Casey (emeritus, New Testament languages and literatures, U. of Nottingham, England) presents material he has gathered and analyzed over many years on the historical Jesus, placing his life and teachi
This is the first book to examine the Aramaic dimension of Q since the Aramaic Dead Sea scrolls made such work more feasible. Maurice Casey gives a detailed examination of key passages in Matthew and Luke's gospels, demonstrating that they used two different Greek translations of an Aramaic source, which can be reconstructed. He overturns the conventional model of Q as a single Greek document, and shows that Jesus said everything in the original Aramaic source. Further analysis of other gospel passages shows the evangelists editing a Greek translation of an Aramaic source. On one, it can be shown that Mark utilises a different Aramaic source. A complex model of Q is thus proposed. Casey argues that Aramaic sources behind part of Q are of extremely early date, and should contribute significantly to the quest for the historical Jesus.
This 1999 book was the first to use all the Aramaic Dead Sea Scrolls to reconstruct original Aramaic sources from parts of Mark's Gospel. The scrolls enabled the author to revolutionize the methodology of such work, and to reconstruct whole passages which he interpreted in their original cultural context. The passages from which sources are reconstructed are Mark 9.11-13; 2.23-3.6; 10.35-45; and 14.12-26. A detailed discussion of each passage is offered, demonstrating that these sources are completely accurate accounts from the ministry of Jesus, from early sabbath disputes to his final Passover. An account of the translation process is given, showing how problems in Mark's text arose from the difficulty of translating some Aramaic expressions into Greek, including the notoriously difficult 'son of man'. A very early date for these sources is proposed, implying a date of c. 40 CE for Mark's Gospel.
This is the first book to examine the Aramaic dimension of Q since the Aramaic Dead Sea scrolls made such work more feasible. Maurice Casey gives a detailed examination of key passages in Matthew and Luke's gospels, demonstrating that they used two different Greek translations of an Aramaic source, which can be reconstructed. He overturns the conventional model of Q as a single Greek document, and shows that Jesus said everything in the original Aramaic source. Further analysis of other gospel passages shows the evangelists editing a Greek translation of an Aramaic source. On one, it can be shown that Mark utilises a different Aramaic source. A complex model of Q is thus proposed. Casey argues that Aramaic sources behind part of Q are of extremely early date, and should contribute significantly to the quest for the historical Jesus.
The opening chapter surveys the history of scholarship regarding the problematic use of the phrase 'son of man' in the New Testament. It also explains why this problem could not be so
This 1999 book was the first to use all the Aramaic Dead Sea Scrolls to reconstruct original Aramaic sources from parts of Mark's Gospel. The scrolls enabled the author to revolutionize the methodology of such work, and to reconstruct whole passages which he interpreted in their original cultural context. The passages from which sources are reconstructed are Mark 9.11-13; 2.23-3.6; 10.35-45; and 14.12-26. A detailed discussion of each passage is offered, demonstrating that these sources are completely accurate accounts from the ministry of Jesus, from early sabbath disputes to his final Passover. An account of the translation process is given, showing how problems in Mark's text arose from the difficulty of translating some Aramaic expressions into Greek, including the notoriously difficult 'son of man'. A very early date for these sources is proposed, implying a date of c. 40 CE for Mark's Gospel.
The opening chapter surveys the history of scholarship regarding the problematic use of the phrase 'son of man' in the New Testament. It also explains why this problem could not be so
Did Jesus exist? In recent years there has been a massive upsurge in public discussion of the view that Jesus did not exist. This view first found a voice in the 19th century, when Christian views wer
Did Jesus exist? In recent years there has been a massive upsurge in public discussion of the view that Jesus did not exist. This view first found a voice in the 19th century, when Christian views wer
