01-01-2009, 11:40 PM
Shlama Akhay,
I found this quote from a footnote of a book at Google Books....
The Acts of Paul and Thecla, though an apocryphal work, MUST BE ASCRIBED TO THE SECOND CENTURY, AND IT MAKES USE OF ACTS. Acts is in the Peshitto and the Old Latin versions.
Why doesn't he make mention of any Greek manuscript? He only mentions the Peshitto and the Old Latin.
The oldest manuscript that I could find of Acts written in Greek is the Chester Beatty papyrus P45 estimated at 200-250 A. D. But that's 3rd century!! The quote from the above footnote tells us that The Acts of Paul and Thecla MUST BE ASCRIBED TO THE SECOND CENTURY and quoted the Acts of the Apostles.
So my first question (mentioned above) is "Why doesn't the author make mention of an early Greek text? He only states that "Acts is in the Peshitto and Old Latin version."
Based on the above footnote quote, my biggest question is "Are there any PRE-THIRD CENTURY Greek manuscripts, papyri (or fragments thereof) of the Acts of the Apostles now extant that can be dated with any definite certainty?
This is, with reference to the above footnote quote, quite a weighty question to wrestle with for both Greek and Aramaic primacists.
The quote is from the bottom of page 341 of this work......
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://books.google.com/books?id=cDlHAAAAIAAJ&pg=PA341&dq=earliest+citation+of+the+Peshitto&lr=&as_brr=0&as_pt=ALLTYPES">http://books.google.com/books?id=cDlHAA ... t=ALLTYPES</a><!-- m -->
The website for the earliest papyri of Greek Acts I chose was this link...
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.biblefacts.org/history/oldtext.html">http://www.biblefacts.org/history/oldtext.html</a><!-- m -->
Any thoughts?
Shlama w'Burkate, Larry Kelsey
I found this quote from a footnote of a book at Google Books....
The Acts of Paul and Thecla, though an apocryphal work, MUST BE ASCRIBED TO THE SECOND CENTURY, AND IT MAKES USE OF ACTS. Acts is in the Peshitto and the Old Latin versions.
Why doesn't he make mention of any Greek manuscript? He only mentions the Peshitto and the Old Latin.
The oldest manuscript that I could find of Acts written in Greek is the Chester Beatty papyrus P45 estimated at 200-250 A. D. But that's 3rd century!! The quote from the above footnote tells us that The Acts of Paul and Thecla MUST BE ASCRIBED TO THE SECOND CENTURY and quoted the Acts of the Apostles.
So my first question (mentioned above) is "Why doesn't the author make mention of an early Greek text? He only states that "Acts is in the Peshitto and Old Latin version."
Based on the above footnote quote, my biggest question is "Are there any PRE-THIRD CENTURY Greek manuscripts, papyri (or fragments thereof) of the Acts of the Apostles now extant that can be dated with any definite certainty?
This is, with reference to the above footnote quote, quite a weighty question to wrestle with for both Greek and Aramaic primacists.
The quote is from the bottom of page 341 of this work......
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://books.google.com/books?id=cDlHAAAAIAAJ&pg=PA341&dq=earliest+citation+of+the+Peshitto&lr=&as_brr=0&as_pt=ALLTYPES">http://books.google.com/books?id=cDlHAA ... t=ALLTYPES</a><!-- m -->
The website for the earliest papyri of Greek Acts I chose was this link...
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.biblefacts.org/history/oldtext.html">http://www.biblefacts.org/history/oldtext.html</a><!-- m -->
Any thoughts?
Shlama w'Burkate, Larry Kelsey