Summary Thesis points regarding Luke
James R. Edwards. The Hebrew Gospel and the Development of the Synoptic Tradition (2009). pp. 260-261
- (Patristic quotations from the Hebrew Gospel exhibit a stronger correlation with the Gospel of Luke, and especially material in Special Luke, than they do with either Matthew or Mark
- Patristic quotations from the Hebrew Gospel exhibit a stronger correlation with the Gospel of Luke, and especially material in Special Luke, than they do with either Matthew or Mark (ii) The Hebrew Gospel was most plausibly a source of the Gospel of Luke, and specifically either the primary or sole source of Special Luke.
- The Semitisms in Luke cannot be properly explained as "Septuagintisms;" i.e., as imitations of the language and style of the LXX. Nor can they be explained as reliance on an Aramaic spoken Vorlage. Semitisms in Luke are most plausibly explained by reliance on the Hebrew language of the original Hebrew Gospel.
- The Hebrew Gospel was not a compilation of the Synoptic Gospels, but repeatedly and distinctly similar to Luke.
- Semitisms appear in Special Luke nearly four times as often as they appear in those sections of Luke that are shared in common with Matthew and/or Mark.
- The distinct and unusually high number of Semitisms in Special Luke is most plausibly explained by Luke's reliance on the Hebrew Gospel for those parts of his Gospel not shared in common with Matthew and/or Mark.
- The Hebrew Gospel, although not specified, is most probably one of the eyewitness sources that Luke used as a source of the Third Gospel and to which he refers in the prologue.
- It appears that the Hebrew Gospel, at least in order and sequence, forms the Grundtext of the Gospel of Luke, into which Luke integrated grated material from Mark.
- A sum of 177 verses in Luke does not appear to derive either from the Hebrew Gospel or from Mark. These verses, which are present in one form or another also in Matthew, could be accounted for in various ways, none of which is conclusive. The verses, which I refer to as the double tradition, do not appear to have derived from a hypothetical sayings source, however, and thus cannot be explained or associated with the traditional "Q" hypothesis.
- A plethora of evidence, including factors related to the design, style, vocabulary, and historical allusions in canonical Matthew, argue for Matthean posteriority, i.e., that the Gospel [of Matthew] was the final and consummate Gospel in the Synoptic tradition
For more on solving the synoptic problem, see the site https://lukeprimacy.com