X-Organization: University of Prince Edward Island
X-VMS-To: IN%"CHRISTIA@ASUACAD.bitnet"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Wed, 22 Jul 1992 10:04:00 -0400
From:         Lora Harris <LHARRIS@UPEI.CA>
Subject:      Re: Evolution of the scriptures...

>Hello Friends!
>
>Lately I have been railed at by a non believer.  He told me that the
>scriptures had been written and re-written so many times, and had been
>edited and manipulated by man so much, that they bear little or no
>relationship to the original text.
>
>

As to evolution of the Scriptures - as someone else pointed out, the dead sea
scrolls proved the integrity of the OT.  As to the new, the quotes from the
Church Fathers could reconstruct practically the entire thing.  I don't have a
list of the others and earlier ones with me at the moment - however, here are
the passages that Clement of Alexandria quotes (150-220 AD) in only three of his
writings "The Exhortation to the Greeks" "The Rich Man's Salvation" and
"Instructions to the Newly Baptized".  So at least by then, they were in
recognizable forms.


(60% direct quotes, 40% allusions or paraphrases)

Matthew 3:3,7,9,10,12,17
        4:10,16,17
        5:3,6,8,10,13,14,18,25,28-30,39,45
        6:19-21,24
        7:1,7,11,13-15,21
        8:22
        9:13
        10:16,22,40-42
        11:11,12,25,27-30
        12:7,50
        13:16,17,38
        18:3,8,10
        19:21
        21:1-7
        23:9
        24:29,31,35
        25:30-43
        26:75

Also in Mark 36 verses, in Luke 60, in John 39, in Acts 3,
Romans 22
1Corinthians 27
2 " 8
galatians 7
Ephesians 21
Phillippians 4
Colossians 5
1 Timothy 9
2 " 4
Titus 4
Hebrews 21
James 1
1 Peter 6
2 Peter 2
1John 5
Jude 1
Revelation 2

( CHeck out a series called "The Ante-Nicene Fathers" or the one called
"Patrology from your library for more of this kind of thing, and earlier).

Also helpful is Eusebius "Ecclesiastical History" - here are some of what he
has to say.  One thing we see is that all the copies of Matthew we have come
from a translation, because the original was in Aramaic - even the ancient
Greek manuscripts are translations.

Eusebius, 324 AD.

Eusebius' Ecclesiastical History

Book II,XV

"But a great light of religion shone on the minds of the hearers of Peter, so
that they were not satisfied with a single hearing or with the unwritten
teaching of the divine proclamation, but with every kind of exhortation
besought Mark, whose Gospel is extant, seeing that he was Peter's follower, to
leave them a written statement of the teaching given them verbally, nor did
they cease until they had persuaded him, and so became the cause of the
Scripture called the Gospel according to Mark.  And they say that the Apostle,
knowing by the revelation of the spirit to him what had been done, was pleased
at their zeal, and ratified the scripture for study in the churches.  Clement
quotes the story in the sixth book of the Hypotyposes, and the bishop of
Hierapolis, named Papais, confirms him.  He also says that Peter mentions Mark
in his first Epistle, and that he composed this in Rome itself, which they say
that he himself indicates, referring to the city metaphorically as Babylon, in
the words, "the elect one in Babylon greets you, and Marcus my son.""

Book III, XXV

" At this point it seems reasonable to summarize the writings of the New
Testament which have been quoted.  In the first place should be put the holy
tetrad of the Gospels.  To them follows the writing of the Acts of the
Apostles. After this should be reckoned the Epistles of Paul.  Following them
the Epistle  of John called the first, and in the same way should be recognized
the Epistle of Peter.  In addition to these should be put, if it seems
desirable, the Revelation of John, the arguments concerning which we will
expound at the proper time.  These belong to the Recognized Books. Of the
Disputed Books which are nevertheless known to most are the Epistle called of
James, that of Jude, the second Epistle of Peter, and the so-called second and
third Epistles of John which may be the work of the evangelist or of some other
with the same name.
[some deleted discussion of other writings.]
...the Revelation of John...some reject it, but others count it among the
Recognized Books.
[some deleted]
... we have nevertheless been obliged to make a list of them, distinguishing
between those writings which, according to the tradition of the Church, are
true, genuine, and recognized ..."

Book III, XXXIX

" These are also mentioned by Ireneaus as though his [Papais's] only
writings, for he says in one place, " To these things also Papais, the hearer
of John, who was a companion of Polycarp and one of the ancients, bears witness
in writing in the fourth of his books, for five books were composed by him."
So says Irenaeus.  Yet Papais himself, according to the preface of his
treatises, makes plain that he had in no way been a hearer and eye-witness of
the sacred Apostles, but teaches that he had received the articles of faith
from those who had known them, for he speaks as follows:
        "And I shall not hesitate to append to the interpretations all
        that I ever learned from the presbyters and remember well, for
        of their truth I am confident.  For unlike most I did not re-
        joice in them who say much, but in them who teach the truth, nor
        in them who recount the commandments of others, but in them who
        repeated those given to the faith by the Lord and derived from
        truth itself; but if ever anyone came who had followed the pres-
        byters, I inquired into the words of the presbyters, what Andrew
        or Peter or Philip or Thomas or James or John or Matthew, or any
        other of the Lord's disciples, were saying.  For I did not sup-
        pose that information from books would help me so much as the word
        of a living and surviving voice."
...
        "And the Presbyter [ ie. John ] used to say this, 'Mark became
        Peter's interpreter and wrote accurately all that he remembered,
        not, indeed, in order, of the things said or done by the Lord.
        For he had not heard the Lord, nor had he followed him, but later
        on, as I said, followed Peter, who used to give teaching as nec-
        cessity demanded but not making, as it were, an arrangement of the
        Lord's  oracles, so that Mark did nothing wrong in thus writing
        down single points as he remembered them.  "

This is related by Papais about Mark, and about Matthew this was said, "Mat-
thew collected the oracles in the Hebrew language, and each interpreted them
as best he could."
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU