The Q-Hypothesis has functioned as a mainstay of study of the synoptic gospels for many years. Increasingly it comes under fire. In this volume leading proponents of Q, as well as of the case against Q, offer the latest arguments based on the latest research into this literary conundrum. The contributors to the volume include John Kloppenborg, Christopher Tuckett, Clare Rothschild, Mark Goodacre, and Francis Watson. The Q-Hypothesis is examined in depth and the discussion moves back and forth over Q's strengths and weaknesses. As such the volume sheds light on how the gospels were composed, and how we can view them in their final literary forms.

Breaking a 200-year impasse on the origins of the gospels Biblical scholars want to get to the roots of the gospels—the very earliest memories of Jesus and his world. Though scholars know about all the major concepts at work—Q, the Urgospel, priority—it seems like a definitive solution to the Synoptic problem is hopelessly unattainable. Why the impasse? And where do we go from here? In Jesus Tradition, Early Christian Memory, and Gospel Writing, Alan Kirk guides us through the history of biblical scholars’ quest for the authentic source. Kirk reveals that outdated assumptions about ancient media realities have caused the past two centuries of academic deadlock. Using cutting-edge scholarship on orality, memory, and tradition formation, he shows how the origins of the gospels may be found in the memory practices of the earliest Jesus communities. Jesus Tradition, Early Christian Memory, and Gospel Writing is an essential resource for scholars and students looking to better understand this complex and rapidly changing field.

Because there are more women in the Gospel of Luke than in any other gospel, feminists have given it much attention. In this commentary, Shelly Matthews and Barbara Reid show that feminist analysis demands much more than counting the number of female characters. Feminist biblical interpretation examines how the female characters function in the narrative and also scrutinizes the workings of power with respect to empire, to anti-Judaism, and to other forms of othering. Matthews and Reid draw attention to the ambiguities of the text-both the liberative possibilities and the ways that Luke upholds the patriarchal status quo-and guide readers to empowering reading strategies.

Gospel writing always follows Gospel reading, a complex literary act of reception that interprets the theological significance of Jesus. This volume seek to demonstrate the intricate dynamics of this controversial figure's theological and textual reception through foundational essays on specific texts and themes.

In this book prominent biblical scholars engage with Francis Watson's most striking arguments on the creation of the gospels. Their contributions focus in particular on his argument for a fourfold gospel rather than four separate gospels, his argument against Q but for an early sayings collection, and on the larger landscape of Jesus studies, gospel reception and interpretation The contributors ask whether, and in what ways, Watson's reorientation of gospel studies is successful, and explore its implications for research. Leading scholars including Jens Schröter, Margaret Mitchell, Richard Bauckham and many others provide a close critical and creative engagement with Watson's work. More than merely a critical review of Watson's writing, this book carries forward his work with fresh treatments and provides an essential volume for students and scholars seeking to understand the landscape of gospel studies and to explore new directions within it.

Back cover: Recently reconstructed by scholars, Q is one of the New Testament's earliest source documents. Olegs Andrejevs performs a new literary-critical, narrative, and philological analysis of a number of Q passages, supplementing it with recent advances made in the study of Jewish apocalyptic literature.

The text entitled as the "Gospel according to Matthew" was written anonymously. Matthew, the formerly despised tax collector whom Jesus appointed as one of his twelve apostles, is just briefly mentioned twice within its pages. The internal evidence within the text offers little support for the long-standing tradition accepted by innumerable Christians throughout the last two millennia that the Apostle Matthew was the evangelist who composed it. This has led Michael J. Kok to investigate anew the origins and development of the Patristic traditions about the Evangelist Matthew. Kok's investigation starts by tackling the question about why the Gospel of Matthew disagrees with the Gospels of Mark and Luke over the identity of the person whom Jesus approached when he was sitting at a toll booth near the Galilean village of Capernaum. Although it distinctively names Matthew as the tax collector in the narrative, it does not identify him as the one responsible for its composition. Kok's next step, then, is to ascertain why a tradition emerged in the early second century CE that Matthew recorded the oracles about the Lord in his native language before they were translated into Greek. Matthew's work was contrasted with Mark's rough draft documenting the words and deeds of Jesus that was based on his memories of what the Apostle Peter had preached. These traditions about the two evangelists may have had few adherents at first, but they eventually commanded unanimous consent among Christian interpreters once titles were affixed to the four Gospels identifying their authors as Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John in the late second century. The postulation that there was an original edition of Matthew's Gospel in a Semitic language had far-reaching consequences when the "Gospel according to the Hebrews" was eventually ascribed to Matthew too. This re-examination of the internal and external evidence regarding Matthew's authorship of a Gospel has important historical and theological implications.

When Christians speak of “the gospels” they’re usually referring to Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. Other ancient writings about the life of Jesus are generally considered noncanonical or heretical. But what if these other gospel writings—including the Gospel of Thomas, the Gospel of Judas, and the Protevangelium of James—aren’t fundamentally different from the four canonical gospels? In this follow-up to Gospel Writing: A Canonical Perspective, noted biblical scholar Francis Watson makes the case that viewing early gospel literature as a unified genre—sharing significant similarities in sources, content, and goals—allows us to discern important interrelated aspects that are lost amid the usual categories. Watson’s critical approach enables modern readers of the Bible to break free of fraught scholarly assumptions in order to better understand early Christian identity formation and beliefs.

This volume addresses the Synoptic Problem and how it emerged in a historical context closely connected with challenges to the historical reliability of the gospels; questions the ability of scholarship arriving at a compelling reconstruction of the historical Jesus; the limits of the canon; and an examination of the relationship between the historical reliability of gospel material and ecclesial dogma that was presumed to flow from the gospels. The contributors, all experts in the Synoptic Problem, probe various sites and issues in the 19th and 20th century to elaborate how the Synoptic Problem and scholarship on the synoptic gospels was seen to complement, undergird, or complicate theological views. By exploring topics ranging from the Q hypothesis to the Markan priority and the Two Document hypothesis, this volume supplies extensive theological context to the beginnings of synoptic scholarship from an entirely new perspective.

Because there are more women in the Gospel of Luke than in any other gospel, feminists have given it much attention. In this commentary, Shelly Matthews and Barbara Reid show that feminist analysis demands much more than counting the number of female characters. Feminist biblical interpretation examines how the female characters function in the narrative and also scrutinizes the workings of power with respect to empire, to anti-Judaism, and to other forms of othering. Matthews and Reid draw attention to the ambiguities of the text-both the liberative possibilities and the ways that Luke upholds the patriarchal status quo-and guide readers to empowering reading strategies.