An Aramaic Approach to Q: Sources for the Gospels of Matthew by Maurice Casey

February 23, 2017 | Old Testament | By admin | 0 Comments

By Maurice Casey

In the United States for the previous few a long time, Q discussions in the USA were principally framed by means of students like Robinson, Kloppenborg, Mack and Crossan. of their works, those students declare, with a stunning quantity of self assurance, to understand many stuff concerning the foundation, improvement, style, personality, volume and function of Q. consequently, many a long way attaining conclusions were asserted in regards to Christian origins and the ancient Jesus. yet fact be informed, lots of those conclusions were equipped on little greater than hypothesis and methodological difficulties are by no means challenging to notice.
Let me try and summarize in short the conclusions which were drawn via a number of the fogeys writing books approximately Q who've established their works at the above-mentioned students. it truly is often assumed (and sometimes argued) that Q used to be a unmarried Greek record, or that it may be accurately categorized in line with genera (e.g. "sayings of the wise") or that Q and the "community" accountable for it may be particularly linked to old Cynicism. Early Christianity, we're advised, all started with a bunch of itinerant Cynics who loved to discuss nature and who loved being a stick within the eye of traditionalism (earliest strata of Q). Afterwards, it advanced into an eschatologically-oriented workforce with a lot nearer ties to Judaism (later strata of Q). Then, with the composition of Mark's Gospel and with the stratified Q's eventual enshrinement within the Gospel's of Matthew and Luke the origian Q used to be misplaced and all yet forgotten ... until eventually contemporary students recovered it and defined to us what all of it means.
Kloppenborg's stratification conception and Downing's, Vaage's, Crossan's and Mack's claims approximately Jesus being a "Cynic sage" have supplied well known authors with fodder for every type of ridiculous historic reconstructions in regards to the lifetime of Jesus and early Christianity. In his personal old caricature of Q study Casey runs during the scholarship top as much as our unhappy present scenario in Q scholarship, concentrating on males like Toedt, Luehrman and Kloppenborg, displaying how their methodologies have been very unsound and feature been accredited all-too-uncritically. Casey complains of ways Q learn has develop into "beaurocratized", wherein he signifies that students usually depend upon one another's past arguments instead of own examinations of the first resource fabric (e.g. the hot discoveries at Qumran). He additionally issues to the best way arguments for Q contain loads of question-begging recommendations. for instance, the arguments Kloppenborg makes use of to teach how Luke or Matthew displaced yes sayings inside Q might simply as simply be taken to teach that those sayings initially existed independently and weren't extracted from an latest record (at least now not one with its personal significant association) after which rearranged in line with the redactor's theological programme.
Casey's criticisms on contemporary Q scholarship could by myself make the booklet worthy deciding to buy seeing that reliable criticisms like his are going almost unheard within the ruckus of all of the sensationalist rules being proposed those days.
Casey additionally, quite without notice, criticizes some of the early Aramaic methods to the Gospels, even Matthew Black's remarkable paintings. i discovered his feedback right here insightful and a trademark of his personal reflective and demanding brain.
Casey's thesis is that at the very least a few of Q was once initially preserved in Aramaic, no longer Greek. furthermore, it was once no longer a united composition, yet can have existed as a number of self sustaining sayings. The translated Greek Q existed in at the very least translations ahead of Matthew and Luke acquired to it and those particular translations are detectable and in part recoverable by means of retroverting the texts into Aramaic - the language within which they have been initially preserved and which Jesus probably knew and spoke.
Casey additionally demanding situations the common assumption that Q contained not anything greater than what Matthew and Luke now carry in universal. for instance, it's always characterised as a "sayings resource" because it includes only a few narratives. yet this declare depends upon a slightly intricate view of stratification. because it comes all the way down to us, Q contained a number of narratives (e.g. tales approximately John the Baptist, Christ's temptation, the therapeutic of the centurion's servant, Peter's leaving the scene and weeping bitterly after his three-fold denial, the query posed to Christ, "Who is he that struck you?").
One challenge i've got with Casey is his approach to demonstrating the Aramaic Vorlage at the back of Q: he attempts to teach how Matthew or Luke can have misinterpret or misinterpreted yes Aramaic phrases. i am not confident any of those arguments rather carry up.
Still, the e-book comes as a refresher to me due to the fact that i have learn a number of books in this subject now and they have often been from an identical viewpoint. This publication bargains a unique examine issues and that i imagine provides a few sturdy nutrients for idea. A extra entire e-book on Q that i would suggest is "Q and Early Christianity" by means of Christopher Tuckett. Richard Horsley has additionally written a few sturdy evaluations of Kloppenborg. For a superb critique of the Cynic speculation, Craig Evans has an exceptional bankruptcy in his ebook "Fabricating Jesus." it is a really easy learn too, not like this e-book by way of Casey.

Show description

Read Online or Download An Aramaic Approach to Q: Sources for the Gospels of Matthew and Luke (Society for New Testament Studies Monograph Series) PDF

Similar old testament books

Forms of Old Testament Literature: Isaiah 1-39 with an Introduction to Prophetic Literature (The Forms of the Old Testament Literature, Volume 16)

Essentially exegetical, the FOTL volumes learn the constitution, style, environment, and purpose of the biblical literature in query. additionally they examine the historical past at the back of the form-critical dialogue of the cloth, try to carry consistency to the terminology for the genres and formulation of the biblical literature, and reveal the exegetical strategy.

Israel Constructs its History: Deuteronomistic Historiography in Recent Research

The thesis that the books of Deuteronomy to two Kings have gone through a redaction that made them right into a 'Deuteronomistic background' has develop into because Martin Noth (1943) a generally authorised thought in outdated testomony scholarship. yet there's no consensus while this historical past was once edited: less than Josiah (622 BCE), throughout the exile (c.

An Introduction to the New Testament

An creation to the hot testomony specializes in 'special advent' that's old questions facing authorship, date, assets, objective, vacation spot, etc. This process stands not like contemporary texts that focus extra on literary shape, rhetorical feedback, and ancient parallels---topics the authors do not reduce, yet as an alternative imagine are larger given prolonged remedy in exegesis classes.

Seriously Dangerous Religion: What the Old Testament Really Says and Why It Matters

The previous testomony is frequently maligned as an superseded or even harmful textual content. Best-selling authors like Richard Dawkins, Karen Armstrong, and Derrick Jensen are best examples of these who locate the outdated testomony to be challenging to trendy sensibilities. Iain Provan counters that such effortless and well known readings misunderstand the outdated testomony.

Extra info for An Aramaic Approach to Q: Sources for the Gospels of Matthew and Luke (Society for New Testament Studies Monograph Series)

Example text

They might therefore have used and placed both wisdom and non-wisdom items together, and our ability to classify them with more formal sophistication than anyone in their culture does not imply a literary stratum. Moreover, Kloppenborg’s classification of some sayings as being wisdom sayings creaks and groans at the edges. 103 This leads him into problems with ‘seeking the kingdom’ at Matt. 31. His discussion as to whether this might be prophetic or apocalyptic, his 101 102 Kloppenborg, Formation of Q, pp.

Pp. 35–72; Dalman, Worte Jesu, pp. 1–72; Words of Jesus, pp. 1–88; G. Dalman, Jesus-Jeschua. Die drei Sprachen Jesu (Leipzig, 1922), pp. 6–25; ET Jesus-Jeshua. Studies in the Gospels (London, 1929), pp. 7–27; Jeremias, New Testament Theology, pp. 3–29; J. A. MS 25. Missoula, 1979), pp. 29–56; G. Schwarz, ‘Und Jesus sprach’. Untersuchungen zur aram¨aischen Urgestalt der Worte Jesu (BWANT 118 = VI,18. Stuttgart, 1985, 2nd edn, 1987), esp. pp. 5–48. The state of play 43 as mentions. 137 Guenther’s sweeping statement that Semitisms may be Septuagintalisms138 does not lead him to discuss any of those Semitic features of the Gospels which are not found in LXX.

30 An Aramaic Approach to Q criterion that zht”w is not found with tŸn basile©an in Jewish apocalyptic literature, his bringing forth evidence that seeking other things is associated with Sophia, all this underlines the arbitrary way in which he is determined to classify things. The kingdom of God was central to Jesus’ teaching, in which it is much commoner than in extant literature of our period. That he should teach people to seek it did not require either him or the collectors of his sayings to be in wisdom, apocalyptic or prophetic mode, since all these could be combined.

Download PDF sample

Rated 4.77 of 5 – based on 5 votes