Greg Matthews said

I’m of the opinion that Mark was written for Hellenistic Jews and by the time Matthew and Luke were written the message of Jesus was being brought to a wider audience outside of Palestine.  Both of these points were reasons Aramaic would not have been used.  In the case of the former the audience were Hellenists so the chances they knew Aramaic were slim and none.  I don’t guess I need to explain the obviousness of Matthew and Luke not being in Aramaic.

I wish Bart would do a post or two on the Hellenists.  There’s a lot of subtext to what was going on with them.

Interesting, I had all but convinced myself that the synoptics were all later Greek authors aiming at a  “wider audience outside of Palestine”, but now that I think about it, it makes sense that Mark may have been as you describe.  Is the whole John Mark (Peter’s secretary) hypothesis credible in that context? 

Yea, there are many posts that would be useful. Bart better get on the stick!

spiker said

maryhelena said 
No secret, spiker, all that is required of you is to demonstrate reading comprehension….but with mockery and ridicule as your aim….rationality flies out the window and all that is left is indeed hidden from view….

Mockery and ridicule are just a bonus!  My reading comprehension is just fine; though my understanding of gibberish could use some work. If my aim is mockery and ridicule, why are you the only recipient? Why is it that others I have disagreed with haven’t been ridiculed and mocked?  

Now we pass from talk of undercurrents has run out of gas, you’ve decided your next explanation is reading comprehension? 

So let’s get this straight, it’s not secret, but is, indeed, hidden from view? ROTFL. The ever devastating quip!!! Oh no what remains is not seen!  What will I ever do!?

Hmm… still not capable of making an actual argument I see. What’s next?  Eeny meeny miny moe, catch Thomas Brodie by the toe. If Carrier hollers let him go?

Hey Diddle diddle the dish ran away with your Thorazine?

Mockery and ridicule   –  that such is the currency of debate on Bart Ehrman’s forum is simply astonishing…

Lawyerskeptic said

It still seems strange to me that no one cared enough about posterity to record Jesus’ words in his own language, but Spiker is right that early Christians were not planning for posterity. I’ve always wondered about the Corinthian teenagers. What was the reaction of teenagers when they first received 1 Corinthians in which Paul said that “in view of the coming crisis” virgins should remain virgins?

Sort of depends on what you mean by posterity, if that means us, it’s entirely understandable they wouldn’t have even thought we 

would exist. However, maybe the issue isn’t as clear as we, in a society where communication relies so heavily on the written word,

think.  Thus, the value of a written record goes unrecognized.  I think Bart mentioned somewhere, that the concern for verbatim accuracy does not arise until after the advent of the written record. My suspicion is that in a society where oral transmission is dominant, a concern for posterity is expressed in oral transmission represented by evangelising.

As for Corinthian teens, I’m sure they had an awful time getting the keys to the family mule. C’mon Dad me and the guys want to go see the Saul of Tarsus farewell tour and we wont be picking up any girls, honest!