Biblical Criticism & History Forum - earlywritings.com

The closest thing to an honest formulation would be: The proto-gospel MUST HAVE BEEN written in Aramaic because 'Jesus was a Galilean man' AND IF YOU LIKE THAT WHY NOT ALSO ACCEPT THAT this unattested Aramaic gospel can be used to decisively prove that Jesus was a historical Galilean man. If Casey s...

This is what an argument developed from a non-existent (unattested) Aramaic gospel text comes down: The proto-gospel MUST HAVE BEEN written in Aramaic because 'Jesus was a Galilean man' AND this unattested Aramaic gospel can be used to decisively prove that Jesus was a historical Galilean man. or is...

I see so Casey is in your opinion justified in appealing to the existence of an unattested 'Aramaic gospel' to prove the existence of a historical Galilean man named Jesus even though the basis for said 'Aramaic gospel' solely rests on (a) the careless reading of the testimonies of the Church Father...

When you follow the thread from the Church Fathers - the Church Fathers, not mythicists - back to a Hebrew text, high Christology is still intact, it's still a viable 'Grund' for the development of the gospel - in other words, the community that wrote the text could have believed that Jesus was a su...

My previous point was simply that if the text was 'typically Jewish' you are effectively pushing to the side 'high Christology' at the time of the composition of the gospel. In other words, you assume it was some 'report' about a man named Jesus not intended to glorify him as a god, which is again a...

I don't understand all these tangents when speaking about whether Casey is justified in using circular logic with regards to the existence of an Aramaic gospel (a) unattested by the Church Fathers but (b) developed by Protestant theologians to establish him as a mostly ordinary historical man in ord...

Right, but you understand how to read this stuff, right. Let's look at the original Mishnah: MISHNAH. THE FOLLOWING MAY BE RECITED IN ANY LANGUAGE: THE SECTION CONCERNING THE SUSPECTED WOMAN, THE CONFESSION MADE AT THE PRESENTATION OF THE TITHE, THE SHEMA', THE 'PRAYER', THE GRACE AFTER MEALS, THE O...

Not what the Marcionites and countless other early sects believed. Do you imagine that the Marcionite had Jesus the angel speaking Greek or Aramaic when quoting from the heavenly Torah? Come on. No one thinks about these things. The heavenly being quoted from the heavenly (= Hebrew) Torah. End of st...

Casey's work has argued strongly for Aramaic sources behind the New Testament documents

Really? I didn't know that.

And remember, the point of my posts here is to draw attention to Casey's presuppositions regarding the Aramaic gospel. If people want to keep posting things like 'the gospel must have been written in Aramaic because Jesus was a Jew from Galilee and Jews in the area spoke Aramaic' that's great, go on...