Everyone else in the entire Roman empire kept records, made reports, transacted business, conducted trials, and wrote and read extensively. Except, of course, when it came to such important figures as Jesus Christ, or the slaughter of the innocents by Herod, and other major events (Exodus) described in the Bible and nowehere else.
It is possible that 7Q5 and its Genessaret text that so closely parallels Mark is a piece of a scribal record, if it is not a piece of Mark itself. That fragment has dated earlier than 50 AD
This is an old theory. The work done on 7Q5 was shown to have been the result of researcher's bias. Subsequent computer matches yielded sixteen possible matches, not unique to +Mark.
Cave 7 in Qumran yielded many non-biblical texts. The "gge" fragment that was interpreted as "Gennesaret" can also be part of "eggenesen" (begot) someone's genealogy. The Q75 has so little information, everything about it is practically a conjecture. The picutre is worth a thousand words.
Luke very clearly points out at the beginning of his gospel that he collected the sources available
Well, he didn't collect them from +John for sure. If he was 'inspired' as +Paul says he was, then he wouldn't need a collective memory of others, but would be guided by the Spirit to write word by word, correct?
So leading someone to compile the records of eyewitnesses affirmed by the Jerusalem Christian community is something beyond the ability of the Lord?
I don't 'spose you'd care to review the Kings and Chronicles and their likely method of compilation?
So far as other events are concerned, we are certain that entire libraries from that era have disappeared. Not to mention Alexandria, little ole Qumran should teach us that. To claim records did not exist is to claim perfect knowledge in the present of what transpired 2000 years ago.
7Q5 has not been disposed of. It is still a viable theory presented by whoever that priest was. Additionally, no one has even begun to seek for
While much of the speculation about the document known as Q (from German "quelle" for "source") is liberal and unworthy of note, the idea of a pre-gospel source is supported by Luke.
Udo Schnelle writes about the dating of Q (op. cit., p. 186):
The Sayings Source was composed before the destruction of the temple, since the sayings against Jerusalem and the temple in Luke 13.34-35Q do not presuppose any military events. A more precise determination of the time of composition must remain hypothetical, but a few indications point to the period between 40 and 50 CE: (1) Bearers of the sayings tradition, which possibly extends all the way back to pre-Easter times, included both wandering preachers of the Jesus movement as well as local congregations. Thus the conditions in which the Sayings Source originated included both continuity with the beginnings and with the developing congregational structures across the region. (2) The Sayings Source presupposes persection of the young congregations by Palestinian Jews (cf. Luke 6.22-23 Q; Luke 11.49-51 Q; Luke 12.4-5 Q; 12.11-12 Q). About 50 CE Paul mentions in 1 Thess. 2.14-16 a persecution of Christians in Judea that had already taken place. The execution of James the son of Zebedee by Agrippa I (cf. Acts 12.2) occurred around 44 CE. (3) The positive references to Gentiles in Q (cf. Luke 10.13-15Q; Luke 11.29-31Q; Matt. 8.5-13 Q; Matt. 5.47 Q; Matt. 22.1-10 Q) indicate that the Gentile mission had begun, which is probably to be located in the period between 40 and 50 CE.