Up to this point most Q sayings are addressed to Jesus' supporters.
Social conflict involving Jesus is evident in a few references to critics
(for instance: Luke
6:22-23//Matt 5:11-12; Luke
7:31-35//Matt 11:16-19). But, apart from the condemnation of three
Galilean towns (Luke
10:13-15//Matt 11:20-24), Q's presentation of Jesus' response to
opposition is a model of restraint. Jesus urges people not to initiate
criticism (Luke 6:37-42 //Matt
7:1-5) or to retaliate when provoked (Luke
6:27-35//Matt 5:38-48). And his own retorts to critics (for instance,
the timber in the eye and the children in the market) employ irony rather
than invective. He thanks God for letting the unschooled see what teachers
ignore (Luke 10:21//Matt 11:25). But instead of engaging in dispute with
rival sages, Q's Jesus only makes the caustic general comment that blind
guides risk falling into a ditch (Luke
6:39//Matt 15:14). Even after preparing people to experience rejection
(Luke 10:10-12//Matt 10:13-15), Q focuses on divine protection (Luke
11:9-13//Matt 7:7-11) rather than on countering challenges from human
sources. And this remains true for all Q passages after Luke 11.
Thus, the reader is hardly prepared for the disputes that Luke presents
after Q's cluster of sayings on prayer. In less than forty verses
Jesus seems to lose his composure, trading insult for insult and issuing
condemnations without sign of provocation. Anybody can be inconsistent. But
such a startling shift in tactics over a relatively short span raises the
question of the source of this material.
Issues
Three questions confront Jesus in this section:
- Who authorized him to perform exorcisms (Luke 11:14-15//Matt
12:22-24)?
- Can he produce a sign from Heaven, i.e., God (Luke 11:16//Matt
12:38)?
- Why doesn't he wash like the Pharisees (Luke 11:37-38)?
Jesus' brief response to each challenge is followed by similar
sayings that have little to do with the initiating issue. Thus, these
apparent debates are really strings of separate sayings that have been
grouped together because of pattern or theme. The challenges posed to Jesus
originally sparked only the first saying in each sequence or were created in
order to give an aphorism a concrete setting. Like other clusters in Q, some
elements can be traced to Jesus. But other sayings were either created by
the scribe or vacuumed up from anonymous oral tradition.
Sources
The first two issues (exorcism and signs) were known in early Christian
tradition apart from Q, since Mark presents both, but separately (Mark 3:22,
8:11). In each case, Mark's version of Jesus' response is shorter than Q's.
Matthew presents each challenge twice, once close to Mark's context (Matt
9:32-34, 16:1-4) and the second time close to Q's (Matt 12:22-45).
This duplication shows that Matthew got these disputes from two separate
sources. But in reporting each version he mixes details from each.
Mark 7 and Matt 15 give a version of the third challenge to Jesus
(hand-washing), but use a different cluster of sayings than Luke to indicate
Jesus' response. Yet, Matthew includes the contents of Luke 11:39-52 later
in a long speech about the Pharisees in Jerusalem (Matt 23). Two of these
sayings are paralleled in Mark 12, but there they are aimed not at Pharisees
but at scribes in general.
Mark's briefer and separate parallels show that the collection of these
polemical sayings was gradual and began before the composition of Q.
Interpolation
The first two clusters were probably added to Q because they mention
themes in the Lord's prayer. That prayer begins by calling on God to
establish his rule (Luke 11:2//Matt 6:10); the first cluster in this segment
on controversies presents Jesus' exorcism as a sign that this has happened
(Luke 11:20//Matt 12:28). Q's prayer ends by asking to be spared testing
(Luke 11:4//Matt 6:13); the second cluster in this section of Q was
introduced by opponents testing Jesus (Luke 11:16//Matt 12:38). Most
of the sayings in both clusters, however, are irrelevant to Q's context.
The location of the third cluster in Q is less certain. Matthew's use of
its critique of the Pharisees as a prelude to Jesus' lament over Jerusalem
makes sense (Luke 13:34-35//Matt 23:37-39). But if Q had it there, Luke had
no apparent reason to move it to its present location in his gospel.
Thus, it is simplest to view these three controversies as a single
interpolation into a revised, expanded edition of Q. Together they disrupt
the logic that links the clusters on revelation (Luke 10:21-24//Matt
11:25-27) and confidence (Luke 11:9-13//Matt 7:7-11) to sayings with the
same themes in the next section of Q (Luke 12:4-7//Matt 10:28-31). Yet
even a late addition to Q could preserve early Jesus sayings.
