(March 28, 2019 at 10:23 am)Gae Bolga Wrote: It's interesting that you think that. Why would matthew or luke need a shared source document? All they'd need were narratives in an oral tradition. A collection of wisdom sayings.
That collection didn;t need to be monolithic or from a singular source, itself, or have any historical character at it;s heart....and, again, there is no q, there is no mention of q, and if there ever were a q it would have been very important and valued to the nascent jesus movement. As envisioned it is very literally the gospel of jesus, the smart things he said.
In reality, q is a secularization of jesus popularized by liberal theology.
-and all of this, all of it, relies on a very amusing set of assumed initial conditions to excuse and explain away. There's a simpler explanation that gels with everything we know about the development of myths, legends, and social movements.
Matthew & Luke were not eyewitnesses, and so, they copied their source materials and embellished as they needed and wanted to.
