LegionOnomaMoi

First, p. 237-238 is a discussion of Matthew, so what is the "and" part you are referring to? Second, nowhere does Casey say anything about Jesus being divine here. Despite what you say here:

it isn't a matter of "higher Christology." Talking about Jesus' role in the "end time" and a (possible re-)interpretation of messianic restoration of Isreal as an eschatological messiah in no way means a divine figure. In various Jewish writings different humans (Adam, Moses, David, etc.) are discussed in the same way: important Jewish figures who would play an eschatological role (or at least be present at the end of days) despite being human and dead (and quite apart from references to a more general resurrection). You are reading into Casey what he himself does not say.

Diogenes the Cynic

To add onto this, there is also the eschatological role of Elijiah, who performed many of the same miracles that Jesus did (healing the sick, raising from the dead, multiplication of food and controlling the rain, bodily ascent into Heaven), and was expected to return from heaven to announce the Messiah. Elijah was already a celestial superhero, expected to return for the apocalypse, and no one ever confused him with God.

Duvduv

The same Elijah figure who does not appear in any epistles, including Romans that ostensibly describes Christ as the seed of David, and despite all the other references from the Jewish scriptures......

Diogenes the Cynic

He does appear in Mark, though, not only symbolically as John, but literally during the transfiguration.

Paul doesn't mention him, but Paul doesn't mention a "son of man" either.

thief of fire

So just what would be a celestial superhero? A heavenly superhero?
Is that someone from heaven or someone in heaven

Duvduv

But what that suggests as I mentioned before, that with all the scriptural quotes in the epistles, including from Malachi, the epistle writers do not invoke an Elijah motif for the Christ at all, which suggests that the underlying letters had nothing to do with messianic issues before they were integrated with the Christ motif.

Iskander

Why should Elijah appear in a Christian scripture?

The early Christians tried to persuade Judaism that they were ’kosher’ and therefore respectable people. It is a pity because Christianity was a new religion and Marcion clearly understood it to be so.

Islam is much closer to Judaism than Christianity, but it has always said that Abraham was a Muslim.

Islam acknowledges Christianity, but reduces Jesus to the status of a minor Muslim prophet while ignoring the gospels.

Perhaps Christianity ought to have said that Moses and his brother Aaron were Christian prophets

Duvduv

Because the epistles invoke all kinds of other Jewish biblical references from the prophets except the ones referring to the messiah or Elijah, as I discussed in the other thread on Old Testament references in the epistles. Yet in Romans Christ is of the seed of David, and the Davidic messiah need Elijah according to Malachi, which the epistles quote. Not to mention of course Isaiah 53 which is not referenced despite other references from Isaiah in the epistles.

Diogenes the Cynic

In the case of both Elijah and Jesus, it's somebody who got to Heaven by ascending from Earth. Both were miracle workers (with virtually the same set of miracles) and both are expected to return from Heaven.

This shows Jewish precedent (and not an obscure one either, but one of their front and center prophets) for a human superhero ascending bodily to, and waiting to return from Heaven without any identification of that character as God or as coequal to/coexistent with God.

Iskander

They tried to make Christianity acceptable to Judaism that is all. Well educated Christians read the bible and live their religion without being aware of the contrived and unnecessary references to the heroes of another religion.