Reviews Review "Goodacre has an impressive knack for exposing weaknesses in what so many have supposed are good arguments. Those who do not believe in Q will find him a mighty ally in their unbelief. Those of us who remain in the Q camp will have to meet his worthy challenge and wrestle with his fresh and instructive observations on the synoptic problem." Dale C. Allison, Jr. Errett M. Grable Professor of New Testament and Early Christianity (Dale C. Allison, Jr. ) The positing of Q as a source for Matthew and Luke is founded on the twin suppositions of Markan priority and the independence of Matthew and Luke. In this lucid and carefully argued exploration of the Synoptic Problem, Goodacre argues that Markan priority is reasonable and well-founded, and that a good case can be made for Luke's direct dependence on Matthew. If his argument should be sustained, Q would become unnecessary and decades of Gospel research will have to be re-thought. But whether or not Goodacre is ultimately correct, The Case Against Q provides the most accessible and compelling defense to date of the theory of Gospel origins championed by James Ropes, Austin Farrer and Michael Goulder.John S. Kloppenborg, Claremont Graduate University and The University of Toronto (John S. Kloppenborg ) This is an urgently needed book in New Testament studies. The Q hypothesis dominates the field partly because of intellectual inertia and partly because it serves the ideological interests of critics who desire a Jesus without a