Documents From the Aramaic Church in Jerusalem of the First Century

[praise_yeshua]

Make sure you are truthful and include ALL facts. There is an manuscript of the 4 Gospels written in Aramaic which has a scribal note saying the content is dated to 78 AD. The codex was located in the Vatican Library since the early 1700's. No one has seen it since, though.

https://berean-apologetics.community.forum/threads/the-gospels-codex-from-78-ad-where-is-it.262/

So we are to believe every scribal note on every manuscript? Is that how evidence works in church history?

I would like to understand just how you choose between competing sources.

 

[EclipseEventSigns]

So we are to believe every scribal note on every manuscript? Is that how evidence works in church history?

I would like to understand just how you choose between competing sources.

Hmmm.. maybe you should be asking your favorite Greek manuscript expert. You know, one of those who have a tenured position at an institution of learning.

 

[praise_yeshua]

Hmmm.. maybe you should be asking your favorite Greek manuscript expert. You know, one of those who have a tenured position at an institution of learning.

I know the subject myself. Your appeal to a scribal date isn't an indication of truth. It is just a note. It is rather common for scribes to fabricate evidence to support their beliefs in manuscripts. Which is why we cross reference competing manuscripts.

 

[EclipseEventSigns]

I know the subject myself. Your appeal to a scribal date isn't an indication of truth. It is just a note. It is rather common for scribes to fabricate evidence to support their beliefs in manuscripts. Which is why we cross reference competing manuscripts.

Ya, and that's why I made the video. Take this up with the Vatican Library. Find that codex. Let's get some experts to examine it and find out for sure.

 

[praise_yeshua]

Ya, and that's why I made the video. Take this up with the Vatican Library. Find that codex. Let's get some experts to examine it and find out for sure.

Not my requirement. It is conjecture until otherwise established as fact.

 

[EclipseEventSigns]

Not my requirement. It is conjecture until otherwise established as fact.

Then stop being silly.

 

[Diserner]

We should definitely examine it, but part of the reason it "disappeared" is mostly likely because the RCC does not want to look bad.

Having the exact date inscribed on it that everyone hoping for an Aramaic original is exactly hoping for is just too unrealistic.

 

[praise_yeshua]

Then stop being silly.

You based your comments on something you can not verify? What is that called?

 

[EclipseEventSigns]

We should definitely examine it, but part of the reason it "disappeared" is mostly likely because the RCC does not want to look bad.

Having the exact date inscribed on it that everyone hoping for an Aramaic original is exactly hoping for is just too unrealistic.

Everyone "hoping for"? Either it was written in 78 AD or is wasn't. Nothing to do with hope. There is evidence there waiting to be confirmed. The Roman Church sure has no particular wish for that to be true. Yet, the codex was catalogued in an official document with the full weight of the then current Pope. Now you or I may not consider the pope of any ultimate authority but according to the way of the world, that office carries weight. Anything published in that document was accurate on pain of excommunication and imprisonment for the authors of that document. So whether you like it or not and whether you want to wish it away or not, the fact is - it exists. And jumping up and down saying it's "a fake" doesn't make it so.

 

[praise_yeshua]

Everyone "hoping for"? Either it was written in 78 AD or is wasn't. Nothing to do with hope. There is evidence there waiting to be confirmed. The Roman Church sure has no particular wish for that to be true. Yet, the codex was catalogued in an official document with the full weight of the then current Pope. Now you or I may not consider the pope of any ultimate authority but according to the way of the world, that office carries weight. Anything published in that document was accurate on pain of excommunication and imprisonment for the authors of that document. So whether you like it or not and whether you want to wish it away or not, the fact is - it exists. And jumping up and down saying it's "a fake" doesn't make it so.

Is everything the Vatican "cataloged"...... "inspired"? The Vatican doesn't share everything they have. It is not like this is the only manuscript not being offered for review.

 

[EclipseEventSigns]

Is everything the Vatican "cataloged"...... "inspired"? The Vatican doesn't share everything they have. It is not like this is the only manuscript not being offered for review.

totally fallacious comment. Not even the point of anything.

 

[praise_yeshua]

totally fallacious comment. Not even the point of anything.

You are presenting the "idea" that the Vatican is withholding the document because it would contradict their position.

 

[EclipseEventSigns]

You are presenting the "idea" that the Vatican is withholding the document because it would contradict their position.

I never said or suggested anything of the kind. I've never assumed any agenda by anyone.