Full Description
This book discusses the composition of the synoptic gospels from the perspective of the Farrer hypothesis, a view that posits that Mark was written first, that Matthew used Mark as a source, and that Luke used both Mark and Matthew. All of the articles in the volume are written in support of the Farrer hypothesis, with the exception of the final chapter, which criticizes these articles from the perspective of the reigning Two-Source theory. The contributors engage the synoptic problem with a more refined understanding of the options set before each of the evangelists pointing towards a deepened understanding of how works were compiled in the first and early second centuries CE.
The contributors include Andris Abakuks, Stephen Carlson, Eric Eve, Mark Goodacre, Heather Gorman, John S. Kloppenborg, David Landry, Mark Matson, Ken Olson, Michael Pahl, Jeffrey Peterson, and John C. Poirier.
Contents
Introduction - John C. Poirier and Jeffrey Peterson
1. 'The Devil in the Detail: Exorcising Q from the Beelzebul Controversy' - Eric Eve
2. 'Problems with the Non-Aversion Principle for Reconstructing Q' - Stephen C. Carlson
3. 'Luke—Crank or Creative Genius? How Ancient Rhetoric Makes Sense of Luke's Order' - Heather M. Gorman
4. 'Too Good to be Q: High Verbatim Agreement in the Double Tradition' - Mark Goodacre
5. 'Luke 11.2-4: The Lord's Prayer (Abridged Edition)' - Ken Olson
6. 'A Statistical Time Series Approach to the Use of Mark by Matthew and Luke' - Andris Abakuks
7. 'Matthew's Ending and the Genesis of Acts: The Farrer Hypothesis and the Composition of Luke's Two Volumes' - Jeffrey Peterson
8. 'Reconsidering the Date of Luke in Light of the Farrer Hypothesis' - David Landry
9. 'Delbert Burkett's Defense of Q' - John C. Poirier
10. Response - John S. Kloppenborg
Bibliography
Index
