Mark Goodacre's The Case Against Q, published by Trinity Press International in 2002, is a peer-reviewed scholarly monograph arguing for the Farrer hypothesis, that Luke used Matthew directly, against the majority view that Matthew and Luke both drew on a lost sayings source called Q. Its strength is that it is a rigorous, closely argued academic study by a recognized New Testament scholar. Its limit is that it represents the minority position in an ongoing and genuinely unresolved scholarly debate over the Synoptic Problem, so a claim treating Q's existence, or its absence, as settled needs to be corrected against that live disagreement.
Facts
Citation
AuthorMark Goodacre
PublisherTrinity Press International
Publication Year2002
URLhttps://archive.org/details/caseagainstqstud0000good
Source Typeacademic monograph
Assessment
Reliability Tier1
Mark Goodacre's The Case Against Q, published by Trinity Press International in 2002, is a peer reviewed scholarly monograph by a recognized New Testament scholar, treated at the top tier. NotesThe Farrer-Goodacre dissent, named in the entry against the majority Q position.
Cross-Tradition Connections
Associated With
This source names Matthew directly: "the Farrer hypothesis, that Luke used Matthew directly, against the majority view that Matthew and Luke both drew on a lost sayings source called Q."
Claims Backed By This Source (27 claims)
This source backs 27 claims across the atlas. As facts: 18 well-attested, 3 scholarly debate. As cited relationships: 1 holds. Plus 5 entities citing it as a general reference with no single fact or relationship attached.
Disposition By Topic
- Scripture Portions, 11 claims: 7 well-attested, 4 general references.
- Sources, 9 claims: 8 well-attested, 1 holds.
- Scriptures & Texts, 6 claims: 2 well-attested, 3 scholarly debate, 1 general references.
- Articles, 1 claims: 1 well-attested.
Reader Challenges (0 open reader challenges)
No disputes yet. Spotted an error or a better source? Open the first one.
Sign in to dispute this or suggest a correction.
View At A Past Year
The atlas records no dated fact of its own for this entry, so there is no other year to choose.