If Q is not a written source, the Q hypothesis falls apart. The point is to explain what Matthew and Luke (but not Mark) have in common, much of which is word-f

If Q is not a written source, the Q hypothesis falls apart. The point is to explain what Matthew and Luke (but not Mark) have in common, much of which is word-for-word the same. Whole sentences between them that are verbatim in the Greek point to literary dependence, not oral tradition.