What do you think?
Rate this book
The Lost Gospel Q: The Original Sayings of Jesus
Discover the remarkable teachings of one of the most profound lost Gospels of the Bible, The Lost Gospel Q , with renowned authors Marcus Borg and Thomas Moore.
The image of the historical Jesus takes form in the words of the Gospel Q. The Lost Gospel Q represents the very first Gospel, older than the traditional Gospels and written by Jesus' contemporaries. It preserves Jesus' original words — the Sermon on the Mount, Beatitudes, the Lord's Prayer, parables, and his counsel for a compassionate life. The original of the Gospel Q was lost for 2,000 years, but for the past 170 years historians and theologians have been digging through the many layers of the New Testament to uncover one of the most remarkable lost Gospels of the Bible.
The image of the historical Jesus takes form in the words of the Gospel Q. The Lost Gospel Q represents the very first Gospel, older than the traditional Gospels and written by Jesus' contemporaries. It preserves Jesus' original words — the Sermon on the Mount, Beatitudes, the Lord's Prayer, parables, and his counsel for a compassionate life. The original of the Gospel Q was lost for 2,000 years, but for the past 170 years historians and theologians have been digging through the many layers of the New Testament to uncover one of the most remarkable lost Gospels of the Bible.
128 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1996
49 people are currently reading
415 people want to read
About the author
Marcus J. Borg
48 books355 followersBorg was born into a Lutheran family of Swedish and Norwegian descent, the youngest of four children. He grew up in the 1940s in North Dakota and attended Concordia College, Moorhead, a small liberal arts school in Moorhead, Minnesota. While at Moorhead he was a columnist for the school paper and held forth as a conservative. After a close reading of the Book of Amos and its overt message of social equality he immediately began writing with an increasingly liberal stance and was eventually invited to discontinue writing his articles due to his new-found liberalism. He did graduate work at Union Theological Seminary and obtained masters and DPhil degrees at Oxford under G. B. Caird. Anglican bishop N.T. Wright had studied under the same professor and many years later Borg and Wright were to share in co-authoring The Meaning of Jesus: Two Visions, an amicable study in contrast. Following a period of religious questioning in his mid-thirties, and numinous experiences similar to those described by Rudolf Otto, Borg became active in the Episcopal Church, in which his wife, the Reverend Canon Marianne Wells-Borg, serves as a priest and directs a spiritual development program at the Trinity Episcopal Cathedral, Portland, Oregon. On May 31, 2009, Borg was installed as the first canon theologian at Trinity Episcopal Cathedral.
Marcus J. Borg is Canon Theologian at Trinity Episcopal Cathedral in Portland, OR. Internationally known in both academic and church circles as a biblical and Jesus scholar, he was Hundere Chair of Religion and Culture in the Philosophy Department at Oregon State University until his retirement in 2007.
Described by The New York Times as "a leading figure in his generation of Jesus scholars," he has appeared on NBC's "Today Show" and “Dateline,” PBS's "Newshour," ABC’s “Evening News” and “Prime Time” with Peter Jennings, NPR’s “Fresh Air” with Terry Gross, and several National Geographic programs. A Fellow of the Jesus Seminar, he has been national chair of the Historical Jesus Section of the Society of Biblical Literature and co-chair of its International New Testament Program Committee, and is past president of the Anglican Association of Biblical Scholars. His work has been translated into eleven languages: German, Dutch, Korean, Japanese, Chinese, Indonesian, Italian, Spanish, Portugese, Russian, and French. His doctor's degree is from Oxford University, and he has lectured widely overseas (England, Scotland, Austria, Germany, Belgium, Hungary, Israel and South Africa) and in North America, including the Chautauqua and Smithsonian Institutions.
Marcus J. Borg is Canon Theologian at Trinity Episcopal Cathedral in Portland, OR. Internationally known in both academic and church circles as a biblical and Jesus scholar, he was Hundere Chair of Religion and Culture in the Philosophy Department at Oregon State University until his retirement in 2007.
Described by The New York Times as "a leading figure in his generation of Jesus scholars," he has appeared on NBC's "Today Show" and “Dateline,” PBS's "Newshour," ABC’s “Evening News” and “Prime Time” with Peter Jennings, NPR’s “Fresh Air” with Terry Gross, and several National Geographic programs. A Fellow of the Jesus Seminar, he has been national chair of the Historical Jesus Section of the Society of Biblical Literature and co-chair of its International New Testament Program Committee, and is past president of the Anglican Association of Biblical Scholars. His work has been translated into eleven languages: German, Dutch, Korean, Japanese, Chinese, Indonesian, Italian, Spanish, Portugese, Russian, and French. His doctor's degree is from Oxford University, and he has lectured widely overseas (England, Scotland, Austria, Germany, Belgium, Hungary, Israel and South Africa) and in North America, including the Chautauqua and Smithsonian Institutions.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 47 reviews
May 4, 2024
The Lost Gospel Q, 82 sayings attributed to Jesus that almost all appear in the gospels of both Matthew and Luke.
The letter Q comes from the German word Quelle that means source, as the Q gospel is the source of a lot of stories told in Matthew and Luke. However, Q contains no passion narrative, no death and resurrection stories.
No copy of Q has ever been discovered and that's an important point to remember. These sayings and actions of Jesus have been 'rediscovered' in the original gospels and placed together in this book by literature archaeologists who've worked on this project for many decades.
This is a refreshing book to read and makes you feel connected to the original teachings and actions of Jesus without the layers added on by the Church Fathers of early Christianity.
The letter Q comes from the German word Quelle that means source, as the Q gospel is the source of a lot of stories told in Matthew and Luke. However, Q contains no passion narrative, no death and resurrection stories.
No copy of Q has ever been discovered and that's an important point to remember. These sayings and actions of Jesus have been 'rediscovered' in the original gospels and placed together in this book by literature archaeologists who've worked on this project for many decades.
This is a refreshing book to read and makes you feel connected to the original teachings and actions of Jesus without the layers added on by the Church Fathers of early Christianity.
June 11, 2011
From the introduction by Thomas Moore: “The haunting, inspiring and challenging words of Jesus have now been with us for two thousand years. During all that time they have been used to moralize, instruct, defend and condemn as well as to lead and guide. As scholars have pointed out for over a century, the four Gospels are riddled with the interpretations, biases and agendas of their editors. Amid the clutter of age-old conflicting readings, it often seems difficult to hear an original voice and to take to heart the wisdom of one of the world’s greatest teachers.”
If you’re unfamiliar with Q, here’s the idea: Matthew and Luke were written with the book of Mark open in front of them. 50% of Mark is repeated in Luke, and 90% is repeated in Matthew. But there are enough other commonalities between Matthew and Luke to determine that they shared another source, and this source appears to be a “sayings” Gospel. Just the words that Jesus taught. No such book has ever been found, so scholars have named this hypothetical book “Q,” meaning “Source.”
Written in the 50’s only a couple decades after Jesus’ death, presumably by his contemporaries, this is as close as we can get to Jesus’ original teachings, away from the supernaturalism and moralizing of later Gospels. Q is the sacred “soul” of the Gospel message. Most of its sayings are about how to live “the way” that Jesus taught. Q is the Gospel for Liberal Christians.
Once past the introductory sections, Borg’s book provides just one saying per page, sometimes with a bit of historical commentary. This is a short little book that you can read in a couple hours. Or, if you prefer reading one saying per day, the book would provide daily inspiration for three months.
If you’re unfamiliar with Q, here’s the idea: Matthew and Luke were written with the book of Mark open in front of them. 50% of Mark is repeated in Luke, and 90% is repeated in Matthew. But there are enough other commonalities between Matthew and Luke to determine that they shared another source, and this source appears to be a “sayings” Gospel. Just the words that Jesus taught. No such book has ever been found, so scholars have named this hypothetical book “Q,” meaning “Source.”
Written in the 50’s only a couple decades after Jesus’ death, presumably by his contemporaries, this is as close as we can get to Jesus’ original teachings, away from the supernaturalism and moralizing of later Gospels. Q is the sacred “soul” of the Gospel message. Most of its sayings are about how to live “the way” that Jesus taught. Q is the Gospel for Liberal Christians.
Once past the introductory sections, Borg’s book provides just one saying per page, sometimes with a bit of historical commentary. This is a short little book that you can read in a couple hours. Or, if you prefer reading one saying per day, the book would provide daily inspiration for three months.
November 25, 2012
Okay, the Gospel of Mark is the earliest of the good news. The Gospel's Matthew and Luke obviously are based upon this story, however they add extra stuff. Of that extra stuff, there are things that occur in both Luke and Matthew, but also things that occur only in Luke or Matthew. Anyway, some German hermeneutical theologians figured out that this meant there was another gospel that's been lost, a source gospel (Q stands for "Quelle", the German word for "source". So basically they went backwards and shaved off everything that was only in Luke, they shaved off everything that was only in Matthew and then they shaved off everything that was in Mark, and you are left with a pretty close estimate of what that lost piece of scripture must have looked like.
Hermeneutics is basically the study of balancing skepticism and reverence.
Hermeneutics is basically the study of balancing skepticism and reverence.
July 12, 2008
Contrary to what the title might lead you to think, this book doesn't offer any "lost" sayings of Jesus. Everything is taken straight from the first and third gospels, "Q" being the name given to the hypothesized source of the material which appears in both Matthew and Luke but not in Mark.
(By the way, I don't know why this site has the author listed as Ray Riegert. It's actually Marcus Borg.)
(By the way, I don't know why this site has the author listed as Ray Riegert. It's actually Marcus Borg.)
December 30, 2024
This book isn’t anything that it says it is. It is not lost, all of the excerpts are from the Gospels, it isn’t a Gospel, it is an assortment of passages ripped out of their proper contexts and mistranslated according the biases of these authors. And it isn’t from Jesus (not exactly). All of the excerpts are about Jesus but many of them aren’t direct sayings of His. I understand that that last point seems like semantics but when speaking on a topic like Q details become very important because those details can make or break the validity of the whole Q debate. Q is a theoretical document that has almost no validity. The evidence in support of it is circumstantial at best and farcical at worst. The standard argument seems to break down to “the synoptic gospels have too much in common, they must have copied from a previous document. Let’s name that document Q.” This document is a favourite of many internet atheists growing neck beards on Reddit but I can’t think of any respected scholars who actually put much stock in its existence. Really, Q is just an attempt to undermine the fact that the writers of the Gospel are telling the truth about first hand accounts that they experienced. They are synoptic because the story they tell is true and historical. Q is just a way to undermine the validity of the Bible, and you can tell by the way these authors translate passages that they have little respect for scripture and its inerrancy (best example I can think of is how they change the words of the Father at Jesus’ baptism from “this is my beloved Son in whom I am well pleased” to “… whom today has become my Son.” It’s subtle but this translation of that passage puts into question whether Jesus was God’s son before His baptism WHICH HE WAS AND IS AND FOREVER WILL BE). The authors of this book also dilute many of these sayings of Jesus into hoaky self help garbage. They turn practical applications of Jesus into metaphysical affirmations.
TLDR: This is NOT the first gospel, this is NOT the way Jesus intended His words to be read or understood, and this document Q is at best a theoretical copy of Jesus’ words that has no real evidence to support its existence and at worst, a deliberate attempt to undermine the original Apostolic authors of scripture, inspired by the Holy Spirit. The authors of this book do a really bad job at staying faithful to the Greek manuscripts in their contemporary translating and do a great job at shoehorning their own biases into Jesus’ words which is laughable because the themes these authors try to shoehorn into Jesus’ make no sense within the cultural context of when these events took place. These words wouldn’t have carried the metaphysical connotations back then that many in our new age based culture read into them today. I wouldn’t bother with this one.
TLDR: This is NOT the first gospel, this is NOT the way Jesus intended His words to be read or understood, and this document Q is at best a theoretical copy of Jesus’ words that has no real evidence to support its existence and at worst, a deliberate attempt to undermine the original Apostolic authors of scripture, inspired by the Holy Spirit. The authors of this book do a really bad job at staying faithful to the Greek manuscripts in their contemporary translating and do a great job at shoehorning their own biases into Jesus’ words which is laughable because the themes these authors try to shoehorn into Jesus’ make no sense within the cultural context of when these events took place. These words wouldn’t have carried the metaphysical connotations back then that many in our new age based culture read into them today. I wouldn’t bother with this one.
June 27, 2013
This small volume is claimed to be one of the sources for the gospels Matthew and Luke, whose authors also incorporated much of Mark to elaborate their own story. Q is just the sayings of Jesus; it does not include any of the Passion narrative, nor does it include the myth of the Resurrection. Fairly interesting if intended for the layperson.
February 10, 2013
If you are one that focuses your Christianity on the words of Jesus, this is a must read. Borg is the best in taking scholarly information and making them accessible and meaningful. This book helped me on my way.
May 24, 2016
Lost gospel and original gospel are terms used in the introduction, yet this Q gospel exsists entirely within the known texts, not independantly. Some scholars reject Q as ever being an independant resource. Apparently "Q" is simply conjecture at this point.
November 8, 2019
This is a nice book, but I find reading the synoptic gospels to be more useful for my purposes. One tends to read through this quickly with little reflection. The words of Jesus are always valuable; I think this volume is more for the academics and less for the faithful.
June 28, 2009
This a compilation of only Jesus words from the Bible.
November 20, 2012
I expected the book to be little bit more informative on how the scholars pulled the says of Jesus to construct "Q," but it was a quick, interesting, and fast reading-
May 3, 2018
A brief (very brief!) book by the much-missed Marcus Borg about the historical Jesus. Basically, scholars believe that there was a written document--called the Q document (I guess quelle is the German word for source, and it was German scholars who started this theory) that was a collection of the sayings of Jesus. The evidence? Based on an analysis of the overlaps in the synoptic Gospels, people who study these things conclude that both Mathew and Luke had a copy of Mark and a copy of the Q document. Mathew and Luke share material with Mark, as well as material that is unique to each of their Gospels. However, they also share material that is not present in Mark.
This document, if it ever existed, has never been found, but I find the argument compelling. It's not hard to imagine that, long before the Gospels were composed, and even before Paul started writing his letters, someone wrote down a version of Jesus' greatest hits for his followers. But of course, we may never know if this actually happened.
So much of religion is like the barnacles on the side of a ship. Over the centuries and millennia, the accretions of language and culture and history and interpretation and communities have added and subtracted and emphasized and diminished the writings found in the Bible (the Bible itself very much being the product of choices made by the early Christian church). It's...satisfying, I guess, to imagine we have the ability to go back to the source, Jesus, and see what it was that he said before his followers began to filter and--in many ways--to create his message.
Much of what passes for Christianity today would be utterly incomprehensible to Jesus and his early followers. I don't just mean the language and culture barriers. I mean the teachings and practices of 21st century Christians. What would Jesus make of a Pope in his full regalia standing in the Vatican speaking in Latin, or of an Evangelical preacher telling his followers that God wants them to be wealthy? Or of people who inscribe Bible verses on bullets and bombs? (I have often thought that we'd have a hard time explaining why we bake cakes in the form of a crucifix to celebrate First Communions! How do you say, "Dudes...really? in Aramaic?)
Alas, we shall never know. An interesting book about trying to get to the source of the world's largest religious tradition. Interesting and strangely wistful.
This document, if it ever existed, has never been found, but I find the argument compelling. It's not hard to imagine that, long before the Gospels were composed, and even before Paul started writing his letters, someone wrote down a version of Jesus' greatest hits for his followers. But of course, we may never know if this actually happened.
So much of religion is like the barnacles on the side of a ship. Over the centuries and millennia, the accretions of language and culture and history and interpretation and communities have added and subtracted and emphasized and diminished the writings found in the Bible (the Bible itself very much being the product of choices made by the early Christian church). It's...satisfying, I guess, to imagine we have the ability to go back to the source, Jesus, and see what it was that he said before his followers began to filter and--in many ways--to create his message.
Much of what passes for Christianity today would be utterly incomprehensible to Jesus and his early followers. I don't just mean the language and culture barriers. I mean the teachings and practices of 21st century Christians. What would Jesus make of a Pope in his full regalia standing in the Vatican speaking in Latin, or of an Evangelical preacher telling his followers that God wants them to be wealthy? Or of people who inscribe Bible verses on bullets and bombs? (I have often thought that we'd have a hard time explaining why we bake cakes in the form of a crucifix to celebrate First Communions! How do you say, "Dudes...really? in Aramaic?)
Alas, we shall never know. An interesting book about trying to get to the source of the world's largest religious tradition. Interesting and strangely wistful.
July 20, 2018
This was a nice short read. This covered the material that Matthew and Luke share but that is not contained in the Gospel of Mark. Many scholars think that Q must have been a written document, for the simple reason that there are long stretches of material in both Matthew and Luke that are in verbatim agreement, thereby making the argument for Q as a written document as opposed to an oral tradition. (On the matter of whether Q was written, Tuckett writes (The Anchor Bible Dictionary, v. 5, p. 568): “The theory that Q represents a mass of oral traditions does not account for the common order in Q material, which can be discerned once Matthew’s habit of collecting related material into his large teaching discourses is discounted (Taylor 1953, 1959). Such a common order demands a theory that Q at some stage existed in written form.”
Was there a Q? Perhaps we will never know. I have met and heard of people who have whole stretches of scriptural text memorized. I heard of a young man that memorized the entire Koran, so this kind of thing isn't impossible. Perhaps these were oral traditions that spread and Matthew and Luke heard these stories, memorized them, and hence Q was never textualized. We will not know unless we find it sometime.
Was there a Q? Perhaps we will never know. I have met and heard of people who have whole stretches of scriptural text memorized. I heard of a young man that memorized the entire Koran, so this kind of thing isn't impossible. Perhaps these were oral traditions that spread and Matthew and Luke heard these stories, memorized them, and hence Q was never textualized. We will not know unless we find it sometime.
January 6, 2025
I heard about this book years ago from a friend who recommended it to me. Recently the book came up again in a conversation about The Chosen series on tv. Soon after that I found the book on my bookshelf; I had forgotten that I owned the book. It is a very short book, but I took my time reading it and read several parts more than once.
One thing that always makes me wonder is why Jesus would tell someone he could not take the time to say goodbye to his family but must instead put Jesus first if he really wanted to follow Jesus. That, to me, does not seem to correlate with the rest of Jesus's behavior as shown in the Bible.
But, who am I to disagree with Biblical scholars? Perhaps the request to take time to say goodbye to family was just an excuse to avoid saying no to the invitation to follow Jesus. And, of course it would have taken a bit of time to walk back to the person's house since people did not have cell phones in their pockets then.
In addition to listing some of the things that the scholars say Jesus actually did say, there are interesting footnotes in this book.
One thing that always makes me wonder is why Jesus would tell someone he could not take the time to say goodbye to his family but must instead put Jesus first if he really wanted to follow Jesus. That, to me, does not seem to correlate with the rest of Jesus's behavior as shown in the Bible.
But, who am I to disagree with Biblical scholars? Perhaps the request to take time to say goodbye to family was just an excuse to avoid saying no to the invitation to follow Jesus. And, of course it would have taken a bit of time to walk back to the person's house since people did not have cell phones in their pockets then.
In addition to listing some of the things that the scholars say Jesus actually did say, there are interesting footnotes in this book.
June 17, 2023
While not “bad” the book lacks some of the scholarship one would expect from such an undertaking. It ends up being just an idea of Q, a rough one at that. While writing a real Q is of course impossible since we do not have access, more information as to how the writing was discovered, as well as cross references to the Gospel of Thomas which also appears sourced, would have been appreciated.
January 23, 2025
This was alright. It took a while for the author to admit this was a hypothetical gospel rather than an actual manuscript. It was interesting to read, but mostly reiterated the New Testament since they claimed the Q gospel was used by the NT authors. I wish there was more of a dissection on the history and philosophy behind the theory.
October 14, 2022
Maybe it should be a 4 star since it is nicely edited, provides an ok introduction, and has a decent bibliography to access, but overall it felt like it tried to convince the reader of more than the data given could convince.
This is not my recommended book to introduce someone to Q.
This is not my recommended book to introduce someone to Q.
April 1, 2024
It was hard for me to accept this author's opinion of which sayings of jesus constituted the original "Quelle" of sayings without any empirical proof or other proven research methodology. It appeared to me to be a quick little book creation without sincere or deliberate academic effort.
Read
March 29, 2020Very interesting to read just the quotes outside of the context.
February 24, 2023
Though the pages are quick and short, the meanings are rich and lasting.
November 20, 2023
All quotes in this book are covered in various Bible verses. There is nothing new found in this book.
July 11, 2025
Interesting summary of the Lost Gospel Q by one of the more liberal theological experts on the historical Jesus. While I don't share the same theological views as Borg, and while I remain unconvinced of many of the claims to the existence or broad theological usage of purported anonymous gospels, this book is insightful in demonstrating how many of the sayings attributed to Jesus in this purported lost gospel are similar to those in the respective canonical gospel writings.
January 1, 2025
Borg is always an interesting read - this paints a slightly different picture of Jesus and Christianity than the Church teaches now.
November 25, 2015
I am a big Marcus Borg fan, so I had a project to read all the books that he had had a hand in. Borg was "consulting editor" in this project and wrote the preface. I had gotten the book and had it on my shelf when the opportunity came along to dig into it. In short, the opportunity was a desire to find a scripture passage that summed up for me what it would mean to follow Jesus. My idea was to read through he gospels, looking for his sayings--what he instructed to those who would follow him. Then I was struck by the idea that Q is the earliest gospel we have--though it is "derived" through source comparison of the synoptic gospels (Mt & Lk, compared to Mk), Reading through Q (instead of reading the four canonical gospels) seemed a very suitable approach for what I was doing, and I was satisfied-to-happy with it.
See also Lee Harmon's review on goodreads.com for a good description of this smallish book. Lee's review likely prompted me to get the book.
The editors of the book are Mark Powelson and Ray Regent. According to the section entitled "A Note of Translation," they drew on the New English Bible, Jerusalem Bible, Today's English version, New RSV, and the New American Standard "as well as experiments in prose undertaken by individual translators such as James Moffatt, Ronald Knox, Edgar Goodspeed, and J.B. Phillips." They comment further that "many scholars would call our rendering a 'paraphrase' since we have followed the principle of 'dynamic equivalence' in producing the text. This modern style of translation seeks to re-create a text in contemporary language by focusing on sentences, paragraphs and overall meaning rather than seeking a word-for-word equivalence. Our goal has been to rebuild the scattered fragments of he Lost Gospel Q in a fashion that gives form and meaning t the resulting structure."
I do have a few complaints about the book:
1) For some reason, the Note on Translation and bibliography are printed in a smaller font size than the body. And the listing of parallel references in Mk, Mt, Lk is smaller font still, which together with the quality of the paper required me to use a magnifying glass to read in more than one instance. Smaller font size was not the best solution surely to whatever problem the printer faced.
2) Punctuation used in rendering the Q sayings seem inconsistent to me, and there were cases where I thought the grammar was awkward and even wrong (such as using nominative form in objective case). This was disappointing to me; I am thinking people doing work at this level should take more care with their use of language and punctuation.
See also Lee Harmon's review on goodreads.com for a good description of this smallish book. Lee's review likely prompted me to get the book.
The editors of the book are Mark Powelson and Ray Regent. According to the section entitled "A Note of Translation," they drew on the New English Bible, Jerusalem Bible, Today's English version, New RSV, and the New American Standard "as well as experiments in prose undertaken by individual translators such as James Moffatt, Ronald Knox, Edgar Goodspeed, and J.B. Phillips." They comment further that "many scholars would call our rendering a 'paraphrase' since we have followed the principle of 'dynamic equivalence' in producing the text. This modern style of translation seeks to re-create a text in contemporary language by focusing on sentences, paragraphs and overall meaning rather than seeking a word-for-word equivalence. Our goal has been to rebuild the scattered fragments of he Lost Gospel Q in a fashion that gives form and meaning t the resulting structure."
I do have a few complaints about the book:
1) For some reason, the Note on Translation and bibliography are printed in a smaller font size than the body. And the listing of parallel references in Mk, Mt, Lk is smaller font still, which together with the quality of the paper required me to use a magnifying glass to read in more than one instance. Smaller font size was not the best solution surely to whatever problem the printer faced.
2) Punctuation used in rendering the Q sayings seem inconsistent to me, and there were cases where I thought the grammar was awkward and even wrong (such as using nominative form in objective case). This was disappointing to me; I am thinking people doing work at this level should take more care with their use of language and punctuation.
March 26, 2010
"Q" sounds like a really odd title, particularly for something attributable as a "gospel," but there's a reason. When studying the "synoptic problem" (the relationships between the first three gospels, Matthew, Mark, and Luke) in the 1800s, a German scholar noted material that was common to Matthew and Luke but did not appear in Mark, and speculated that this came from a lost source, which was noted as "Q" for "Quelle" (German for "source").
Here's what "Q" is not: It is not unsubstantiated extra-biblical material; everything in it comes right from Matthew and Luke, retranslated into modern English for the general public (complete with a cross-reference table to the appropriate biblical verses). It is not commentary or criticism of the gospels; it is an attempt to reconstruct what the lost "source" contained. And, it is not something that has been found on a mysterious scroll somewhere and foisted on an unsuspecting public; it is a product of serious, ongoing biblical scholarship, entirely derived from the Bible itself.
To this last point, it's important to keep in mind, as the editors themselves say, that what this book contains is *not* the original "Q", which is lost. It's a compilation of what "Q" contained that made it into the gospels of Matthew and Luke. It appears to be largely a collection of sayings of Jesus, but that does not prohibit the possibility that there was more to it; in fact, there almost certainly was more material, and perhaps someday something close to "Q" may be found.
The editors also note that (contrary to the way the book has been publicized) this is not some sort of transcription of Jesus's speeches. "Q" wouldn't have been written down until a generation later, and therefore belongs to the same time period as the early epistles of Paul, a generation prior to the composition of the gospels.
What "Q" is: A very interesting and important part of the history of the compilation of the New Testament, as well as being thought-provoking in and of itself. Whatever the religious/philosophical orientation of the reader, Jesus's words (at least those that were recorded and transmitted to posterity) are always thought-provoking, sometimes even radical. Brought out of the recesses of some of the less-scrutinized corners of the gospels and looked at in the light, these sayings are well worth reading and contemplating.
Here's what "Q" is not: It is not unsubstantiated extra-biblical material; everything in it comes right from Matthew and Luke, retranslated into modern English for the general public (complete with a cross-reference table to the appropriate biblical verses). It is not commentary or criticism of the gospels; it is an attempt to reconstruct what the lost "source" contained. And, it is not something that has been found on a mysterious scroll somewhere and foisted on an unsuspecting public; it is a product of serious, ongoing biblical scholarship, entirely derived from the Bible itself.
To this last point, it's important to keep in mind, as the editors themselves say, that what this book contains is *not* the original "Q", which is lost. It's a compilation of what "Q" contained that made it into the gospels of Matthew and Luke. It appears to be largely a collection of sayings of Jesus, but that does not prohibit the possibility that there was more to it; in fact, there almost certainly was more material, and perhaps someday something close to "Q" may be found.
The editors also note that (contrary to the way the book has been publicized) this is not some sort of transcription of Jesus's speeches. "Q" wouldn't have been written down until a generation later, and therefore belongs to the same time period as the early epistles of Paul, a generation prior to the composition of the gospels.
What "Q" is: A very interesting and important part of the history of the compilation of the New Testament, as well as being thought-provoking in and of itself. Whatever the religious/philosophical orientation of the reader, Jesus's words (at least those that were recorded and transmitted to posterity) are always thought-provoking, sometimes even radical. Brought out of the recesses of some of the less-scrutinized corners of the gospels and looked at in the light, these sayings are well worth reading and contemplating.
May 20, 2008
It seems an act of supreme hubris to assign stars or to write a critical review for this book.
I will say that it is a triumph of philology, though. In the early 19th century, German Bible scholars determined that the Gospels of Matthew and Luke had both been drawn from the Book of Mark (now accepted as the oldest of the four New Testament Gospels) and from a second, unknown source. By comparing Matthew and Luke, scholars were able to tease out the passages that came from this second source, which was called Quelle (German for "well" or "spring"), later shortened to Q or the Q Gospel.
Subsequent research and archaeological discoveries of early Christian manuscripts showed that the Q Gospel was most likely written shortly after Jesus's death by his contemporaries and stands as the oldest Gospel. The book is a collection of stories and teachings in Jesus's original voice, without the interpretive overlay provided in the New Testament Gospels.
Many Fundamentalists reject extrabiblical Scripture, like the Q Gospel or the Gospel of Thomas. However, everything in the former book has echoes in Matthew and Luke, so one wonders to what these critics object. (One might suspect that, for some, veneration has come to be focused more on a book and on their own theological concepts, rather than on the man who inspired it all.) No one suggests that any of the extrabiblical Christian writings should replace the traditional Gospels; rather, all of these writings are useful in gaining a complete understanding of Jesus's life and teachings.
In recent years, the Q Gospel has been one of the texts at the center of the search for a historical Jesus. While this approach drives many Fundamentalists to apoplectic fits, I find it compelling. J. G. Herder wrote that divine revelation comes primarily from Scripture, but also from nature and history. Indeed, the Hebrew Bible turns on Judaic history, and the Gospel writers included in the New Testament see the figure of Jesus in relation to that history.
I will say that it is a triumph of philology, though. In the early 19th century, German Bible scholars determined that the Gospels of Matthew and Luke had both been drawn from the Book of Mark (now accepted as the oldest of the four New Testament Gospels) and from a second, unknown source. By comparing Matthew and Luke, scholars were able to tease out the passages that came from this second source, which was called Quelle (German for "well" or "spring"), later shortened to Q or the Q Gospel.
Subsequent research and archaeological discoveries of early Christian manuscripts showed that the Q Gospel was most likely written shortly after Jesus's death by his contemporaries and stands as the oldest Gospel. The book is a collection of stories and teachings in Jesus's original voice, without the interpretive overlay provided in the New Testament Gospels.
Many Fundamentalists reject extrabiblical Scripture, like the Q Gospel or the Gospel of Thomas. However, everything in the former book has echoes in Matthew and Luke, so one wonders to what these critics object. (One might suspect that, for some, veneration has come to be focused more on a book and on their own theological concepts, rather than on the man who inspired it all.) No one suggests that any of the extrabiblical Christian writings should replace the traditional Gospels; rather, all of these writings are useful in gaining a complete understanding of Jesus's life and teachings.
In recent years, the Q Gospel has been one of the texts at the center of the search for a historical Jesus. While this approach drives many Fundamentalists to apoplectic fits, I find it compelling. J. G. Herder wrote that divine revelation comes primarily from Scripture, but also from nature and history. Indeed, the Hebrew Bible turns on Judaic history, and the Gospel writers included in the New Testament see the figure of Jesus in relation to that history.
February 21, 2017
This is a well edited "dynamic equivalence" translation of the lost gospel Q.
January 14, 2015
This is an excellent attempt to present the Gospel Q as it would be in its historical context. The Lost Gospel Q was most likely used by Matthew and Luke as well, holding a major place in biblical history (which I hope one day is found). Borg offers commentary on some of the sayings of Jesus, also providing excellent scholarship with regards to the many meaningful sayings of Jesus, including parables and important stories used in the other Gospels. This an a very short read for Borg that I special ordered because I like his work so much, definitely worth reading to a casual Christian or someone seeking to learn about the historical Jesus.
April 25, 2016
This book was never found or discovered but was instead projected from later writings that theoretically used this as a source. It is similar to the Gospel of Thomas, and in fact a lot of the sayings are the same. Both books are collections of things that Jesus was reported to have said: parables and stories as quoted by his followers. It is not that long of a book and a lot of the sayings are familiar from the synoptic gospels: Matthew, Mark, and Luke.
February 20, 2008
I thought this was a very interesting book. I am very interested in the way that the Bible was put together and the fact that there are lots of other documents that were written about Jesus besides the ones we have in the Bible. I think it is interesting to read other things about the teachings of Jesus.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 47 reviews