Q and the Passion - Challenging the Consensus View

Abstract

This thesis challenges the consensus viewpoint of biblical scholarship that Q, the sayings source common to Matthew and Luke, contains no Passion account. Based on the absence of a Passion in Q (the Argument from Silence), the consensus view concludes Q’s theology is divergent from the cross-centered theology of Matthew and Luke. The purpose of the present study is to refute the Argument from Silence, and show that Q did in fact contain Passion material. With a Passion, Q must have had a theology more congruent with Matthew and Luke. The research methodology is source utilization, the study of how ancient writers used sources based on the then available technology of document production. Based on deviations from Mark in content, but more importantly order, source utilization points to a second non-Markan written source in Luke’s Passion, which source provided the alternative content and order. Q could be the second source because (a) the non-Markan portion of Luke’s Passion contains numerous sayings of Jesus consistent with Q’s genre as a sayings source, and (b) these non-Markan sayings also have thematic resonance with Q. The Minor Agreements of Matthew and Luke against Mark in their respective Passion accounts further support these findings. The Minor Agreements demonstrate Matthew’ s awareness of: (1) non-Markan sayings thematically related to Q, and (2) non-Markan material precisely at the point where Luke deviates from Markan order, and is therefore following the order of the second written source. Based on all of these results, I conclude Q is in fact the second written source for much of the non-Markan Passion material in Luke, and the material is echoed to a lesser extent in Matthew. I will pull the analysis together and propose an addition to Q of about 300 words of Passion material drawn from Luke and Matthew. I will end with a brief discussion of the implications of a Q Passion. These include rebuttal of the Argument from Silence, consequences for the Synoptic Problem and ramifications for the theology of Q and the history of early Christianity.