And so just hours ago my husband was looking for a spare Bible. I helped him find one and then took a nap. I woke up to something very amazing. He said he was moved to start reading the new Testament all the way through. Something he has never done. We are Catholic and the Bible I found for him was given to our family in the mid 70's from the funeral home after my younger sister passed. It is a Catholic Bible.
So on the first pages of Matthew there is some background information. Something I would easily pass up by not my husband. I scanned the page and highlighted the 6th paragraph. Please read and then keep reading -
After reading that he looked up the word "Quelle". He got as far as the Wikileaks link -
Q source From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Jump to navigationJump to search The "Two-source Hypothesis" proposes that the Gospels of Matthew and Luke were written independently, each using Mark and a second hypothetical document called "Q" as a source. Q was conceived as the most likely explanation behind the common material (mostly sayings) found in the Gospel of Matthew and the Gospel of Luke but not in Mark. The Q source (also called Q document, Q Gospel, or Q from German: Quelle, meaning "source") is a hypothetical written collection of primarily Jesus' sayings (logia). Q is part of the common material found in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke but not in the Gospel of Mark. According to this hypothesis, this material was drawn from the early Church's oral tradition.[1][2][3] Along with Marcan priority, Q was hypothesized by 1900, and is one of the foundations of most modern gospel scholarship.[4] B. H. Streeter formulated a widely accepted view of Q: that it was written in Koine Greek; that most of its contents appear in Matthew, in Luke, or in both; and that Luke more often preserves the text's original order than Matthew. In the two-source hypothesis, the three-source hypothesis and the Q+/Papias hypothesis, Matthew and Luke both used Mark and Q as sources. Some scholars have postulated that Q is actually a plurality of sources, some written and some oral.[5] Others have attempted to determine the stages in which Q was composed.[6] Q's existence has been questioned.[6] Omitting what should have been a highly treasured dominical document from all early Church catalogs, its lack of mention by Jerome is a conundrum of modern Biblical scholarship.[7] But copying Q might have been seen as unnecessary as it was preserved in the canonical gospels. Hence, it was preferable to copy the Gospels of Matthew and Luke, "where the sayings of Jesus from Q were rephrased to avoid misunderstandings, and to fit their own situations and their understanding of what Jesus had really meant".[8] Despite challenges, the two-source hypothesis retains wide support.[6]
there is more at the link for those interested. Just had to post this. This was the opposite of a dig for surehttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Q_source