Q Was a Woman
Posted by NT Wrong on October 18, 2008
There are many factors in Q, a source for both Matthew and Luke, which point in the same direction:
Why such an interest in the female God, the divine Sophia?
Why is woman’s domestic work accorded equality with a man’s work (Luke 13.20-21; 12.26-27; 17.25)?
Why is there such an interest in the salvation of women (Luke 17.35)?
Why is Q so interested in protecting women from remarriage and divorce (Luke 16.16-18; 17.27)?
Why the interest in flowers and in heralding all that blooms (Luke 12.27-28; 6.43-45)?
Why is Q interested in itinerant prophets, given the prominent role of women as prophetesses in the earliest church (Luke 10.2ff; Luise Schottroff, ‘Itinerant Prophetesses’)?
Why does Q remember so many words of Jesus containing domestic elements — salt that has lost its savour (Luke 14.34-35); children (10.21-24); lamps (11.33-35); washing cups (11.39-44); mixing flour until leavened (13.21)?
Why does Q have such an interest in purses? eg “Make purses for yourselves” (Luke 12.33; cf. 10.4)?
Surely the answer must be: Q was a woman.
And if so, given the early date of Q (ca. AD 50), would we not expect a woman at the centre of Jesus’ circle of followers? Yes, Q was — in all probability — Mary Magdalene.
The earliest known Gospel was written by a woman. To those who protest that this is just a hypothesis, I ask: Why should we add to the centuries of suppression by male Evangelists of this Woman’s Gospel, penned by the foremost of the apostles who tradition records arrived first at the tomb? No, the Gospel of Mary, Q, must be given its rightful attribution — to the first of the Evangelists, a woman.
71 Responses to “Q Was a Woman”
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.