Irenaeus of Lyons (yes, "Lyons"). TransMission E-Missions

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
User avatar
JoeWallack
Posts: 1608
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 8:22 pm
Contact:

Irenaeus of Lyons (yes, "Lyons"). TransMission E-Missions

Post by JoeWallack »

Irenaeus of Lyons (yes, "Lyons"). 7 Firsts @ the XXX Olympiads. TransMission E-Missions.

JW:
Many important, supposedly early Christian assertions appear to go through/were started by one Irenaeus (if that was his real name) of Lyons (yes, "Lyons"). However, as our own Roger Pearse points out, some alleged/self-appointed Bible scholars are guilty of obscuranticism/deconstructism in ignoring/denying the evidence that the only place one can find such original Irenaeus quotes is in "They Never Said It".

[Translation for the JoeWallack challenged = Scholar and amateur alike typically quote important Christian assertions attributed to Irenaeus without realizing or at least indicating that the evidence for Irenaeus originality is relatively weak.]

Consider that in general top Skeptical Bible Scholar Dr. Richard Carrier says that it is commonly accepted that in general transmission of Patristic writings, which includes original Greek to Latin, shows evidence of being moved towards orthodox Christian assertions.

Specifically, in Adverse Heresies, Irenaeus' most famous work, note that Irenaeus explicitly quotes from GMark relatively few times compared to the other Gospels. I see three explicit quotes:

3:10:5

[1;1]
5. Wherefore also Mark, the interpreter and follower of Peter, does thus commence his Gospel narrative: "The beginning of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God; as it is written in the prophets, Behold, I send My messenger before Thy face, which shall prepare Thy way. The voice of one crying in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the Lord, make the paths straight before our God."
[16:19]
Also, towards the conclusion of his Gospel, Mark says: "So then, after the Lord Jesus had spoken to them, He was received up into heaven, and sitteth on the right hand of God; "
4:6:1
1. For the Lord, revealing Himself to His disciples, that He Himself is the Word, who imparts knowledge of the Father, and reproving the Jews, who imagined that they, had [the knowledge of] God, while they nevertheless rejected His Word, through whom God is made known, declared, "No man knoweth the Son, but the Father; neither knoweth any man the Father, save the Son, and he to whom the Son has willed to reveal [Him]." Thus hath Matthew set it down, and Luke in like manner, and Mark the very same;
Strangely, the above is nowhere to be found in extant GMark. Perhaps that 1st century fragment?

For the two explicit quotes that actually can be found in extants GMark, I ask the serious student to consider them cumulatively, what textual criticism criticisms do they share and what do the two as a group lack?

We have the following reasons to doubt that either are original to Irenaeus of Lyons:
  • 1) In general, Irenaeus did not explicitly quote much from GMark.

    2) The two quotes just happen to be two of the most famous Textual Criticism issues of GMark.

    3) For the two quotes Textual Criticism indicates that they are likely not what the original Gospels had.

    4) Textual Criticism indicates that the evidence at the time of Irenaeus would not have supported the quotes.

    5) Each would be the earliest known explicit quote.

    6) There is no extant Greek text of Irenaeus which has either quote.

    7) Patristic quotes of Irenaeus here show movement to the two quotes from the Greek to the Latin.

    8) Irenaeus was considered an important early witness by the early Church so subsequent Patristics would have had motivation to move to the two quotes.

Joseph

ErrancyWiki
User avatar
Peter Kirby
Site Admin
Posts: 8617
Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 2:13 pm
Location: Santa Clara
Contact:

Re: Irenaeus of Lyons (yes, "Lyons"). TransMission E-Mission

Post by Peter Kirby »

One of the things I want to do one day is to look at all the quotations by Irenaeus from the New Testament and specifically look at them in relation to the text-critical issues of the New Testament. Despite being "early," Irenaeus has a habit of quoting expansions of the New Testament (longer ending of Mark, etc.) that still do not take over the textual witnesses entirely even as late as the fourth and fifth century (Vaticanus, Sinaiticus, etc.) or that are deemed interpolations by modern scholars. Is this a coincidence? Does Irenaeus just happen to have very adulterated copies, very early on?

Or, if it is not a coincidence... ? Could it be that we need to invoke The Ken Olson Option?

We must be, at least, ready to consider it (although it is possible that a perpetrator, if there is one, would turn out to be not Irenaeus but one of his western forebears, such as Justin and/or his pupil Tatian).
"... almost every critical biblical position was earlier advanced by skeptics." - Raymond Brown
User avatar
Ben C. Smith
Posts: 8994
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Irenaeus of Lyons (yes, "Lyons"). TransMission E-Mission

Post by Ben C. Smith »

JoeWallack wrote:We have the following reasons to doubt that either are original to Irenaeus of Lyons:
  • 1) In general, Irenaeus did not explicitly quote much from GMark.

    2) The two quotes just happen to be two of the most famous Textual Criticism issues of GMark.

    3) For the two quotes Textual Criticism indicates that they are likely not what the original Gospels had.

    4) Textual Criticism indicates that the evidence at the time of Irenaeus would not have supported the quotes.

    5) Each would be the earliest known explicit quote.

    6) There is no extant Greek text of Irenaeus which has either quote.

    7) Patristic quotes of Irenaeus here show movement to the two quotes from the Greek to the Latin.

    8) Irenaeus was considered an important early witness by the early Church so subsequent Patristics would have had motivation to move to the two quotes.
That is a very impressive summary, Joe. Well done.

Might I add that in Against Heresies 3.11.8 Irenaeus quotes Mark 1.1 again (very top of the righthand column), but this time he leaves out the son of God. (This one is extant in the Greek.) When he quotes Mark 1.1 yet again in 3.16.3, son of God is back (and apparently no Greek again).

Irenaeus certainly seems fond of Mark 1.1.

Ben.
ΤΙ ΕΣΤΙΝ ΑΛΗΘΕΙΑ
dengen
Posts: 4
Joined: Fri Apr 10, 2015 9:22 am

Re: Irenaeus of Lyons (yes, "Lyons"). TransMission E-Mission

Post by dengen »

Ben C. Smith wrote:That is a very impressive summary, Joe. Well done.
agree, but would have been even better with a link to Greek text demonstrating absence of highlighted English translation.
Ben C. Smith wrote:Might I add that in Against Heresies 3.11.8 Irenaeus quotes Mark 1.1 again (very top of the righthand column), but this time he leaves out the son of God. (This one is extant in the Greek.) When he quotes Mark 1.1 yet again in 3.16.3, son of God is back (and apparently no Greek again).
httpwwwtextexcavationcomirenaeushtml You are not allowed to post URLs!

have not yet found link, Ben, is it handy? Searched Skeptic too, without success. Is the source of this Greek text Migne's Patrologia Greca?
texthttp patristica net graeca You are not allowed to post URLs!

that's logical. cover your eyes children; imagine visiting a nudist camp, in the heat of summer, compelled to wear a cashmere sweater-how unique! how skillful, what brilliance: to conduct the forum in harmony with the earliest sources, lacunae, abridged, forged, missing. No wonder neither Joe nor Ben provided links.
User avatar
Ben C. Smith
Posts: 8994
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Irenaeus of Lyons (yes, "Lyons"). TransMission E-Mission

Post by Ben C. Smith »

The link to the scans is here: http://textexcavation.com/irenaeusah.html. The overall source is the edition by W. Wigan Harvey. The source of this particular Greek passage is given in the margin on the previous page: http://www.textexcavation.com/documents ... h3p026.jpg: Anastas[ius], Quaes[tiones] et respons[iones] 144.

Ben.
ΤΙ ΕΣΤΙΝ ΑΛΗΘΕΙΑ
andrewcriddle
Posts: 2852
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 12:36 am

Re: Irenaeus of Lyons (yes, "Lyons"). TransMission E-Mission

Post by andrewcriddle »

Ben C. Smith wrote:That is a very impressive summary, Joe. Well done.

Might I add that in Against Heresies 3.11.8 Irenaeus quotes Mark 1.1 again (very top of the righthand column), but this time he leaves out the son of God. (This one is extant in the Greek.) When he quotes Mark 1.1 yet again in 3.16.3, son of God is back (and apparently no Greek again).

Irenaeus certainly seems fond of Mark 1.1.

Ben.
Hi Ben

Sources Chretiennes 211 Irenaeus Contre les Heresies book 3 by Rousseau and Doutreleau pps 166-167 gives the Greek fragment covering 11.8 as agreeing with the Latin i.e.
The beginning of the Gospel, as it is written in Isaiah the prophet
without reference to Jesus Christ with or without Son of God

Andrew Criddle
User avatar
Ben C. Smith
Posts: 8994
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Irenaeus of Lyons (yes, "Lyons"). TransMission E-Mission

Post by Ben C. Smith »

Good show, Andrew. Thanks.
ΤΙ ΕΣΤΙΝ ΑΛΗΘΕΙΑ
User avatar
JoeWallack
Posts: 1608
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 8:22 pm
Contact:

Re: Irenaeus of Lyons (yes, "Lyons"). TransMission E-Mission

Post by JoeWallack »

JW:
I have started a Textual Criticism page for Mark 1:1 here:

Mark 1:1

Tommy Wasserman goes James Snapp on "son of God" trying to defend it as original. He has the most claimed information I've seen regarding Irenaeus' likely original here. Unfortunately, like Snapp, I see Wasserman as an Apologist (he proudly owns "Evangelical") so everything he says needs to be checked. His related article is here:

The ‘Son of God’ was in the Beginning (Mark 1:1)

To investigate, know a few things:

1) There is no complete Greek text of Irenaeus' Adverse Heresies, not even close. There are a few Latin texts. Obviously Christianity came to prefer the Latin version.

2) There is no Greek fragment of Irenaeus' text with "son of God". Note that "Greek fragment of Irenaeus' text" is different from Greek Patristic texts that explicitly or implicitly indicate Irenaeus' references to 1:1.

3) Most of the related evidence than for what Irenaeus' witness is here is than second hand. What did other Patristics say that Irenaeus said.

4) Everyone including Wasserman would agree that Patristic Latin here is more likely to support Irenaeus' "son of God" than Patristic Greek.

5) The problem for the Textual Critic is that there is often mixed evidence for what a subsequent Patristic said Irenaeus said due to variation in the manuscripts of the subsequent Patristic. Add to this that it can also be unclear where the Patristic quote of Irenaeus stops and the subsequent Patristic commentary starts.

6) Many of the sources for the Patristic evidence here are either not available or difficult to find so all you have is the analysis of someone you may never have heard of.

For the willing investigator, if you agree with Wasserman's conclusion or at least can fake it, he may be willing to correspond with you.


Joseph

ErrancyWiki
Secret Alias
Posts: 18922
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: Irenaeus of Lyons (yes, "Lyons"). TransMission E-Mission

Post by Secret Alias »

But Irenaeus has a similar pattern of misquotation with other passages from Jeremiah (from memory) and attributes a agraphon to another prophetic book. The problem may well have something to do with the fact that what passes as the collected works of 'Irenaeus' may well be a composite of other authors (Justin for instance). The same patter is exhibited in Tertullian where citations of specific scriptures don't agree.
“Finally, from so little sleeping and so much reading, his brain dried up and he went completely out of his mind.”
― Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, Don Quixote
User avatar
MrMacSon
Posts: 8891
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 3:45 pm

Re: Irenaeus of Lyons (yes, "Lyons"). TransMission E-Mission

Post by MrMacSon »

Ben C. Smith wrote:That is a very impressive summary, Joe. Well done.

Might I add that in Against Heresies 3.11.8 Irenaeus quotes Mark 1.1 again (very top of the righthand column), but this time he leaves out the son of God. (This one is extant in the Greek.) When he quotes Mark 1.1 yet again in 3.16.3, son of God is back (and apparently no Greek again).

Irenaeus certainly seems fond of Mark 1.1.
andrewcriddle wrote:Sources Chretiennes 211 Irenaeus Contre les Heresies book 3 by Rousseau and Doutreleau (pps 166-167) gives the Greek fragment covering 11.8 as agreeing with the Latin
  • ie. "The beginning of the Gospel, as it is written in Isaiah the prophet"
without reference to Jesus Christ with or without Son of God
Secret Alias wrote:But Irenaeus has a similar pattern of misquotation with other passages from Jeremiah (from memory) and attributes a agraphon to another prophetic book. The problem may well have something to do with the fact that what passes as the collected works of 'Irenaeus' may well be a composite of other authors (Justin for instance). The same patter is exhibited in Tertullian where citations of specific scriptures don't agree.
I think things like Irenaeus's Against Heresies 3.11.8 having "The beginning of the Gospel, as it is written in Isaiah the prophet" suggests the synoptic gospels were being written or reformulated during their [the Church Fathers'] times, rather than having been written or finalized before their time.
Post Reply