Irenaeus Likely Originally Wrote in Aramaic

[Bernard Muller]

Since Bernard doesn't think it is important to examine texts in ancient languages his comments will be ignored as Irenaeus plainly states that he is appealing to the plain meaning and word order of the material in the language of the texts he used.

OK, let's look at Irenaeus' comments:

As to their affirming that Paul said plainly in the Second to the Corinthians, "In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them that believe not," and maintaining that there is indeed one god of this world, but another who is beyond all principality, and beginning, and power, we are not to blame if they, who give out that they do themselves know mysteries beyond God, know not how to read Paul. For if any one read the passage thus--according to Paul's custom, as I show elsewhere, and by many examples, that he uses transposition of words --"In whom God," then pointing it off, and making a slight interval, and at the same time read also the rest [of the sentence] in one [clause], "hath blinded the minds of them of this world that believe not," he shall find out the true [sense]; that it is contained in the expression, "God hath blinded the minds of the unbelievers of this world." And this is shown by means of the little interval [between the clause]. For Paul does not say, "the God of this world," as if recognising any other beyond Him; but he confessed God as indeed God. And he says, "the unbelievers of this world," because they shall not inherit the future age of incorruption. I shall show from Paul himself, how it is that God has blinded the minds of them that believe not, in the course of this work, that we may not just at present distract our mind from the matter in hand, [by wandering] at large. [Adv Haer 3.7.1]

Irenaeus did not contest that "In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them that believe not," is not what Paul said. Instead he was contesting how the Marcionites interpreted that phrase.
To oppose the Marcionites' interpretation, he proposed that Paul used transposition of words, and then showed what (Irenaeus thought) Paul meant (and not what he wrote) as such: "In whom God, hath blinded the minds of them of this world that believe not", conveniently removing "the" in front of "god" and displacing "of this world".

Cordially, Bernard

[Secret Alias]

So we're going to determine what Irenaeus could and could not have meant from the English translation ??? You're a real piece of work. Maybe for Bernard's sake we should have a thread - did the Church Fathers write to be understood in English!

[Bernard Muller]

So we're going to determine what Irenaeus could and could not have meant from the English translation ??? You're a real piece of work. Maybe for Bernard's sake we should have a thread - did the Church Fathers write to be understood in English

So what is wrong with the translation of Irenaeus' comments? A translation that you offered yourself.
Is that translation misleading? If yes, how and where.

Cordially, Bernard

[Secret Alias]

I am not following you. I provided my own translation of the Syriac as well as Lamsa's. I showed that translations such as the Georgian which developed from the Syriac rendered the text as Irenaeus did. What more is to consider? The idea that Irenaeus used an Aramaic text is plausible. Sorry that the world didn't speak English in antiquity. I know it would make everything so much simpler.

[Secret Alias]

This argument https://books.google.com/books?id=R203A ... ey&f=false is generally supportive of my methodology