The Diatessaron FAQ

[Paul Younan]

You even made the effort to say that it was used in Syria, and made no mention about Persia and the Church of the East (in Persia!)

The only bone I have to pick with it is your mention of Aphrahat. So far, you have given no examples of Aphrahat quoting the Diatesseron. None whatsoever.

Well, see my new post today about "the Rich Man".

I did - and you a posted a convoluted hodge-podge of Old Scratch readings that don't even match what Mar Aphrahat was saying - thereby proving my hypothesis that he was paraphrasing!

I know you know the difference between Old Scratch and the Diatesseron - but you seem to be constantly confusing the two! <!-- s --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/sleepy.gif" alt="" title="Sleepy" /><!-- s -->

You only gave one example of his supposed quote of Old Scratch, which is completely subjective since the Aramaic word order is completely different - proving that Aphrahat was freely paraphrasing rather than quoting anything, let alone Old Scratch. As I stated before - the Diatesseron and Old Scratch are two completely different things. And the quote you gave actually proves that Mar Aphrahat did NOT use the Diatesseron - since the words "before God" are not present in the earliest and most trustworthy translations of the Diatesseron.

But I would suppose that, since the words "before God" _are_ present in the Persian Diatessaron, and in the Magdalene Gospel, that these would be the earlier, and the more trustworthy versions of the Diatesseron, as compared to those versions of the Diatessaron that lack these words...

C'MON Akhi - you are picking and choosing which is your "best text" based on which one "best" suits your purpose at any given time!

Also, you wrote as follows in a later post,

Since the Diatesseron doesn't actually exist - and may never have actually existed in Aramaic ...

But I would think that Ephrem's Commentary on the Diatessaron provides a pretty good indication that an ancient version of the Diatessaron did exist in Aramaic.

But that's assuming that Ephraem wasn't quoting on a Greek Diatesseron - or maybe that Ephraem didn't even write that commentary that's attributed to him. You know - there is a lot of "pseudo-Ephraem" out there! <!-- s --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/smile.gif" alt="" title="Smile" /><!-- s -->

Look - I'm not saying that an Aramaic version of the Diatesseron never existed - I'm simply stating the facts - since no copy of it exists any longer, everything you or I say about it is inference or judgment based on inconclusive, incomplete evidence.

Just like the theory of Mar Aphrahat quoting this mysterious, long-lost version - how convenient it is for Greek primacists that this "black hole" exists. <!-- s --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/smile.gif" alt="" title="Smile" /><!-- s -->