Scholarly Reflections
Wenham, John. "Chapter One: The Intractable Problem." Redating Matthew, Mark, and Luke: A Fresh Assault on the Synoptic Problem. Downers Grove, Illinois: InterVarsity Press, 1992, 1-10.
Weham observes the difficulty inherent in identifying influences on the composition of the Gospels. He states, "For nearly a undred years the search has been for literary solutions. Before that, belief in a common form of basic oral instruction was popular" (Wenham 1992, 1). It is difficult to consider the gospels to be created completely independently based on oral tradition, though, because it presupposes an extensive but non-authoritative body of oral tradition, a nearly simultaneous composition of the Synoptic Gospels, and suggests that church traditions are not correct in their views of the Gospels. Wenham suggests it is possible that there was some degree of structural, but not verbal, dependence (Wenham 1992, 1).
The 20th century has largely approached Gospel scholarship based on an assumption of literary dependence on Mark and the hyopthetical Q document. However, Wenham suggests that this construct is not necessarily compelling. Many of the arguments used can be reversed with equal force (Wenham 1992, 3). We can all agree that there are many similarities in the Synoptic Gospels, but finding the actual connections is elusive. Prior to the 20th century oral theory suggested a common narrative that guided the evangelists but didn't dictate what they would do. However, in the 20th century the assumption has been that there is a primarily literary relationship (Wenham 1992, 4).
Wenham proceeds to ask some very important questions. For instance, "Can one distinguish documentary dependence from indebtedness to a common oral tradition?" (Wenham 1992, 5). Finding examples of identical wording easily leads scholars to assume literary dependence. Yet this is not necessarily the case. Orality can also account for even extended passages with nearly identical wording (Wenham 1992, 5). Yet Wenham notes that Matthew 14-28 and Mark 6-16 have no fewer than seventy items in the same order. That suggests a written source (Wenham 1992, 7).
In the nd, Wenham questions independence on three counts. First, he thinks the similar order of pericopes in the Synoptics is likely to depend on some sort of written source (Wenham 1992, 9). He further considers it likely that in the highly mobile society information and written works would be disseminated quickly (Wenham 1992, 10). Finally, early Christian tradition recognized the Gospels as written in a particular order, and assumed the earlier writings would be known to later authors.