7607Re: Mark 1:1 "the son of God" - Jerome Witness
- Nov 12, 2012Hi Joe,
Concerning Mk 1.1, it might be that "Son of God" was omitted in certain localities as an apologetic strategy. ("If only we could get people to read past the first sentence...") The omission of YIOY QEOY is found among certain texts which seem associated with the Eastern branch of Christianity (i.e. places where Syriac and cognates were spoken), e.g. 038, Syr. Pal., Arm., Geo., Origen.
On thinking that the Son of God is at the beginning of the Hebrew Bible, the Apostle John says that the Word of God was with God in the beginning (alluding to the beginning of Genesis) and, later, the Word became a human being. Maybe Irenaeus was thinking of John's Gospel?
--- In firstname.lastname@example.org, "joewallack" <joewallack@...> wrote:
> Be glad to start. The most important criterion I use is Credibility.
> Here the comparison is Irenaeus, if you accept him as Long, and Origen.
> Credibility consists of knowledge and objectivity. Now most early
> Patristics have relatively low credibility by modern standards (the only
> standard I use) so what we are doing is comparing their credibility to
> each other. Origen was a Textual Critic and I would rate him the
> outstanding scholar of the Early Church. Not much evidence that Irenaeus
> was a Textual Critic and his credibility was low by Patristic standards.
> Did you know that he thought the son of God was at the beginning of the
> Jewish Bible? So in the Credibility criterion I give the edge to Short.
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>