Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

diatessaron query

Expand Messages
  • Roderic L. Mullen
    (tried to send this earlier, don t know if it got through, someone pls let me know) The recent diatessaron discussion has reminded me of a question I had in
    Message 1 of 1 , Jul 14, 1997
    • 0 Attachment
      (tried to send this earlier, don't know if it got through, someone pls let
      me know) The recent diatessaron discussion has reminded me of a question I
      had in reading Wm Petersen's book "tatian's Diatessaron," (Leiden: Brill,
      1994). Bill please allow the question of a novice in matters diatessaronic.
      On p.374-75 of your book you discuss Quispel's second criterion for
      determining the lilely authenticity of a reading, viz., that the reading
      should have minimal support from canonical gospel mss and patristic authors.
      If we apply that criterion strictl in reconstructing readings, would it not
      mean that the value of the diatessaron as an independent witness in
      reconstructing the text of the canonical gospels is problematic at best,
      even though it is often cited in UBS4 and NA27? Perhaps we would have
      attestation of a stage in the gospel tradition, but it seems that home of
      using the diatessaron to reach an "original text" of the gospels would elude
      us. How would you assess this relationship? Interested to hear your repl,
      thanks-- Rod Mullen
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.