Hubbry Logo
Mark GoodacreMark GoodacreMain
Open search
Mark Goodacre
Community hub
Mark Goodacre
logo
7 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Mark Goodacre
Mark Goodacre
Mark Goodacre
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia

Mark S. Goodacre (born 1967 in Leicestershire, England) is a New Testament scholar and Professor at Duke University's Department of Religion. He has written extensively on the Synoptic Problem; he defends the Farrer hypothesis,[1] and thus accepts Markan priority but rejects Q.

Key Information

Biography

[edit]

Mark Goodacre’s first job was a paperboy at age 11.[2]

Goodacre received his MA, M.Phil, and DPhil at the University of Oxford, and has been at Duke University since 2005. [3]

Goodacre has written extensively on the Synoptic Problem; he defends the Farrer hypothesis,[1] and thus accepts Markan priority but rejects Q. He has authored four books, including The Case Against Q: Studies in Markan Priority and the Synoptic Problem and Thomas and the Gospels: The Case for Thomas's Familiarity with the Synoptics.[3] He is writing a book called The Fourth Synoptic Gospel: John’s Knowledge of Matthew, Mark, and Luke, which argues that John was aware of all three Synoptics.[4]

He has also been a consultant for numerous television and radio shows related to the New Testament, such as the 2001 BBC series Son of God and the 2013 mini-series The Bible.[5]

Reception

[edit]

Goodacre has been described as the leading advocate of the Farrer Hypothesis, which is currently enjoying growing popularity among Biblical scholars.[6][7] Simon Joseph writes that The Case Against Q brought an end to the “exuberant hegemony” of the Two-source hypothesis.[8] Alan Kirk and John Kloppenborg have critiqued Goodacre’s Farrer solution and his conception of ancient media such as editorial fatigue in defense of the two-source hypothesis.[9][10]

Works

[edit]
  • Goodacre, Mark S. (1996). Goulder and the Gospels: An Examination of a New Paradigm. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press. ISBN 1-85075-631-7.[11]
  • ——— (2001). The Synoptic Problem: A Way Through the Maze. London: T & T International. ISBN 0-567-08056-0.[12]
  • ——— (2002). The Case Against Q: Studies in Markan Priority and the Synoptic Problem. Harrisburg, PA. ISBN 1-56338-334-9.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link)[13]
  • ——— (2012). Thomas and the Gospels: The Case for Thomas' Familiarity with the Synoptics. London & Grand Rapids, MI: SPCK & Eerdmans. ISBN 978-0-80286-748-3.
  • ———. The Fourth Synoptic Gospel: John's Knowledge of Matthew, Mark, and Luke. Grand Rapids, MI: SPCK & Eerdmans. ISBN 9781467462716.

References

[edit]
[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

Mark Goodacre

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia
Mark Goodacre is a British New Testament scholar and the Frances Hill Fox Professor of at , specializing in the , the Gospel of Thomas, and early Christian origins. Goodacre earned his B.A. in 1988, M.Phil. in 1990, and D.Phil. in 1994 from the , where his doctoral work focused on studies. He joined in 2005 as an associate professor and was promoted to full professor in 2013; since 2025, he has served as Director of Undergraduate Studies in the Department of . His scholarship challenges traditional views of the Synoptic Problem, particularly advocating the Farrer-Goulder hypothesis, which posits that the Gospels of Matthew and Luke drew directly from Mark without an intervening source known as . This perspective is elaborated in key monographs such as The Synoptic Problem: A Way Through the Maze (2001, T&T Clark International) and The Case Against Q: Studies in Markan Priority and the Synoptic Problem (2002, Trinity Press International). Goodacre has also examined the Gospel of Thomas's relationship to the canonical Gospels in Thomas and the Gospels: The Case for Thomas's Familiarity with the Synoptics (2012, Eerdmans), arguing for its dependence on Synoptic traditions rather than independence. His most recent book, The Fourth Synoptic Gospel: John's Knowledge of Matthew, Mark, and Luke (2025, Eerdmans), extends this line of inquiry to of John. With over 1,300 citations on as of November 2025, Goodacre's peer-reviewed articles address topics like textual fatigue in the Synoptics and the of narratives, including "Fatigue in the Synoptics" (1998, New Testament Studies) and "How Empty Was the Tomb?" (2021, Journal for the Study of the ). Beyond academia, he created the NT Pod series in 2009 to discuss topics accessibly and has consulted on media projects such as the BBC's The Passion (2008) and CNN's Finding Jesus (2015–2017).

Early Life and Education

Early Years

Mark Goodacre was born in 1967 in Leicestershire, England. He grew up in England during his childhood. His first job came at age 11, when he worked as a paperboy, a role that improved his physical fitness and performance in sports. These early experiences shaped Goodacre's initial sense of responsibility, setting the stage for his later transition to higher education at the University of Oxford.

Academic Training

Mark Goodacre pursued his undergraduate studies at , , where he earned a B.A. Honours in from 1985 to 1988, achieving a first-class degree and later converting it to an M.A. in 1995. His academic excellence during this period was recognized through several awards, including the Prelims Prize and Dr. Richards Divinity Prize in 1986, as well as the Denyer & Johnson Prize and Fitzgerald Prize in 1988. Following his undergraduate degree, Goodacre continued his graduate training at , completing an M.Phil. in with a focus on the from 1988 to 1990, supported by a grant. He then advanced to a D.Phil. in () from 1990 to 1994, also funded by the , under the supervision of Dr. John Muddiman. His doctoral thesis, titled Goulder and the Gospels: An Examination of a New Paradigm, explored aspects of the Synoptic tradition in studies and was examined by Prof. C. M. Tuckett and Dom. Henry Wansbrough, requiring no amendments. Goodacre's time at provided foundational training in studies.

Academic Career

Professional Positions

Goodacre's early academic positions, which overlapped with his graduate studies, included serving as Tutorial Assistant at , from 1990 to 1993, followed by tutoring roles at the from 1991 to 1995. In 1995, he joined the Department of Theology and Religion at the as a , advancing to in 2002, where he remained until 2005. Goodacre moved to the in 2005, accepting an appointment as of in the Department of at , a position he held until 2013. He was promoted to of at in 2013 and served as of the Department from 2019 to 2023. From 2018 to 2023, Goodacre held the endowed Frances Hill Fox Professor of Religious Studies chair at . Since 2025, he has served as Director of Undergraduate Studies in the Department of Religious Studies at .

Research Focus

Mark Goodacre's scholarly research primarily encompasses the , early Christian texts, and in the field of studies. His investigations highlight the intricate literary interconnections among the canonical Gospels, with a particular emphasis on analyzing their compositional dependencies through rigorous textual comparison. Central to this approach is Goodacre's advocacy for the rejection of hypothetical sources like , favoring instead models that explain the parallels via direct literary borrowing from Mark by Matthew and Luke, as detailed in his seminal work on the Synoptic Problem. Goodacre's engagement extends to apocryphal and pseudepigraphal literature, including significant contributions to the study of texts. He has critically assessed the historical accounts surrounding the discovery of the codices, questioning their reliability based on inconsistencies in eyewitness testimonies and transmission narratives. Furthermore, his work on the Gospel of Thomas explores its potential familiarity with Synoptic traditions, positioning it as a later text that engages with rather than independently preserves early Christian sayings. Goodacre also maintains scholarly resources on , a Hellenistic Jewish romance that enriches understandings of intertestamental literature and its thematic links to biblical narratives. Over the course of his career, Goodacre's has evolved from a primary concentration on Synoptic interrelations—exemplified by his early books challenging Q's existence and mapping the —to broader explorations of in recent years. This shift is evident in his 2025 publication, which argues that the Gospel of John presupposes and transforms Synoptic accounts, treating it as a "fourth Synoptic" informed by Matthew, Mark, and Luke. This progression underscores his ongoing commitment to source-critical methods while expanding the scope to encompass the full range of early Gospel traditions.

Scholarly Contributions

The Synoptic Problem

Mark Goodacre has been a prominent advocate of the as a solution to the Synoptic Problem, which addresses the literary relationships among the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, and Luke. The hypothesis posits Markan priority, meaning the Gospel of Mark was composed first and served as a for both Matthew and Luke. It further argues that Luke drew directly from Matthew for material shared between them, eliminating the need for a hypothetical sayings source known as . This view contrasts with the dominant Two-Source Theory, which assumes Markan priority alongside an independent document used by both Matthew and Luke. Goodacre's work revives and builds on the ideas of Michael Goulder, who in the 1970s advanced the Farrer approach through detailed redaction-critical analysis, challenging the reliance on by demonstrating how Luke could adapt Matthew's expansions of Mark. A key argument Goodacre advances against the Two-Source Theory is the concept of "editorial ," where an author initially modifies a source but later reverts to its wording due to from sustained redaction, inadvertently revealing dependence. For instance, in the (Luke 8:4-15 // Mark 4:1-20), Luke streamlines Mark's details about the soil's depth early on but restores them in the interpretation, suggesting direct copying from Mark without mediation. Similarly, in the Feeding of the Five Thousand (Luke 9:10-17 // Mark 6:30-44), Luke shifts the location to but retains Mark's description of a "desert place," creating an inconsistency that betrays source reliance. Goodacre extends this to Luke's presumed use of Matthew, noting in passages like the Mission Charge (Luke 9:1-6 // Matt 10:5-15), where Luke alters Matthew's prohibitions but echoes them verbatim later. He observes no such in Matthew's handling of double tradition material, undermining 's existence. Another compelling case Goodacre makes involves the order of agreements between Matthew and Luke, which often aligns against Mark in ways that strain coincidence under the Two-Source but align naturally with Luke consulting Matthew. A representative example is the placement of the Sermon material: Matthew collects teachings into the (Matt 5-7), while Luke disperses them but preserves much of Matthew's sequence in the (Luke 6:20-49), including the and , indicating Luke's familiarity with Matthew's arrangement rather than a shared Q outline. These patterns, Goodacre argues, support the as a simpler, document-based explanation without invoking lost sources.

The Gospel of Thomas

Mark Goodacre has argued that the demonstrates a clear dependence on the —Matthew, Mark, and Luke—rather than serving as an independent early Christian source. In his 2012 book Thomas and the Gospels: The Case for Thomas's Familiarity with the Synoptics, Goodacre posits that Thomas was composed by an author familiar with the Synoptics, incorporating their material in a secondary, apocryphal manner, and thus post-dates them, likely originating in the early to mid-second century CE. Goodacre supports this thesis with evidence of extensive verbal agreements between Thomas and the Synoptics, including material from the triple tradition (shared by all three Synoptics), the double tradition (shared by Matthew and Luke), and even unique Synoptic content. He highlights redactional features that betray Thomas's reliance on Matthean and Lukan editing, such as the retention of Matthew's characteristic phrasing like "Kingdom of Heaven" in Thomas 20 and 54, which contrasts with Thomas's otherwise predominant use of "Kingdom of God," and Lukan stylistic elements in sayings like Thomas 79 paralleling Luke 11:27–28. Additionally, the sequencing of sayings in Thomas often mirrors Synoptic arrangements, suggesting direct influence rather than coincidental overlap. Goodacre critiques theories positing Thomas's independence from the Synoptics, such as those claiming it represents an early, unredacted sayings collection predating or parallel to the canonical gospels. He challenges assumptions that Thomas lacks a defined or shows no signs of redactional development, arguing that these views overlook how apocryphal texts like Thomas adapt and rearrange Synoptic material creatively, including responses to cross-gospel theories that propose mutual influences or hypothetical sources like . This approach aligns with Goodacre's broader advocacy for the , which prioritizes direct literary dependencies among the Synoptics without invoking lost documents. The Gospel of Thomas's discovery among the in 1945, within a fourth-century , has fueled debates over its composition date, with some scholars advocating a first-century origin to support independence claims. Goodacre counters this by emphasizing the second-century context implied by its Synoptic dependencies, positioning Thomas as a later gnosticizing reinterpretation of canonical traditions rather than a primitive witness.

The Gospel of John

In his 2025 book The Fourth Synoptic Gospel: John's Knowledge of Matthew, Mark, and Luke, Mark Goodacre presents a detailed case for the literary dependence of the Gospel of John on the , arguing that the Johannine author systematically drew upon Matthew, Mark, and Luke in composing the narrative. Goodacre synthesizes textual evidence, including shared episodes, verbatim agreements in wording, linguistic parallels, and similarities in vocabulary and material order, to demonstrate John's familiarity with the Synoptics rather than mere coincidence from oral traditions. This thesis revives and expands earlier hypotheses, such as those from the Louvain school, while challenging the dominant scholarly consensus since the mid-20th century that John was composed independently. Goodacre highlights specific examples of John's engagement with Synoptic material, often through chronological rearrangements, strategic omissions, and theological supplements that transform the source narratives. For instance, the Temple cleansing episode, placed early in Jesus' ministry in John 2:13–22, echoes the Synoptics' later placement (e.g., ) but repositions it to emphasize Jesus' prophetic foresight, suggesting deliberate adaptation rather than independent recollection. Similarly, the in John 13:1–30 occurs before , contrasting the Synoptics' depiction as a Passover meal (e.g., ), while burial details like the Day of Preparation in adjust Synoptic timings (e.g., ) to align with Johannine . These instances, Goodacre argues, reveal John's of readers' knowledge of Synoptic accounts, as seen in intertextual ironies like John 7:41–44, which alludes to Jesus' birth from Matthew and Luke without narrating it. The implications of Goodacre's analysis position John as a "fourth" Synoptic Gospel, composed in a multi-stage process around 90–110 CE, after the circulation of the earlier three, thereby integrating it into the broader Synoptic tradition while allowing for its distinctive and emphasis on the beloved disciple—a figure Goodacre views as a Johannine supplement to Synoptic characters. This framework underscores John's historicity in continuity with the Synoptics, countering perceptions of it as a purely theological isolated from earlier traditions. Since the book's September 2025 publication, Goodacre's thesis has elicited positive responses from scholars, with endorsements praising its rigorous reexamination of neglected data and accessibility through charts and minimal footnotes. Reviews and interviews, including a November 2025 discussion, have noted its potential to reignite debates on Johannine independence, addressing critiques from figures like by emphasizing empirical textual "shards" over theoretical models. While some traditionalists maintain John's autonomy based on theological divergences, Goodacre's work has gained traction for bridging Synoptic and Johannine studies without undermining the latter's uniqueness.

Publications

Books

Mark Goodacre has authored several influential monographs on studies, particularly focusing on the Synoptic Problem and the relationships among the Gospels. These works build on his expertise in challenging traditional hypotheses like the existence of the and advocating for direct literary dependencies. His debut monograph, Goulder and the Gospels: An Examination of a New Paradigm ( Academic Press, 1996), provides the first comprehensive scholarly response to Michael Goulder's radical proposals in New Testament criticism. It critically examines Goulder's paradigm, which dispenses with the hypothetical Q document and posits a midrashic development of Gospel traditions from Mark through Matthew and Luke, highlighting strengths and limitations of this approach to synoptic relationships. In The Case Against Q: Studies in Markan Priority and the Synoptic Problem (Trinity Press International, 2002), Goodacre presents a series of studies arguing against the Two-Source Theory by demonstrating patterns of agreement and redaction that support Markan priority without invoking . The book analyzes specific synoptic parallels, such as the "minor agreements" between Matthew and Luke against Mark, to bolster the case for the of direct dependence. The Synoptic Problem: A Way Through the Maze (T&T Clark International, 2001), reissued in 2004, serves as an accessible guide for students and general readers navigating the complexities of synoptic relationships. It surveys major hypotheses, including the Augustinian, Griesbach, and Two-Source theories, while advocating the Farrer-Goulder hypothesis of Markan priority with Matthew and Luke independently drawing from Mark, emphasizing the problem's significance for understanding composition. Goodacre's Thomas and the Gospels: The Case for Thomas's Familiarity with the Synoptics (Eerdmans, 2012; SPCK in the UK) argues that the Gospel of Thomas, dated to the early to mid-second century, demonstrates direct knowledge of the canonical Synoptic Gospels rather than serving as an independent early source. Through detailed comparisons of phrasing, order, and motifs, the book challenges the view of Thomas as a primitive witness, proposing instead its dependence on Matthew, Mark, and Luke. Most recently, The Fourth Synoptic Gospel: John's Knowledge of Matthew, Mark, and Luke (Eerdmans, 2025) synthesizes evidence to contend that the Gospel of John presupposes and creatively transforms the Synoptic narratives. Goodacre identifies "diagnostic shards" of shared structures and wording, such as in miracle stories and Passion narratives, to illustrate John's enhancements to and introduction of unique elements like the Beloved Disciple, positioning John as a fourth Synoptic Gospel in literary sequence.

Articles and Reviews

Goodacre has authored numerous peer-reviewed articles and chapters in edited volumes, primarily addressing the Synoptic Problem, Gospel interrelations, and early Christian textual traditions, often advancing the Farrer hypothesis against the Q source. His work appears in prominent journals such as the Journal for the Study of the New Testament (JSNT), New Testament Studies (NTS), and the Journal of Biblical Literature (JBL), as well as in collections from publishers like Bloomsbury, Oxford University Press, and T&T Clark. A foundational contribution is his 1998 article "Fatigue in the Synoptics," published in NTS, where he develops the criterion of editorial fatigue—evident in Luke's occasional slips into Matthean phrasing after extended use of Mark—to support direct literary dependence between Matthew and Luke without an intervening Q document. Building on this, Goodacre's 1999 JSNT piece "Beyond the Q Impasse or Down a Blind Alley?" critiques the entrenched assumptions of Q scholarship, arguing that the hypothesis relies on unproven oral traditions and overlooks simpler explanations via Markan priority. In 2000, his SBL Seminar Papers article "A Monopoly on Marcan Priority? Fallacies at the Heart of Q" exposes circular reasoning in Q defenses, such as the treatment of minor agreements as coincidences while major ones are attributed to Q. Goodacre's skepticism toward Q extends to responses in later articles, including "Too Good to be Q: High Verbatim Agreement in the Double Tradition" (2015) in without Q, which questions the plausibility of verbatim parallels arising from independent oral sources. On the Gospel of Thomas, his 2014 JSNT article "Did Thomas Know the ? A Response to Denzey Lewis, Kloppenborg and Patterson" defends Thomas's literary dependence on the Synoptics through detailed comparisons of phrasing and sequence, countering independence claims. Recent contributions include "Q, Memory and Matthew: A Response to Alan " (2017) in the Journal for the Study of the , engaging memory-based models of tradition to reaffirm Farrer-style dependencies. Post-2020 works feature "How Empty Was the Tomb?" (2021) in JSNT, analyzing first-century tombs to argue that the motif implies multiple absences rather than a single body's removal. and "Why Not Matthew's Use of Luke?" (2022), a chapter in Gospel Reading and Reception in Early Christian Literature, exploring potential Matthean adaptations of Lukan material. In 2023, Goodacre published "A World Without Mark: An Experiment in Erasure History" in Biblical Interpretation, exploring the implications of the Gospel of Mark's role in early Christian tradition. His 2024 chapter "Missing Pieces" in The Next (Eerdmans) addresses gaps in research on the . In edited volumes, Goodacre examines apocryphal and transformative texts, as in "The Protevangelium of James and the Creative Rewriting of Matthew and Luke" (2018) in Connecting Gospels, which traces how the protoevangelium reworks infancy narratives for theological emphasis. Another example is "The Magdalene Effect: Reading and Misreading the Composite Mary in Early Christian Works" (2020) in Rediscovering the Marys, discussing the conflation of Mary figures across Gospels and . Goodacre's book reviews, published in venues like Novum Testamentum and the Review of Biblical Literature, often target Q-related scholarship. In 2000, he reviewed Alan Kirk's The Composition of the Sayings Source: Genre, Synchrony, and Wisdom Redaction in in Novum Testamentum, questioning the genre classifications and redactional layers proposed for . His 2007 review of Rethinking the Synoptic Problem, edited by David Alan Black and David R. Beck, in Novum Testamentum evaluates diverse challenges to the Two-Source Theory, highlighting strengths in alternative models. Earlier, in 2002, he reviewed David Laird Dungan's A History of the Synoptic Problem in the Scottish Journal of Theology, appraising its historical survey while noting gaps in post-1900 developments. These reviews underscore his ongoing engagement with advocates of , such as through critical assessments of methodological tools in Synoptic reconstruction.

Public Engagement

Podcast and Blog

Goodacre hosts the NT Pod, a podcast dedicated to the and Christian origins, which he launched in June 2009 with its inaugural episode on Matthew's genealogy. The series consists of over 150 episodes as of 2025, typically delivered in short audio formats lasting 5 to 30 minutes, offering condensed academic commentary on diverse topics including the , the Gospel of Thomas, and portrayals of biblical narratives in films. Episodes are distributed across platforms such as , , and , where video versions enhance accessibility. Complementing the podcast, Goodacre maintains the NT Blog, an academic weblog active since April 2005, featuring posts on contemporary debates in New Testament studies, critiques of Jesus mythicism, and announcements promoting his scholarly books. The blog serves as a dynamic forum for engaging with ongoing scholarly discussions, such as responses to mythicist arguments in episodes like NT Pod 47: Did Jesus Exist? from 2011. Goodacre has integrated video content into his outreach through a dedicated YouTube channel (@podacre), launched around 2023, which hosts full podcast episodes, extended discussions, and brief "NT Pod Shorts" under three minutes on themes like the Synoptic Problem and the Farrer hypothesis. These platforms have cultivated broader public interest in rigorous New Testament scholarship by making complex topics approachable, including timely episodes on cultural events such as the 2025 film The Last Supper in NT Pod 109.

Media Consultations

Mark Goodacre has served as a and on-screen expert for several mainstream television productions exploring biblical history and , providing scholarly input to ensure historical accuracy in depictions of narratives and events. In 2001, Goodacre acted as a and participant for the documentary series , directed by Jean-Claude Bragard, where he advised on the portrayal of ' life and the while appearing in interviews to discuss historical context. The series, which aired on BBC1 during and later on in the as Jesus: The Complete Story, drew on his expertise in traditions to bridge archaeological evidence with scriptural accounts. Goodacre provided consultancy for the 2013 History Channel miniseries The Bible, executive produced by and , contributing specifically to the episodes that dramatized events from the Gospels and Acts. His role involved reviewing scripts and historical details to align the production with academic understandings of early Christian texts, helping to inform the ten-episode narrative that reached millions of viewers. Beyond these projects, Goodacre has appeared as an expert commentator in documentaries such as CNN's Finding Jesus (seasons 1 and 2, 2015–2017), where he analyzed artifacts and texts related to ' life and , and History Channel's Bible Secrets Revealed (2013), offering insights into debated aspects of . He also contributed to National Geographic's (2014), discussing theories about ' identity and influences from . In Jesus: His Life (History Channel, 2019), Goodacre served as a series consultant and participant across eight episodes, examining key figures and events in ' story through a historical lens. Throughout these media engagements, Goodacre has emphasized an approach that integrates rigorous academic analysis—drawing briefly from his on Synoptic relationships—with accessible to make complex biblical scholarship engaging for broad audiences.

Reception

Influence and Praise

Mark Goodacre is widely regarded as a leading contemporary advocate of the , which proposes that Luke drew directly from both Mark and Matthew, thereby dispensing with the hypothetical central to the two-document theory. His seminal work The Case Against Q: Studies in Markan Priority and the Synoptic Problem (2002) has played a pivotal role in revitalizing interest in non-Q solutions, with a 2024 retrospective in NTT Journal for Theology and the Study of Religion underscoring its lasting contribution to challenging Q's dominance and fostering alternative models of gospel interdependence. Scholars such as Alan Garrow have lauded Goodacre's scholarship as that of a "careful and brilliant" proponent, emphasizing how his analyses highlight the 's simplicity and explanatory power over more complex reconstructions. Since the early 2000s, Goodacre's arguments have contributed to a broader revival of non-Q perspectives in synoptic , evidenced by increased academic and publications exploring Markan priority without hypothetical documents, as seen in collaborative symposia and studies post-2000 that engage his editorial fatigue and order-of-agreement critiques. This shift has gained traction among a growing number of researchers, with the Farrer approach now routinely discussed alongside traditional views in major works on the synoptic problem. Goodacre's public engagement has extended his influence beyond academia, particularly through his NT Pod podcast, which offers accessible discussions on New Testament origins and has achieved a 4.8 out of 5 rating from 176 reviews across platforms including , , Podchaser, and Podcast Addict as of October 2025. His blog, the NT Weblog, is frequently cited in popular theological resources for its insights into studies, further amplifying his reach in non-specialist circles. Goodacre's prominence is also evident in his regular invitations to prestigious forums, including multiple presentations at annual meetings of the Society of Biblical Literature, such as his 2018 session on "Why Not Matthew's Use of Luke?" within the program unit. In recent years, his work on Johannine-synoptic relations has garnered acclaim; his 2025 book The Fourth Synoptic Gospel: John's Knowledge of Matthew, Mark, and Luke has been praised for its rigorous synthesis of textual evidence, with a review in Anglican Compass noting that it makes a "strong case" for viewing John as literarily dependent on the synoptics while acknowledging complexities in dating and authorship. Bart Ehrman has referenced the volume in discussions of the Gospel of John's dating.

Criticisms

Goodacre's advocacy for the , which posits Luke's direct dependence on Matthew without an intervening document, has drawn significant critique from proponents of the Two-Source Theory. Tobias Hägerland, in a 2019 article, challenges Goodacre's use of "editorial fatigue"—instances where Matthew or Luke inadvertently retain Markan phrasing in double tradition material—as evidence against . Hägerland argues that this phenomenon does not disprove because Matthew's handling of material would not necessarily mirror its treatment of Mark, and detectable fatigue in double tradition is minimal or absent, as seen in cases like the (Luke 6:23, 35). Alan Kirk has critiqued Goodacre's views in his 2016 book Q in Matthew, to which Goodacre responded in 2017, defending his positions on and Synoptic relations. John S. Kloppenborg has similarly critiqued Goodacre's dismissal of evidence, particularly in reviews of his works on the Synoptic Problem. In a 2006 assessment of Questioning , Kloppenborg contends that Goodacre misinterprets the International Project's reconstruction models as literal rather than metaphorical tools for organizing textual variants, thereby underplaying the robust scholarly consensus on 's sayings material. Kloppenborg further argues in a 2013 review of Thomas and the Gospels that Goodacre's rejection of weakens his case for Thomas's dependence on the Synoptics, as it ignores alignments between Thomas and reconstructed strata. Goodacre countered these points in online articles, maintaining that reconstructions are circular and that direct Synoptic-Thomas links stand independently. Regarding the Gospel of Thomas, Goodacre's theory of its dependence on the Synoptics has faced opposition from scholars favoring independence. Stephen Patterson, in a 2013 review, disputes Goodacre's emphasis on verbatim agreements (e.g., the 13-word match in Matthew 7:5 // Luke 6:42 // Thomas 26), attributing them to shared oral traditions rather than literary borrowing, and likens the parallels to common bar jokes evolving independently. John Kloppenborg echoes this in his review, rejecting Goodacre's "diagnostic shards" of redactional features (such as Lukan interior monologue in the Rich Fool parable, Thomas 63) as overstated, citing pre-Lukan parallels in . Nicola Denzey Lewis critiques the approach for neglecting Thomas's second-century context, including Coptic manuscript evidence like the codex and the . Goodacre responded in a 2013 article, clarifying that high verbatim rates across all Synoptic strands necessitate literary dependence and that oral explanations fail to account for redactional echoes. Critiques of Goodacre's 2025 book The Fourth Synoptic Gospel, which argues for John's familiarity with the Synoptics based on verbal parallels and sequential ordering, have emerged in early reviews, noting complexities such as dating and authorship implications that limit full resolution of the issues. Goodacre has addressed such points in podcasts like The NT Pod.

References

  1. https://scholars.duke.edu/person/goodacre
  2. https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=IDy9is4AAAAJ&hl=en
  3. https://markgoodacre.org/Q
  4. https://markgoodacre.org/maze
  5. https://markgoodacre.org/books.htm
  6. https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/new-testament-studies/article/fatigue-in-the-synoptics/530C0A368904B8D51510057B37939777
  7. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0142064X211023714
  8. https://markgoodacre.org/
  9. https://4enoch.org/wiki5/index.php/Mark_Goodacre
  10. https://zwingliusredivivus.wordpress.com/2010/03/23/happy-birthday-mark-goodacre/
  11. https://today.duke.edu/2016/02/bluedevilgoodacre
  12. https://duke.academia.edu/MarkGoodacre/CurriculumVitae
  13. https://www.biblicalarchaeology.org/scholar/mark-goodacre/
  14. https://scholars.duke.edu/person/goodacre/academic-experience
  15. https://markgoodacre.org/bio.htm
  16. http://markgoodacre.org/Q
  17. https://markgoodacre.org/NagHammadiStory.pdf
  18. https://www.eerdmans.com/9780802867483/thomas-and-the-gospels/
  19. https://markgoodacre.org/aseneth/
  20. https://www.eerdmans.com/9780802875136/the-fourth-synoptic-gospel/
  21. https://www.markgoodacre.org/Q/farrer.htm
  22. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0142064X09350960
  23. https://www.markgoodacre.org/Q/fatigue.htm
  24. https://voice.dts.edu/review/thomas-and-the-gospels-goodacre/
  25. https://www.apocryphicity.ca/2013/03/12/a-review-of-mark-goodacres-thomas-and-the-gospels/
  26. https://www.academia.edu/18212131/Mark_Goodacre_Thomas_and_the_Gospels_The_Making_of_an_Apocryphal_Text_London_SPCK_2012_Pp_226_review_
  27. https://enochseminar.org/10460-2/
  28. https://anglicancompass.com/book-review-the-fourth-synoptic-gospel-by-mark-goodacre/
  29. https://www.patheos.com/blogs/inchrist/2025/10/the-fourth-synoptic-gospel-an-interview-with-mark-goodacre/
  30. https://www.amazon.com/Fourth-Synoptic-Gospel-Knowledge-Matthew/dp/0802875130
  31. https://www.thetwocities.com/biblical-studies/the-fourth-synoptic-gospel-with-professor-mark-goodacre-podcast/
  32. https://www.bloomsbury.com/us/goulder-and-the-gospels-9780567187369/
  33. https://markgoodacre.org/maze/
  34. https://markgoodacre.org/articles.htm
  35. https://scholars.duke.edu/person/goodacre/publications
  36. https://markgoodacre.org/Impasse.pdf
  37. https://markgoodacre.org/Q/monopoly.htm
  38. https://markgoodacre.org/Too%20Good%20to%20be%20Q.pdf
  39. https://markgoodacre.org/reviews.htm
  40. https://podacre.blogspot.com/2009/06/nt-pod-episode-1-matthews-genealogy.html
  41. https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL7DR0ecPG8I1AKCHTTuCTYlXY4SxMRjct
  42. https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/nt-pod/id319974061
  43. http://ntweblog.blogspot.com/2005/04/mirror-reading.html
  44. https://ntweblog.blogspot.com/2011/01/nt-pod-47-did-jesus-exist.html
  45. https://www.youtube.com/@podacre
  46. https://markgoodacre.org/media.htm
  47. https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0281485/fullcredits/
  48. https://www.imdb.com/title/tt2245988/fullcredits/
  49. https://lukeprimacy.com/farrer-hypothesis/
  50. https://www.aup-online.com/content/journals/10.5117/NTT2024.1.003.DAVI
  51. https://www.alangarrow.com/blog/category/mph-origin-stories
  52. http://www.sas.upenn.edu/~cbogs/synopticproblem.pdf
  53. https://www.logos.com/grow/when-a-mathematician-rethought-the-synoptic-problem/
  54. https://podnews.net/podcast/i1prg
  55. https://www.sblcentral.org/home/conferencePaperDetails/47948?search=
  56. https://www.bartehrman.com/when-was-the-gospel-of-john-written/
  57. https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/new-testament-studies/article/editorial-fatigue-and-the-existence-of-q/F8CFDBFDDF266D02F71E0E57B20ED6A4
  58. https://markgoodacre.org/Kirk%20Response.pdf
  59. https://ntweblog.blogspot.com/2006/05/kloppenborg-reviews-questioning-q.html
  60. https://markgoodacre.org/Did%20Thomas.pdf
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.