Scriptural controversies in the Christian tradition

In the New Testament studies, the first three gospels, Matthew, Mark, and Luke, are called the Synoptic Gospels; because, when these Gospels are compared, it is easily seen that Jesus' life, miracles and sayings are conveyed in similar content, wording and order. Sometimes the similarities in parallel passages are so close that a possible relationship between each other is considered. However, there are many differences and contradictions between them as well. Since the end of 18th century, scholars have tried to solve this problem in the Synoptic Gospels by using modern scientific methods. In this context, synoptic problem might be defined as the study of the similarities and differences between them, and also a discussion of their possible literary relationship. The Gospel of John is excluded from these studies; because, it differs from the Synoptic Gospels in terms of content, order and theological point of view. This study seeks to introduce the main hypotheses of synoptic problem that have come from the end of the 18th century and to evaluate the dominant view, named the two-source hypothesis among these theories. In this context, in the first part of the study, the historical development of the discussions on the source of the Synoptic Gospels is discussed. In the second part, the two-source hypotheses is examined. The two-source hypothesis is based on the assumption that the Gospel of Mark is written first and Matthew and Luke used Mark with a hypothetical source, named Q. In this context, first, the priority of Mark is viewed and then the assumption that the source Q could be a lost written text, used by Matthew and Luke is discussed.