Luke 16.17Q; Luke 11.42Q), and Q polemic is directed against Pharisees (cf. And the same saying threatens that Capernaum will be condemned to Hades.
Except for the lament over Jerusalem (Q -35) and the localization of John the Baptist's activity in the area of the Jordan (Q 3:3), these are the only names of places which occur in Q.
According to the Two Source Hypothesis accepted by a majority of contemporary scholars, the authors of Matthew and Luke each made use of two different sources: the Gospel of Mark and a non-extant second source termed Q.
The siglum Q derives from the German word "Quelle," which means "Source." Q primarily consists of the "double tradition" material, that which is present in both Matthew and Luke but not Mark.
It is, therefore, tempting to assume that the redaction of Q took place somewhere in Galilee and that the document as a whole reflects the experience of a Galilean community of followers of Jesus.
But some caution with respect to such conclusion seems advisable for several reasons. Polemic against the Pharisees cannot confirm Galilean provenence - Greek-speaking Pharisees could be found elsewhere in the diaspora, viz., Paul who persecuted the church in Greek-speaking synagogues, probably in Syria or Cilicia.
Such a common order demands a theory that Q at some stage existed in written form." C. Tuckett comments on the argument that variations between Matthew and Luke are due to variant translations of an Aramaic Q (op. 567-568): It is doubtful if more than a very few cases of variation between Matthew and Luke can be explained in this way.
Although the temptation story and the healing of the centurion's son are usually ascribed to Q, the majority of the material consists of sayings.Thus the conditions in which the Sayings Source originated included both continuity with the beginnings and with the developing congregational structures across the region. Mark wrote his story of Jesus some time after the war and shortly after Q had been revised with the Q3 additions. Q's characterization of Jesus as the all-knowing one could be used to enhance his authority as a self-referential speaker in the pronouncement stories Mark already had from his own community.(2) The Sayings Source presupposes persection of the young congregations by Palestinian Jews (cf. The notion of Jesus as the son of God could be used to create mystique, divide the house on the question of Jesus' true identity, and develop narrative anticipation, the device scholars call Mark's "messianic secret." The instruction for the workers in the harvest could be turned into a mission charge, and the theme of discipleship could be combined and given narrative profile by introducing a few disciples into the story.Many of the alleged translation variants turn out to be simply cases of synonyms, and the differences between Matthew and Luke can often be explained just as well as due to the redactional activity of the evangelists (Kloppenborg 1987).For example, in Luke , Luke's "give alms" may well be Lk R (Lukan redaction), reflecting Luke's concern for almsgiving.A direct literary connection between Mark and Q must be regarded as improbable.The text complexes they share point rather to independent access of each to old Jesus-traditions, but contacts between the two streams of tradition at the pre-redactional level are not to be excluded.Elsewhere, too, Q sayings seem to presuppose an extremely radical break with past personal ties.The Q Christians are told that they must "hate" their own families (Luke par.); they are told that they must take up their cross (Luke par.).Arguments in favor of the Two Source Hypothesis can be found in the essay on The Existence of Q.On the matter of whether Q was written, Tuckett writes (The Anchor Bible Dictionary, v. 568): "The theory that Q represents a mass of oral traditions does not account for the common order in Q material, which can be discerned once Matthew's habit of collecting related material into his large teaching discourses is discounted (Taylor 1953, 1959).