09-27-2004, 09:38 PM
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.srr.axbridge.org.uk/chron_tab5.html">http://www.srr.axbridge.org.uk/chron_tab5.html</a><!-- m -->
But this web site, which is done from a person who seems more knowledgeable disagrees with the Rabbula consencus.
"Rabbula used the Old Syriac and not the Peshitta. In [38] V????bus proves this by demonstrating how Rabbula inserted readings known from the Old Syriac Evangelion daMepharreshe four gospels into a translation he made of one of Cyril's Greek letters, where the underlying Greek of Cyril's letter cannot account for the biblical text Rabbula used. All this shows that the Evangelion daMepharreshe was in use by the sees of Antioch and Edessa in AD 431. This clarifies Rabbula's own rule, or canon which states, ???Let the presbyters and deacons take care that in all the churches there should be the Evangelion daMepharreshe and it be read.??? V????bus shewed that;
1. The four gospels stipulated by Rabbula were the Old Syriac four gospels, not the Peshitta.
2. That Rabbula was suppressing the Diatessaron or 'mixed' gospel during his episcopate, at the same time as Theodoret was doing the same thing, (see under AD 425 above)."
"Bishop Rabbula of Edessa died. He was succeeded by Hiba (also known as Ibas). Rabbula had switched allegiance from Antioch to Alexandria. However, Hiba was an Antiochean bishop elected by the Antiochean clergy of Edessa.
Two different anonymous biographies of Rabbula survive from about this time, one in Syriac and another which survives only in Greek translation from an original Syriac work. The one surviving in Syriac, provides us with a few gospel quotations. These quotations were definitely taken from the Peshitta. However the other biography preserved only in a Greek translation, contains Old Syriac gospel quotations taken from an Evangelion daMepharreshe"
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.srr.axbridge.org.uk/chron_tab5.html">http://www.srr.axbridge.org.uk/chron_tab5.html</a><!-- m -->
Anyway like I said before I think the Rabbula theory is just "reading between the lines", basically speculation based upon circumstantial evidence. And not a theory based upon solid scholarship.
But this web site, which is done from a person who seems more knowledgeable disagrees with the Rabbula consencus.
"Rabbula used the Old Syriac and not the Peshitta. In [38] V????bus proves this by demonstrating how Rabbula inserted readings known from the Old Syriac Evangelion daMepharreshe four gospels into a translation he made of one of Cyril's Greek letters, where the underlying Greek of Cyril's letter cannot account for the biblical text Rabbula used. All this shows that the Evangelion daMepharreshe was in use by the sees of Antioch and Edessa in AD 431. This clarifies Rabbula's own rule, or canon which states, ???Let the presbyters and deacons take care that in all the churches there should be the Evangelion daMepharreshe and it be read.??? V????bus shewed that;
1. The four gospels stipulated by Rabbula were the Old Syriac four gospels, not the Peshitta.
2. That Rabbula was suppressing the Diatessaron or 'mixed' gospel during his episcopate, at the same time as Theodoret was doing the same thing, (see under AD 425 above)."
"Bishop Rabbula of Edessa died. He was succeeded by Hiba (also known as Ibas). Rabbula had switched allegiance from Antioch to Alexandria. However, Hiba was an Antiochean bishop elected by the Antiochean clergy of Edessa.
Two different anonymous biographies of Rabbula survive from about this time, one in Syriac and another which survives only in Greek translation from an original Syriac work. The one surviving in Syriac, provides us with a few gospel quotations. These quotations were definitely taken from the Peshitta. However the other biography preserved only in a Greek translation, contains Old Syriac gospel quotations taken from an Evangelion daMepharreshe"
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.srr.axbridge.org.uk/chron_tab5.html">http://www.srr.axbridge.org.uk/chron_tab5.html</a><!-- m -->
Anyway like I said before I think the Rabbula theory is just "reading between the lines", basically speculation based upon circumstantial evidence. And not a theory based upon solid scholarship.