# M source

> Mediated Wiki article. Canonical URL: https://mediated.wiki/source/M_source
> Markdown URL: https://mediated.wiki/source/M_source.md
> Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M_source
> Source revision: 1341777327
> License: Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/)

Hypothetical source for Matthew's Gospel

Streeter's [four-document hypothesis](/source/Four-document_hypothesis)

**M source**, which is sometimes referred to as **M document**, or simply **M**, comes from the M in "Matthean material". It is a hypothetical textual source for the [Gospel of Matthew](/source/Gospel_of_Matthew). M Source is defined as that "special material" of the Gospel of Matthew that is neither [Q source](/source/Q_source) nor [Mark](/source/Gospel_of_Mark). With the decline of source criticism the existence of a unified M source is largely rejected in scholarship today.[1]

## History

Main article: [Synoptic Gospels](/source/Synoptic_Gospels)

Nineteenth century New Testament scholars who rejected the traditional perspective of the priority of Matthew in favor of [Marcan priority](/source/Marcan_priority) speculated that the authors of [Matthew](/source/Gospel_of_Matthew) and [Luke](/source/Gospel_of_Luke) drew the material they have in common with the [Gospel of Mark](/source/Gospel_of_Mark) from that Gospel. Matthew and Luke, however, also share large sections of text which are not found in Mark. They suggested that neither Gospel drew upon the other, but upon a *second* common source, termed the **Q**.[2] This [two-source hypothesis](/source/Two-source_hypothesis) speculates that Matthew borrowed from both Mark and a [hypothetical](/source/Hypothetical) sayings collection, called **[Q](/source/Q_source)**. For most scholars, the **Q** collection accounts for what Matthew and Luke share – sometimes in exactly the same words – but are not found in Mark. Examples of such material are the Devil's three [temptations of Jesus](/source/Temptation_of_Christ), the Beatitudes, the Lord's Prayer and many individual sayings.[3]

In *The Four Gospels: A Study of Origins* (1924), [Burnett Hillman Streeter](/source/Burnett_Hillman_Streeter) argued that a third source, referred to as ***M*** and also hypothetical, lies behind the material in Matthew that has no parallel in Mark or Luke.[4] This [four-source hypothesis](/source/Four-document_hypothesis) posits that there were at **least** four sources to the Gospel of Matthew and the Gospel of Luke: the Gospel of Mark, and three lost sources: Q, **M,** and [L](/source/L_source). (M material is represented by violet in the above chart.) Throughout the remainder of the 20th century, there were various challenges and refinements of Streeter's hypothesis. For example, in his 1953 book *The Gospel Before Mark*, Pierson Parker posited an early version of Matthew ([Aram. M](/source/Aramaic_Matthew) or proto-Matthew) as the primary source.[5] Parker argued that it was not possible to separate Streeter's ***"M"*** material from the material in Matthew parallel to Mark.[6][7]

With the decline of source criticism the existence of a unified M source is largely rejected in scholarship today.[8]

## Composition

### Synoptic Gospels and the Nature of M

Main article: [Synoptic Gospels](/source/Synoptic_Gospels)

The relationship among the three synoptic gospels goes beyond mere similarity in viewpoint. The gospels often recount the same stories, usually in the same order, sometimes using the same words. Scholars note that the similarities between Mark, Matthew, and Luke are too great to be accounted for by mere coincidence.[9] If the four-source hypothesis is correct, then **M** would probably have been a written document and contained the following:[10]

Likely content of M Source Parable Chapter Verses Number of verses Parable of the Tares 13 13:24–43 20 Parable of the Hidden Treasure 13 13:44 1 Parable of the Pearl 13 13:45–46 2 Parable of Drawing in the Net 13 13:47–52 6 Parable of the Unforgiving Servant 18 18:21–35 15 Parable of the Workers in the Vineyard 20 20:1–16 17 Parable of the Two Sons 21 21:28–32 5 Parable of the Ten Virgins[11][12] 25 25:1–13 14

#### M source (30–50)

The third primary source is **M**.[13] The study of pre-Gospel sources is declining in scholarship, with the tendency most visible with the M and L sources.[14][15][16][17]

## See also

- [Bible portal](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portal:Bible)

- [Jewish-Christian Gospels](/source/Jewish-Christian_Gospels)

- [Four-document hypothesis](/source/Four-document_hypothesis)

- [Common Sayings Source](/source/Common_Sayings_Source)

- [List of Gospels](/source/List_of_Gospels)

## References

1. **[^](#cite_ref-1)** Foster, Paul (2023). *The Oxford Handbook of the Synoptic Gospels*. Oxford University Press. [ISBN](/source/ISBN_(identifier)) [978-0190887452](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:BookSources/978-0190887452). Where does this virtually unanimous rejection of a unified, written M leave scholarship on the unique Matthean material...the overarching hypothesis finds few, if any supporters...The insights into the ideological character of individual sayings and complexes of material are no longer attributed to a preexisting source but are now to be taken into account as part of the overall message and theology of the first evangelist.

1. **[^](#cite_ref-2)** D. R. W. Wood, *New Bible Dictionary*, Inter Varsity Press, 1996 p. 739.

1. **[^](#cite_ref-3)** Bart Erhman, *Jesus: Apocalyptic Prophet of the New Millennium*, Oxford University Press, p.80-81

1. **[^](#cite_ref-4)** Streeter, Burnett H. *[The Four Gospels. A Study of Origins Treating the Manuscript Tradition, Sources, Authorship, & Dates](http://www.katapi.org.uk/4Gospels/Contents.htm)*. London: Macmillan and Co., Ltd., 1924.

1. **[^](#cite_ref-5)** Pierson Parker. *The Gospel Before Mark*. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1953.

1. **[^](#cite_ref-6)** [Farmer, William R.](/source/William_R._Farmer) (1981) [1964]. *The Synoptic Problem: A Critical Analysis*. Macmillan. p. 196.

1. **[^](#cite_ref-7)** [Everett Falconer Harrison, *Introduction to the New Testament*, Wm. Eerdmans 1971](https://books.google.com/books?id=qh7b4o6JQpIC&dq=Aramaic+matthew++%22The+special+sources+may+be+roughly+equated+with+Streeter's+M+and+L%22&pg=PA152) p. 152.

1. **[^](#cite_ref-8)** Foster, Paul (2023). *The Oxford Handbook of the Synoptic Gospels*. Oxford University Press. [ISBN](/source/ISBN_(identifier)) [978-0190887452](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:BookSources/978-0190887452). Where does this virtually unanimous rejection of a unified, written M leave scholarship on the unique Matthean material...the overarching hypothesis finds few, if any supporters...The insights into the ideological character of individual sayings and complexes of material are no longer attributed to a preexisting source but are now to be taken into account as part of the overall message and theology of the first evangelist.

1. **[^](#cite_ref-9)** [Ehrman, Bart D.](/source/Bart_D._Ehrman) (2004). *The New Testament: A Historical Introduction to the Early Christian Writings*. New York: Oxford. p. 84. [ISBN](/source/ISBN_(identifier)) [0-19-515462-2](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:BookSources/0-19-515462-2).

1. **[^](#cite_ref-10)** [Robert E. Van Voorst, *Jesus outside the New Testament: an introduction to the ancient evidence studying the historical Jesus,* Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing, 2000](https://books.google.com/books?id=lwzliMSRGGkC&dq=M-source+OR+%22M+document%22+gospel&pg=PA143) p. 143

1. **[^](#cite_ref-11)** [Daniel J. Scholz, *Jesus in the Gospels and Acts: Introducing the New Testament,* Saint Mary's Press, 2009](https://books.google.com/books?id=royKA4FeMB4C&dq=%22vineyard+21%3A28+%22+net+servant+sons&pg=PA90) p. 90

1. **[^](#cite_ref-12)** [James R. Edwards, *The Hebrew Gospel and the Development of the Synoptic Tradition*, Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing, 2009](https://books.google.com/books?id=Vs9YXAB_axYC&dq=Q+like+Christian+seminal+document++%22Where+we+should+expect+mention+of+a+dominical+sayings+source%22&pg=PA228) p. 228

1. **[^](#cite_ref-13)** Jones, Brice (2011). [*Matthean and Lukan Special Material: A Brief Introduction with Texts in Greek and English*](https://web.archive.org/web/20140531180933/https://wipfandstock.com/store/Matthean_and_Lukan_Special_Material_A_Brief_Introduction_with_Texts_in_Greek_and_English). Wipf and Stock Publishers. [ISBN](/source/ISBN_(identifier)) [978-1-61097-737-1](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:BookSources/978-1-61097-737-1). Archived from [the original](https://wipfandstock.com/store/Matthean_and_Lukan_Special_Material_A_Brief_Introduction_with_Texts_in_Greek_and_English) on 2014-05-31. Retrieved 2012-02-01.

1. **[^](#cite_ref-14)** Foster, Paul (2023). *The Oxford Handbook of the Synoptic Gospels*. Oxford University Press. [ISBN](/source/ISBN_(identifier)) [978-0190887452](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:BookSources/978-0190887452). While the study of pre-Gospel sources has in general seen a waning of interest among scholars, this tendency is nowhere more pronounced than in relation to the two proposed early sources M and L, and the early intermediary stage of Proto-Luke. Given the importance of these three hypothetical sources in theories of the solution to the Synoptic Problem during the late nineteenth century and for most of the twentieth century, it is instructive to trace the emergence of these source-critical hypotheses, to discuss the reasons for the demise of adherence, and to consider whether anything of value endures from these earlier theories.

1. **[^](#cite_ref-15)** Foster, Paul, *New studies in the synoptic problem: Oxford conference, April 2008; essays in honour of Christopher M. Tuckett*, Foster, P.; Gregory, A.; Kloppenborg, J. S.; Verheyden, J. (eds.), Peeters Publishers, 2011, [ISBN](/source/ISBN_(identifier)) [978-90-429-2401-7](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:BookSources/978-90-429-2401-7), "The M-source : its history and demise in biblical scholarship", pp. 591–616

1. **[^](#cite_ref-16)** [Martin Hengel](/source/Martin_Hengel), *The Four Gospels and the One Gospel of Jesus Christ* Trinity Press, SCM 2000 p.207- 210

1. **[^](#cite_ref-17)** [Delbert Royce Burkett, *Rethinking the Gospel Sources*, Vol. 2, Society of Biblical Lit, 2009](https://books.google.com/books?id=JvO4rj3NOoAC&pg=PA135) p. 135–141

## External links

Online translations of the [Gospel of Matthew](/source/Gospel_of_Matthew):

- [A Four Document Hypothesis](http://www.katapi.org.uk/4Gospels/master.html?http://www.katapi.org.uk/4Gospels/Ch9.htm)

- [Net Bible](http://net.bible.org/dictionary.php?word=Hebrews,%20Gospel%20According%20To%20The)

- [Early Christian Writings](http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/text/gospelhebrews-throck.html)

- [The Development of the Canon of the New Testament](https://books.google.com/books?id=ZiX5d09931UC&q=canon+new)

v t e Gospel of Matthew Bible (New Testament) Chapters Matthew 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Verses Matthew 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 14 15 16:2b–3,19 27:1–12; 52–66 28 Events and phrases Jesus' birth Star of Bethlehem Magi Flight into Egypt Massacre of the Innocents Return to Nazareth Kingdom of heaven Baptism Temptation Galilean ministry Fishers of men Behold the bridegroom Sermon on the Mount Beatitudes Lord's Prayer Golden Rule Jesus preaches in a ship Calming the storm Feeding the multitude Walking on water Transfiguration Great Commandment Olivet Discourse Ten Virgins Anointing Passion of Jesus Last Supper Crucifixion of Jesus Burial Empty tomb Resurrection Great Commission People Andrew Bartholomew Caiaphas Herod James James, son of Alphaeus Jeremiah Jesus Christ John John the Baptist Joseph Judas Iscariot Jude Mary Mary Magdalene Mary, sister of Martha Matthew Philip Pontius Pilate Rachel Simon Peter Simon the Zealot Thomas Zebedee Groups Angels Pharisees Sadducees Sanhedrin Places Bethany Bethlehem Bethsaida Capernaum Egypt Galilee Jerusalem Jordan River Judea Samaria Sea of Galilee Related Q source M source Gospel of Mark Textual variants Augustinian hypothesis Two-gospel hypothesis Matthean Posteriority Genealogy of Jesus Five Discourses of Matthew Calling of Matthew Kingdom of heaven Immanuel Gospel of Pseudo-Matthew Rabbinical translations Shem Tob Joseph Smith–Matthew In culture St Matthew Passion (Bach, 1727/29) Structure The Gospel According to St. Matthew (1964 film) Godspell (1971 musical) Godspell (1973 film) The Visual Bible: Matthew (1993 film) Manuscripts Papyrus 1 4 19 21 25 35 37 44 45 53 62 70 71 73 77 83 86 96 101 102 103 104 105 110 Magdalen papyrus Sources Greek Text Latin Vulgate Wycliffe Version King James Version American Standard Version World English Version

v t e Synoptic problem The Synoptic Gospels Gospel of Matthew Gospel of Mark Gospel of Luke Matthaean priority Two-gospel hypothesis Augustinian hypothesis Marcan priority Two-source hypothesis Farrer hypothesis Three-source hypothesis Matthean Posteriority hypothesis Four-document hypothesis Lucan priority Jerusalem school hypothesis Other or no priority Multi-source hypothesis Hebrew Gospel hypothesis Priority of the Gospel of Marcion Q+/Papias hypothesis Independence hypothesis Possible sources Q source M source L source

---
Adapted from the Wikipedia article [M source](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M_source) by Wikipedia contributors ([contributor history](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M_source?action=history)). Available under [Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International](https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/). Changes may have been made.