Chris Weimer

I think it might be better to bring the Matthew/Didache discussion here instead.

Broad opening question: What is the relationship between Matthew, Didache, Q, and the synoptic problem?

S.C.Carlson

Broad answer: No.

Chris Weimer

Damn Stephen. Too quick. Reread what I said!

I knew it was a "no" so I reworded the question to better suit the discussion. Mea culpa.

Ben C Smith

My own thoughts so far are as follows:

1. If the Didache relates only to Matthew, then it peripheral to the synoptic problem; this is true whether the Didache used Matthew or vice versa (in which latter case the Didache would take up some of the space occupied by M in our reconstructions). If the Didache used both Matthew and Luke, it is again peripheral to the synoptic problem (just as, say, Augustine, who knew both Matthew and Luke, is peripheral to the synoptic problem). If, however, both Matthew and Luke used the Didache, or the Didache used one of them and the other used the Didache, then of course the Didache is squarely involved in the synoptic problem.

2. There is a direct literary link between Matthew and the Didache. It is somewhat unclear in which direction that link connects the two; on the one hand, the references in Didache 8.2; 11.3; 15.3-4 to the gospel almost certainly refer to the gospel of Matthew, but on the other hand a fairly good case can be made that much of the Didache represents earlier tradition than we find in Matthew.

3. The relationship of Q to the Didache is similar to that of Q to Thomas; it is possible, but not necessary, to posit a literary link (if Q exists in the first place, a proposition of which I am not sure).

Well, now that that is solved, I think I will move on to world peace....

Ben.