Your experience is probably of American conservative evangelicals. Even within that triple subset I could find you people deeply interested in the origins of te

Your experience is probably of American conservative evangelicals. Even within that triple subset I could find you people deeply interested in the origins of texts (e.g. the translators responsible for the NET Bible (http://netbible.org http://netbible.org). Your experience is narrow. If I can give an analogy from IT, this is like talking to a few people training for an MCSE, and concluding that no-one is interested in computer science. > So who is this research for? The first work on links between the gospels goes back to about the 3C, and there have been discussions on the origins of the different books since before there was a canon of the Bible - in fact this was one of the early motivations. The academics currently working on origins of texts are a mixture of Christians and non-Christians, and as such, their motives differ. These academics are usually found at traditional universities, not the Bible colleges you refer to. Non-Christian scholars have the usual motives of academics. Christian scholars have the same motives, but add the drive to get back to the original teachings as far as possible. As to who uses it: generally priests, preachers and the like preparing services, and Christians in private study. It tends to be discussed in commentaries working at the level of whole books of the Bible rather than verse-by-verse commentaries. For the specific case of Q (or the alternative Farrer hypothesis), this will generally be found under the heading "The Synoptic Problem", though verse-by-verse commentaries will often discuss parallels between gospels. By the way, for those who are interested, there is a reconstruction of Q here: https://www.livius.org/sources/content/q-text/ https://www.livius.org/sources/content/q-text/ - but bear in mind that this assumes a single Q document, which to my mind is not necessarily true.