Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
The Catholic Epistles
#1
Shalama to all

I was having a discussion recently with a lecturer in Christianities of the East, and she informed me that the early Eastern Church initially regarded the Catholic Epistles as spurious, and were not actually accepted.

If this is so, then did the Peshitta contain Matthew to Acts, or was Acts not accepted either? Can anyone direct me to more information?

Please can someone clear this up

Thanks <!-- sSmile --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/smile.gif" alt="Smile" title="Smile" /><!-- sSmile -->

John S
Reply
#2
Shlama John,

The Eastern Church has a 22 book NT: Matthew through Hebrews. The five books not included are : 2 Peter,2John,3 John, Jude, Revelation.
All the Peshitta mss. exclude these books, going back to the fifth century.
There are other Aramaic mss. with the Catholic epistles and Revelation: Palestinian Syriac, Harklean Syriac, Philoxenian Syriac. Some believe the Palestinian may preserve the original Aramaic form of these epistles.

My account of the Peshitta is that it was a very early settled canon of the NT, before all the later epistles were written. It is testament (no pun intended) to the fact that the Peshitta is an early first century NT canon and probably
the original text thereof.

If it were a translation, probably all 27 books would have been translated, not just 22. 27 had been circulated by the end of the first century.

None of the 5 epistles purports to be written by any extra writers than those of the other books; none shows any signs of being unauthentic or discrepant from the others of the same purported authors.

The Eastern Church claims to have held the 22 book canon for 20 centuries. I believe the evidence we have compiled here on the web site strongly supports that claim, and the claim that they received those books from the apostles themselves in their present form.

I also believe the the 5 other books are inspired scripture, and that they have been preserved also in Aramaic. The major argument against that position is an argument from silence. Non - inclusion of a text is no real evidence that that text is not scripture , nor even that it was not considered scripture by the earliest Christians. It is simply testimony to the likelihood that the Eastern Church settled its canon early and perserved it intact to safeguard it from corruption, which corruption descended quickly enough upon the Greek mss. from the first century on.

Paul Younan is a member of The Church of The East. He holds a slightly different position, which I respect.
It certainly is a fascinating study. I hope you will enjoy it as much as I have.

Many blessings,


Dave
Reply
#3
Shalama brother Dave

Many thanks for your kind help. The opinion I received was from a scholar by the name of Erica Hunter who teaches at Cambridge, and is quite a well known authority on Christianities of the East. She has informed me that the Catholic Epistles [the books after Acts I assume, as they are known] were initially regarded as spurious by the Eastern Church - which branch specifically this means, I do not know.

I notice that Brother Paul Younan has put the Gospels and Acts available on the Interlinear - does this mean that this position is the one originally held?

I would like to know the reason why, if it is confirmed, as to why the Catholic Epistles were thereafter accepted.

Many thanks
John S
Reply
#4
Good point Mr Bauscher. The 22 book canon suggests Peshitta arose independant of the Greek, while the 4 book OS suggests it has something to do with the Diatessaron.
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.AramaicPeshitta.com">http://www.AramaicPeshitta.com</a><!-- m -->
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.RaphaelLataster.com">http://www.RaphaelLataster.com</a><!-- m -->
Reply
#5
Shlama Akhi John,

I can tell you for Paul that he holds to the 22 book canon as the original canon of the Church of The East. The reason he has the Gospels and Acts in the Interlinear is that he has not finished the translation of Acts, let alone the rest of the NT.
He will also tell you that Erica Hunter is all wet, if she believes the Eastern churches held a five book canon.

You may have misunderstood her. The Catholic epistles are only nine in number(counting Hebrews & Revelation). To exclude them still leaves 18 books. Pauls epistles are not Catholic epistles.

The early churches did not apparently all agree on the 27 book canon in the first two centuries.

I know that the 22 book canon was very early accepted by most churches in the first century.All of them are quoted as scripture in the early 2nd century and thereafter. Most of the wrangling over the canon was over the 5 books aforementioned. It took another three centuries to officially settle the disputes at Carthage, AD 397.

The Syrian Church also accepts the 27 book canon.
The COE has never wavered from its 22 book canon. All Peshitta mss. reflect this.

Paul and I , with the editorial help of Larry Kelsey and Stephen Silver, will be translating the Khabouris manuscript (an 11th century Eastern Peshitta ms. that is copied from a 4th century ms.) , picking up where Paul left off at Acts 15. This manuscript and text of the Eastern Peshitta has never been published in electronic form ; nor has it ever been translated into English, to my knowledge.

We desire your prayers . It is a monumental undertaking in the history of Bible publishing , Textual Criticism and Christian evangelism and ministry.

Burktha w'Shlama,

Dave
Get my NT translations, books & articles at :
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://aramaicnt.com">http://aramaicnt.com</a><!-- m --> and Lulu.com
I also have articles at BibleCodeDigest.com
Reply
#6
Shlama Akhi Chris,

Thank you for your comments. I trust all is well with you.How is school ?

Dave
Get my NT translations, books & articles at :
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://aramaicnt.com">http://aramaicnt.com</a><!-- m --> and Lulu.com
I also have articles at BibleCodeDigest.com
Reply
#7
The translation project sounds great, I have already prayed for you guys. How am I? Much better since "changing". I had come to terms with many things that were wrong, and my book and website are going well. I have been in fine form in my exams and look forward to aceing my last EVER pharmacy exam on Thursday <!-- sBig Grin --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/happy.gif" alt="Big Grin" title="Happy" /><!-- sBig Grin -->

Regards,

Chris
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.AramaicPeshitta.com">http://www.AramaicPeshitta.com</a><!-- m -->
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.RaphaelLataster.com">http://www.RaphaelLataster.com</a><!-- m -->
Reply
#8
peshitta_enthusiast Wrote:The translation project sounds great, I have already prayed for you guys. How am I? Much better since "changing". I had come to terms with many things that were wrong, and my book and website are going well. I have been in fine form in my exams and look forward to aceing my last EVER pharmacy exam on Thursday <!-- sBig Grin --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/happy.gif" alt="Big Grin" title="Happy" /><!-- sBig Grin -->

Regards,

Chris

Glad to hear that Chris. You are studying medicine aren't you? Let me be the first one to call you Dr Chris.
One of the first owners of the facsimile of <a href="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0802837867/ref=nosim/ultimyourulti-20"><b>Codex Leningrad</b></a>
Reply
#9
Chris,

Quote:Good point Mr Bauscher. The 22 book canon suggests Peshitta arose independant of the Greek, while the 4 book OS suggests it has something to do with the Diatessaron.

"The Catholic New Testament, as defined by the Council of Trent, does not differ, as regards the books contained, from that of all Christian bodies at present. Like the Old Testament, the New has its deuterocanonical books and portions of books, their canonicity having formerly been a subject of some controversy in the Church. These are for the entire books: the Epistle to the Hebrews, that of James, the Second of St. Peter, the Second and Third of John, Jude, and Apocalypse; giving seven in all as the number of the New Testament contested books. The formerly disputed passages are three: the closing section of St. Mark's Gospel, xvi, 9-20 about the apparitions of Christ after the Resurrection; the verses in Luke about the bloody sweat of Jesus, xxii, 43, 44; the Pericope Adulter??, or narrative of the woman taken in adultery, St. John, vii, 53 to viii, 11. Since the Council of Trent it is not permitted for a Catholic to question the inspiration of these passages" Catholic Encyclopedia, entry "Canon of NT"

Martin Luther condemned the Epistle of James as worthless, an 'epistle of straw.' Furthermore, he denigrated Jude, Hebrews, and the Apocalypse (Revelation). He did not omit them from his German Bible, but drew a line in the table of contents, putting them on a lower level than the rest of the New Testament. In Prefaces to each of these books, Luther explains his doubts as to their apostolic as well as canonical authority.Metzger, The Canon Of The New Testament: Its Origin, Significance & Development, Op.Cit, p. 273

The reformer known as Andreas Bodenstein of Karlstadt (1480-1541) divided the New Testament into three ranks of differing dignity. On the lowest level are the seven disputed books of James, 2 Peter, 2 and 3 John, Jude, Hebrews, and the Apocalypse (Revelation).Metzger, The Canon Of The New Testament: Its Origin, Significance & Development, Op.Cit, p. 273.

Oecolampadius in 1531 under Wurttemberg Confession declared that while all 27 books should be received, the Apocalypse (Revelation), James, Jude, 2 Peter 2 and 3 John should not be compared to the rest of the books.Metzger, The Canon Of The New Testament: Its Origin, Significance & Development, Op.Cit, p. 273.

Early in his career, Erasmus (d. 1536) doubted that Paul was the author of Hebrews, and James of the epistle bearing the name. He also questioned the authorship of 2 Peter, 2 and 3 John, and Jude. The style of Revelation precludes it from being written by the author of the Fourth Gospel.Metzger, The Canon Of The New Testament: Its Origin, Significance & Development, Op.Cit, p. 273.

The same four books are labeled 'Apocrypha' in a Bible from Hamburg in 1596. In Sweden, beginning in 1618, the Gustavus Adolphus Bible labels the four dubious books as 'Apocryphal New Testament.' This arrangement lasted for more than a century.Metzger, The Canon Of The New Testament: Its Origin, Significance & Development, Op.Cit, p. 273.

The twenty-two book canon implies nothing other than disagreement over which book is Scripture. The Church of the East is only bold enough to completely separate itself from them. All of this tells me that Christians are disunified as to what exactly is the 'Word of God.' How then can they expect others to take the Bible seriously?

Churches have been playing "pick n' choose" for centuries now.[/quote]
???Do not give up, for that is ignorance and not according to the rules of this art... Like the lover, you cannot hope to achieve success without infinite perseverance.???
Reply
#10
bar_khela Wrote:Chris,

[ The twenty-two book canon implies nothing other than disagreement over which book is Scripture. The Church of the East is only bold enough to completely separate itself from them. All of this tells me that Christians are disunified as to what exactly is the 'Word of God.' How then can they expect others to take the Bible seriously?

Churches have been playing "pick n' choose" for centuries now.
[/quote]

There were a number of phases when it comes to the development of the Canon. The only thing the truncated church of the East Canon proves to me that it comes from an earlier time of Church history. And that in turn is most likely a result of them being isolated for the most part from the Chrisitans in the West, and therefore not adopting the larger Canon.


Basically before 367 AD, when Athanasius, who wrote the list of books that we now accept (which however was not fully ratified until 397). Basically the full NT canon. THE COE canon basically agrees with the earlier previous list of books both accepted and questioned by Eusebius.
Reply
#11
The bottom line is that Christians of all flavors universally accept the 22 books. As for the "Western Five", the CoE has never openly said they are not Apostolic works. We simply closed our canon before these books were known to us.

In either case, we are encouraged to read them privately at home. They are not used in the liturgy or in scriptural lessons during sermons. But it's not like we are told to not study them. They are called "pious works", and are to be used by all Christians (including the CoE) for their own personal edification.

Akhi bar-Khela, what you view as a weakness is actually a strength. While denomination may differ on the importance or authorship of certain books, they are unanimous on 22 of them....which of course shows how important they consider those books.
+Shamasha Paul bar-Shimun de'Beth-Younan
[Image: sig.jpg]
Reply
#12
Quote:The bottom line is that Christians of all flavors universally accept the 22 books. As for the "Western Five", the CoE has never openly said they are not Apostolic works. We simply closed our canon before these books were known to us.

In either case, we are encouraged to read them privately at home. They are not used in the liturgy or in scriptural lessons during sermons. But it's not like we are told to not study them. They are called "pious works", and are to be used by all Christians (including the CoE) for their own personal edification.

Akhi bar-Khela, what you view as a weakness is actually a strength. While denomination may differ on the importance or authorship of certain books, they are unanimous on 22 of them....which of course shows how important they consider those books.

When did the canon for the ACOE close? Who approved it?
???Do not give up, for that is ignorance and not according to the rules of this art... Like the lover, you cannot hope to achieve success without infinite perseverance.???
Reply
#13
bar_khela Wrote:When did the canon for the ACOE close? Who approved it?

It never closed, and no one ever approved it. No council, no person responsible.
+Shamasha Paul bar-Shimun de'Beth-Younan
[Image: sig.jpg]
Reply
#14
Well that makes a lot of sense, safer to have the 22 EVERYONE acknowledges than to ADD something if it doesn't belong, and especially when not all use it.

No Dan, I am not a Dr yet... Med school will come soon enough. Right now I am a pharmacist. When I'm 21 I'll start med school.
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.AramaicPeshitta.com">http://www.AramaicPeshitta.com</a><!-- m -->
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.RaphaelLataster.com">http://www.RaphaelLataster.com</a><!-- m -->
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)