He notes the following points about Papias:
- Papias says that Matthew wrote in Hebrew. But the Church tradition reports that Matthew was written in Aramaic language. How could both Eusebius and Papias confuse Aramaic and Hebrew?
- Since no Christian wrote still in Hebrew, Papias could refer only to a collection of OT sayings. It preceded the Septuaginta. Therefore it was not even used by our Gospels (that were written in Greek).
- Papias knew only OT oracles where he "read" the "words of Jesus" just as today someone "reads" Stalin or Hitler or 9/11 in Nostradamus.
- Papias wrote that there was disorder in Mark but this is clearly false for the our Mark.
Therefore Papias knew only a proto-Mark very different from the our Mark.
- Papias didn't know Luke (since Luke was written in Rome) and John was still not existing by his time.
- Eusebius rejected the fabulous character of the parables of Lord preserved by Papias not because Eusebius was a rational person (in comparison to Papias) but in the name of a different Gospel tradition, evidently very much different from the Papias's