[textualcriticism] Re: The Reliability of Justin
- At 20:44 15/03/2006, Jim wrote:
>Peter M. Head,No. I was making a general point and providing some concrete
>Even if Justin's First Apology is extant in only one located
>manuscript, that's one more than any copy of First Apology in which
>First Apology ch. 45 does not contain a theme and verbage
>reminiscent of Mark 16:19-20. Caution in light of the late date of
>the extant copy is fine; however mere caution does not justify
>denial (denial, I mean, of a particular passage's genuineness), and
>I don't see any feature in First Apology ch. 45 that is capable of
>justifying such a denial. Do you?
information about the manuscript base for our knowledge of Justin's works.
>I agree that it is not *certain* that Justin knows the text of theIt is helpful to note our agreement that it is not certain that
>LE (not to the degree that "2+2=4" is certain), but considering all
>that seems to be on Justin's mind in ch. 45, and his use
>of "pantachou" and a few other words in 16:19-20, in close
>proximity, it seems more likely that he did than that such
>overlapping verbage is fortuitous.
Justin even knows the LE. It comes down, as you rightly noted, to a
judgement about probability. For me, I am not too convinced that
PANTAXOU is sufficient to prove a connection to Mark 16.20, even if a
few other common words are also found in both texts. The emphasis on
Jerusalem might suggest knowledge of Acts.
1 Apol 45: That which he says, "He shall send to Thee the rod of
power out of Jerusalem," is predictive of the mighty word, which His
apostles, going forth from Jerusalem, preached everywhere (tou logou
tou iscurou on apo ierousalhm oi apostoloi autou exelqonteV pantacou
ekhruxan); and though death is decreed against those who teach or at
all confess the name of Christ, we everywhere both embrace and teach it.
>Peter M. Head, PhD
Sir Kirby Laing Senior Lecturer in New Testament
36 Selwyn Gardens
Cambridge CB3 9BA