The Synoptic Problem With Mark Goodacre

In our newest video, Professor Mark Goodacre (Duke University) sat down with us to discuss some of the key issue surrounding the "Synoptic Problem." Professor Goodacre suggests that, perhaps, scholars have been too dependent upon the hypothetical source called "Q" and instead offers us a different way forward when considering the Synoptic problem.

[@Boxerr54]

Wonderful. Clear. Helpful. Advancing. Thank you Urbs and Polis and that you especially, Mark Goodacre.

[@canwelook]

Right or wrong, that is a well articulated, reasoned, and supported justification for the argument being made... unlike most competing arguments I've heard.

[@jeffreyerwin3665]

The hypothesis that seems not to have been considered is that Jesus had a direct hand in how the Gospels were written, and that no one "copied" anybody else.
This idea is supported by the possibility that Jesus' three descriptions of the Sign of Jonah are not contradictory or mutually exclusive, but, in fact, form a trinity of mutually supportive events.
See "The Enigma of the Sign of Jonah," BSTS Shroud Newsletter, No. 97, Summer 2023.

[@douglasmarshall5904]

Thanks Mark, well stated and I hope that in a future video or podcast you'll give your opinion on interpolations in the Pauline epistles, particularly Romans and 1st Cor., which have been advanced by Walker, Koester, etc.

[@marveloussoftware1417]

I agree. Thats the same thing i thought, no need for a Q. One of them copied Mark then was in turn copied by someone else. It even could've been the same person rewriting it, kinda like a rough draft.

[@notanemoprog]

Mark Goodacre FTW!

[@sylvia4425]

*So in plain language...are we thinking that they "copied" eachother??????*