Customer Reviews

Questioning Q : A Multidimensional Critique

5 star:		(1)
4 star:		(0)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

Edited by Goodacre and Perrin and published by Intervarsity Press in 2004, `Questioning Q' is a short collection of contemporary essays critically examining the requirement, reconstruction and existence of Q. Derived from the German word for source `quelle', Q is the name given to the hypothetical source for the non-Markan material shared by Luke and Matthew.

The prevailing Two Document solution to the synoptic problem posits that Mark and Q served as primary sources for Matthew and Luke. Originating in the work of 19th century German New Testament (NT) scholars Schleiermacher, Weisse and Holtzman, and later popularized in English by Burkitt and then Streeter, the Q hypothesis was rapidly adopted as a foundational assumption of NT scholarship, having broad support amoungst conservatives and by liberals alike, providing the former early accounts of Jesus' words, while allowing the latter to posit early and de-mythologized Christianities.

Led by scholars such as Kloppenborg and Robinson recent decades have seen a rapid growth in all things Q; a critically reconstructed text, differentiated strata within this text, an ancient Q community, etc. The tension between this increasingly bloated speculation and the absence of any early evidence for an actual Q document (archaeological or ancient attestations) has reached the breaking point for many scholars. In it is within this growing Q-sceptical environment that the current essays occur.

This text has an excellent series of brief and erudite essays examining a range of key issues within Q scholarship including:

- The so-called Minor Agreements (agreements between Matthew and Luke contra Mark)
- Like's ordering/handling of Q material
- The relationship between Q and Markan priority
- The Farrer theory (Luke had access to Mark and Mathew)
- The potential impact of discarding Q

Overall, this is an excellent overview of contemporary Q criticism. And, while it is far from the final word on this subject, the authors make a compelling case in favour of the need for sober reflection on the Q hypothesis. Indeed, they suggest that in the absence of new evidence NT scholarship may be in for a Kuhnian shift with respect to the question of synoptic origins. Regardless of one's views on Q, this text is highly recommended for all students of the NT and those interested in the historic Jesus