Q Sources

[justified]

It does not have to have been a written source.

 

[adnilgnav]

Of course, since "Q" is shorthand for German Quelle, which means source, the assumption is that there had to be such a document. But that is an assumption, not a demonstrable fact, and certainly no manuscript evidence to support it.

I would like to say that there is limited facts to the synoptic gospels itself. These books were an idea of why Jesus is who he is. The real Jesus would have been looked at as a lunatic. So we must too consider all the texts written about Jesus in order to truly be knowledgeable about Jesus. If Jesus himself knew writing would have been so important for future generations don't you think he would have written a book himself?

 

[daveleau]

What do you think this phrase is to mean?

Whoever comes to me and does not hate father and mother, wife and children, brothers and sisters, yes, and even life itself, cannot be my disciple. (Q14:26)

The phrase is a Jewish figure of speech. When comparing love and hate, this often means to love supremely and to love less. Humanity is to love God supremely and to love his family less than God. Put God first, above everything including the family.

As for Q as a source, Q (German origination from the word quelle which means "source") is never mentioned or alluded to until 1838. While there are likely notes taken by or phrases memorized by those listening to Christ, the idea that there was one source represented by the source idea of Q is probably non-existent. First, nothing of the sort has been found. None of the early church writers alludes to such a source. Luke mentions in the beginning of his Gospel that there were other writings, but he implies there are many writings that are false among the writings circulating. He wrote his Gospel to clear things up to Theophilus. There may have been other sources, but Q is highly unlikely to have been as has been proposed since 1838.