This board is dedicated to the discussion of history and the other humanities such as philosophy, religion, law, classical artwork, archeology, anthropology, ancient languages, etc. Please use /lit/ for discussions of literature. Threads should be about specific topics, and the creation of "general" threads is discouraged.
For the purpose of determining what is history, please do not start threads about events taking place less than 25 years ago. Historical discussions should be focused on past events, and not their contemporary consequences. Discussion of modern politics, current events, popular culture, or other non-historical topics should be posted elsewhere. General discussions about international culture should go on /int/.
<u>/his/ is not /pol/</u>, and Global Rule #3 is in effect. Do not try to treat this board as /pol/ with dates. Blatant racism and trolling will not be tolerated, and a high level of discourse is expected. History can be examined from many different conflicting viewpoints; please treat other posters with respect and address the content of their post instead of attacking their character.
When discussing history, <u>please reference credible source material</u>, and provide as much supporting information as possible in your posts.
What can be said about document Q, which some claim was a source for Matthew and Luke?
James M. Robinson, professor of religion, states: “Q is surely the most important Christian text that we have.”
That statement is surprising because document Q DOES NOT EXIST today, and in reality, no one can prove that it ever existed !!! Its total disappearance is all the more remarkable because scholars claim that several copies of the document must have circulated.
In addition, document Q is never quoted by the Church Fathers.
Think about this. Q is supposed to have existed and to have supported the hypothetical priority of Mark’s Gospel.
Is that not a case of one hypothesis built upon another hypothesis ???
When it comes to theories such as these, we are wise to keep this proverb in mind: “A simple man believes every word he hears; a clever man understands the need for proof.”—Proverbs 14:15, The New English Bible.
How did the American "Ivy League" universities like Harvard, Yale, and Columbia (to name but a few) arrive at a position of world renown esteem and research superiority, in a country that was (and still is) regarded by much of Europe mostly for its philistinism? Was it just the world wars and the brain drain of European intellectuals that propelled the US to its standing of excellence in higher education and research, or is it rooted in the puritan tradition of the importance of literacy?