gospels of Matthew, Mark, and Luke were written after A.D. 70 and therefore could not have been written by the Apostle Matthew, John Mark, or Luke the doctor. (2) Since the authors of the Gospels were not firsthand witnesses, they must have used other sources. (3) Since Mark is the shortest Gospel and has the least original material, Mark was written first and Matthew and Luke used Mark as a source. (4) Since there are many similarities in Matthew and Luke which do not occur in Mark, Matthew and Luke must have had another source. (5) This source, Q, was likely a collection of sayings of Jesus, similar to the gospel to Thomas.

When considering the possibility of a Q gospel, it is important to remember that no evidence whatsoever has ever been found for the existence of a Q gospel. Not even a single manuscript fragment of Q has ever been found. None of the early church fathers mentioned anything that could have been the Q gospel. Second, there is strong evidence that the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, and Luke were written between A.D. 50 and 65, not after A.D. 70. Many of the early church fathers attributed the Gospels to the Apostle Matthew, John Mark, and Luke the doctor. Third, since the Gospels were written by Matthew, Mark, and Luke, they were written by actual eyewitnesses of Jesus and/or close companions of eyewitnesses of Jesus. Therefore, it is natural that we should expect many similarities. If the Gospels record actual words spoken by Jesus, we should expect the eyewitnesses to report Jesus saying the same things.

https://www.gotquestions.org/Q-Gospel.html