And all of these are nonsense.
Jesus taught his disciples how to read 'the mystery hidden from the beginning'. They forgot what they were taught, but he taught them how to read the prophetic riddle of the OT which spoke of Christ and the cross.
When the Holy Spirit was given, he reminded them of what they were taught. So they STUDIED.
Mark wrote the teachings of Peter first. At that time they were teaching that the story of Christ began with the preaching of John the Baptist.
10-15 years later, their studies and preaching was recorded by Matthew. they had interpreted the prophetic riddle enough that they could say the story started with Abraham.
10-15 years later, their studies had progressed so they pushed the beginning back to Adam in Luke's record.
Finally, having had the most time to study, and handling prophetic riddle most proficiently, John records that the beginning of the story began with Gen 1:1. The doctrine of John 1:1-4 is derived from the first three words of Genesis 1:1.
There is no need for a 'Q' document. All the differences can be shown to be due to a more proficient usage of the prophetic prophecy hermeneutic. In fact it can be used to expound Christ from anywhere in the OT.
When the debates concerning sensus plenior (the mystery) took place in the latter part of the last century, only those who could not read the mystery were invited. It was like a bunch of blind men debating if rainbows existed.
Some decided that they didn't, others decided that if they did, we were not permitted to look for them because we are not apostles. They believe that if prophetic riddles exist, that it takes magic held by priests to see it.
Just because we have been filled with lies doesn't mean we have to swallow anything presented as a red pill.
Check out the sensus plenior or prophetic riddles for yourself.