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

7578Re: Mark 1:1 "the son of God" - Jerome Witness

Expand Messages
  • joewallack
    Nov 2 4:32 PM
    • 0 Attachment
      --- In textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com, Tommy Wasserman <tommy.wasserman@...> wrote:
      > Dear Joseph,
      > I suggest you read my argument again, and very carefully.

      Actually I've read your argument very very carefully but that's no guarantee that I will agree with you.

      > You wrote:
      > > Irenaeus as witness to the Long does not coordinate well with the other evidence here for early Greek Patristic.
      > >
      > I do not understand what you mean.

      I agree with that. Here's the point. Per your article the Greek witness is ("c." mine):

      Origen c. 240

      Serapion c. 350

      Basil c. 363

      Cyril of J. c. 370

      Epiphanius c. 378

      Asterius c. 385

      Severian c. 390

      Cyril of A c. 390

      Hesychius c.430

      The only ones to explicitly quote long are the disputed Severian and less disputed Cyril of A. So good Greek Patristic confirmation of supposed Irenaeus comes about 200 years later. That's a lot of years and fathers to go with only abbreviations & short. Not to mention that Irenaeus was a famous, oft quoted father. As that great 20th century philosopher Kuschke said, "Looks are vastly underrated." So too is the qualitative criterion here of Coordination. Do I even need to likewise demonstrate with list that the later Latin is going Long? Early Irenaeus for Long does not coordinate for other important qualitative criteria either.

      If Irenaeus did omit "Jesus Christ" and "son of God" I have faith that it is better evidence that "Jesus Christ" was not there than it is that "son of God" was.


    • Show all 23 messages in this topic