Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Translations Compared: Eastern or Western?

I was speaking about Manuscript those of Vaticanus and Sinaiticus, where we can study their text. These few fragments, of uncertain date, are not what I was thinking of. If it's true as the person said, that all these possible 2nd century fragments, and possible 1st century fragment make up 43% of the Greek version of the NT, then, I say put them out and compare them with what is found in the Manuscripts of the 4th, 5th, and 6th centuries. I would love to see the picture they give.

Quote:I found something interesting about Tatian's Gospel Harmony, please have a look!

<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href=""></a><!-- m -->

What do you think about that?

I just read it, and I say he is guessing, and has no proof. He says Tatian could not have made the Diatessaron, but says that Justin used an earlier Gospel harmony...of which there is 100% no's all guessing. He says that The Diatessaron is really the lost "Gospel of the Hebrews", which again there is 100% no proof, just a big guess. It's an interesting guess...but just a guess.

Again...we can't say for certain if Tatian made the Diatessorn, but then again, we can't say for certain if Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John were the authors of the Gospels that bear their names...we have only a passed down tradition to go on. Also true of all the other books of The Bible...OT & NT.

There is no argument that was raised when Eusebius stated that Tatian made the Diatessaron...not as far as I know. Was there ever a person who wrote and said?"Hey, it was not Tatian, it was this other person" Seems to me, that someone would have raised a cry, if Eusebius was lying about this?But not a peep.



Messages In This Thread
Re: Translations Compared: Eastern or Western? - by Thirdwoe - 02-10-2013, 01:23 AM

Forum Jump:

Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)