Hey Frens, I was doing some reading & research about Jesus Christ and came upon this wikipedia entry.
What do you guys think?!?!?! I thought it was quite extraordinarily interesting.........!!!!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Q_source
Funny that it even specifically calls out the "far-right conspiracy theory QANON"....😂🤣🐸🧐🧐🧐
This article is about the hypothetical source text used in the Christian Gospels. For the Hebrew Bible text denoted by the abbreviation Q, see Codex Marchalianus. For the far-right conspiracy theory, see QAnon.
The "Two-source Hypothesis" proposes that the Gospels of Matthew and Luke were written independently, each using Mark and a second hypothetical document called "Q" as a source. Q was conceived as the most likely explanation behind the common material (mostly sayings) found in the Gospel of Matthew and the Gospel of Luke but not in the Gospel of Mark. Material from two other sources—the M source and the L source—are represented in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke here by green and teal respectively.
The Q source (also called The Sayings Gospel, Q Gospel, Q document(s), or Q; from German: Quelle, meaning "source") is an alleged written collection of primarily Jesus' sayings (λόγια, logia). Q is part of the common material found in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke but not in the Gospel of Mark. According to this hypothesis, this material was drawn from the early Church's oral gospel traditions.[1][2][3]
Of course Jesus is God and I'm a trinitarian. That's why he could die to take away my sins and rise to give me his eternal life. It's the unitarians who insist on many theoretical layers in the text tradition even while they insist there are no theoretical layers in God.
Whatever. In theological debates it's usually recognized that (Moses was right) two accounts containing many agreed logia over 90% verbatim indicate a single source. Since Luke and Paul weren't present like the disciples and Luke didn't say who his other sources were, and since the nature of the agreements with Mark also introduces complications, the whole synoptic problem is how these agreements came about. It's regarded as untenable to believe that the apostles engaged a rote oral memorization program but then selected differently and arranged differently from within that program, and Luke just got in on that. Much better sourcing is to state one copied from and modified another's manuscript. The unique indications of both the copying direction and the historical testimony (which are too boring to try to summarize accurately here) suggest there's something more subtle than just three manuscripts. So the conservative critic looks for the hypothesis that assumes the least about this copying and also explains the language gap.
Two account that are the same could mean they are copying. But it could an more likely mean they were both witnesses and writing down what was actually happening. 90+% of what they overlapped on what what they were recording Jesus saying.
So yes. A single source. Jesus.
yes, Jesus is the Source and perhaps the message was 'internal'.
two different writers getting the same Words mentally...channeling if you will.
so there's no 'document', that would defeat the purpose; to prove such communication is possible.
like two remote viewers receiving similar info. which of course 'verifies' the data & the source sending it.
the reason I bring this up is because Q talks about such things, spells, etc. the Kennedy curse...
and Q & POTUS said our enemy is 'invisible'. Tucker talks about demons.
and here's a book by Teddy Roosevelt's 'ghost' on the LOC website🤔
https://www.loc.gov/item/41039766/