The question of how to explain the similarities among the Gospels Matthew, Mark, and Luke is known as thesynoptic problem. The hypothetical L source fits a contemporary solution in which Mark was the first gospel and Q was a written source for both Matthew and Luke. According to thefour-document hypothesis, the author combinedMark, theQ source, and L to produce his gospel.[1] The material in L, like that in M, probably comes from the oral tradition.[1]I. Howard Marshall (1994) stated: "Luke rightly regarded these sources as reliable".[3]
According to Honoré (1968), the unique material in the third Gospel (termed "L") amounted to 35% of that gospel.[8] Theissen (1998) went further, stating that the special material comprises nearly half of the Gospel of Luke.[9]
According toE. Earle Ellis (1999), the L source material exhibits the highest prevalence ofSemitismswithin the Luke–Acts corpus, so that Semitic sources were probably at the basis of L source verses such as Luke 1:5–2:40; 5:1–11; 7:11–17, 36–50; 8:1–3; 9:51–56; 11:27f.; 13:10–17; 14:1–6; 17:11–19; 19:1–10; 23:50–24:53.[10] By contrast, the portions of the Gospel of Luke that parallel the contents of the Gospel of Mark represented 'a more polished Greek' than Mark's, and show fewer Hebraisms.[10]
^Marshall, I. Howard (1994). "LUKE. Introduction". In Carson, D. A.; et al. (eds.).New Bible Commentary: 21st Century Edition. Inter-Varsity Press. p. 979.ISBN978-0-85110-648-9.
^Edwards, James (2009).The Hebrew Gospel and the development of the synoptic tradition. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Eerdmans.ISBN978-0-8028-6234-1.OCLC368048433.
^abHonoré, A.M. (1968). "A statistical study of the synoptic problem".Novum Testamentum.10 (2/3):95–147.doi:10.2307/1560364.JSTOR1560364.
^Theissen, Gerd; Merz, Annette (1998). "Chapter 2. Christian sources about Jesus.".The Historical Jesus: A Comprehensive Guide. Translated from German (1996 edition). Fortress Press.ISBN978-0-8006-3123-9.
