aa5874

It is so easy. So basic.

The Pauline writings are anti-Marcionite Texts written some time After Marcion.

Please examine "Against Marcion" attributed to Tertullian.

In the 5th book of "Against Marcion" virtually ALL the Epistles under the name of Paul, even the Pastorals, was used to argue Against Marcion.

Now, what is the Provenance of "Against Marcion" attributed to Tertullian??

"Against Marcion" attributed to Tertullian FELL from the Sky hundreds of years after Marcion was dead.

No Church writer up to the 5th century attributed any writings called Against Marcion to Tertullian.

Church writers that listed the books of Tertullian did NOT mention Against Marcion.

Eusebius mentioned the writings of Tertullian---Against Marcion is not listed.

Jerome mentioned the writings of Tertullian--Against Marcion is NOT listed.

Incredibly the supposed Largest work of Tertullian was completely unknown even in the Church.

The abundance of evidence suggests that the Pauline writings are late and were invented or manipulated to argue Against Marcion.

http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/03125.htm

See "Against Marcion" 5.

But about c 150 CE, Justin Martyr a contemporary of Marcion wrote Not one thing of Paul and the Pauline letters.

sotto voce

Just a pity you can't convince anyone else.

Duvduv

Except that you can only take the heresiologists word for it about writings attributed to Marcion, except for Justin, since nothing of those writings survived.

Vorkosigan

So...what is the first mention of Against Marcion?

Vorkosigan

The NIV which is a doctrinally-driven translation designed to make many doctrinal and textual problems disappear ....

I would argue that tendentious translations like this are evidence that the passage does indeed deny born-on-earth humanity of Jesus. If they said what the NIV claims they did, the NIV translators wouldn't have to alter the meaning of the text. I wonder how those people live with themselves....

sotto voce

Could someone provide an accurate translation?

DCHindley

It was in my earlier post, Sotto, which you may have overlooked when you reacted to "convenient interpolations."

5 ὧν οἱ πατέρες καὶ ἐξ ὧν ὁ Χριστὸς τὸ κατὰ σάρκα, ὁ ὢν ἐπὶ πάντων θεὸς εὐλογητὸς εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας, ἀμήν.

5 to them belong the patriarchs, and out of whom, according to the flesh, is the Christ. God who is over all be blessed for ever. Amen.

ὧν	of whom
οἱ	the
πατέρες	fathers
καὶ	and
ἐξ	out of
ὧν	whom
ὁ	the
Χριστὸς	Christ
τὸ	the (thing)
κατὰ	according
σάρκα,	to flesh
ὁ	the (one)
ὢν	being
ἐπὶ	upon (usually indicating contact)
πάντων	all things
θεὸς	God
(ἐστιν)	(be) verb is often omitted in Koine Greek
εὐλογητὸς	blessed
εἰς	into
τοὺς	the
αἰῶνας,	ages
ἀμήν	amen

The OP asked for an accurate rendering of this section, especially vs 5. It is based on the RSV, which itself translates it as:

RSV Romans 9:5 to them belong the patriarchs, and of their race, according to the flesh, is the Christ. God who is over all (be) blessed for ever. Amen.

The KJV renders it:

KJV Romans 9:5 Whose are the fathers, and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came, who is over all, God blessed for ever. Amen.

And the 1885 English Revised Version:

ERV Romans 9:5 whose are the fathers, and of whom is Christ as concerning the flesh, who is over all, God blessed for ever. Amen.

And the 2007 English Standard Version:

ESV Romans 9:5 To them belong the patriarchs, and from their race, according to the flesh, is the Christ, who (is) God over all, blessed forever. Amen.

The blessing that appears in Psalm 41:13 (40:14 in Lxx) is like this:

RSV Psalm 41:13 Blessed (be) LORD (i.e., YHWH), the God of Israel, from everlasting to everlasting! Amen and Amen. (following the Hebrew)

LXA Psalm 40:14 Blessed (be) the Lord God of Israel from everlasting, and to everlasting. So be it, so be it. (following the Lxx)

BGT Psalm 40:14 εὐλογητὸς (ἐστιν) κύριος ὁ θεὸς Ισραηλ ἀπὸ τοῦ αἰῶνος καὶ εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα γένοιτο γένοιτο

DCH

aa5874

I may consider writings claimed to be from the 2nd century or later because manuscripts with the Jesus story have been recovered and dated to that time period or later

I cannot accept any claim about actual 1st century activities of Jesus, the disciples and Paul until there is actual recovered dated manuscripts.

Again, and again, Justin Martyr's writings CONTRADICT Tertullian's Against Marcion so it does not appear to have been manipulated by the Church.

If the writings of Justin were manipulated by the Church then I would expect them to be similar to "Against Heresies" attributed to Irenaeus, "Against Marcion" attributed to Tertullian, "Against Celsus" attributed to Origen and "Church History" attributed to Eusebius.

Irenaeus, Tertullian, Origen and Eusebius all wrote of Four Gospels, Acts of the Apostles and Pauline writings which even Scholars have rejected because they are NOT credible.

aa5874

It is most remarkable that people here seem to forget what God Incarnate means.

It means GOD in the FLESH.

A whole book called "On the Flesh of Christ" was composed in antiquity.

It is claimed by the author that there was NO question, No Argument, No dis-agreement that Jesus was Divine.

In antiquity Jesus was a God.

The Question was whether or not the GOD manifested itself With or Without Flesh.

Tertullian asked the Questions and he will Answer them.

[b]"On the Flesh of Christ" 1[b] The Jesus of the NT existed as a Mythology God in the Flesh with no human father.

Terullian now Answers his Questions.

[b]On the Flesh of Christ" 18[b] Romans 9.5 does not help any argument that Jesus existed as a human being or that he was crucified in the sub-lunar.

Adam and Eve were created as human beings but it does not matter they are all mythological like Jesus who was made by the Logos of God.

In the Pauline writings a Mythological God GAVE his Son, Sacrificied his OWN Son, for the Salvation of Mankind.

Romans 5:10 KJV---For if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, being reconciled , we shall be saved by his life.

Romans 10:9 KJV---That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved .

sotto voce

Oooh. Mmmmm.

What about mine?

Is there very much purpose to translation, if anything might well be an interpolation?

Fine. Ok. Tickety boo. Pas de problem.

Now why, please, is

'theirs are the patriarchs, and from them is traced the human ancestry of the Messiah'

objectionable as a tendentious, doctrinally-driven translation? Why pick on the NIV?