Steven Avery

Hi Folks,

Our first Ante-Nicene reference, chronologically, is Hilary of Poitiers, a major writer on doctrinal issues and a major church figure.

==================================================

HILARY of POITIERS (c. 360)
Homilies on the Psalms
http://books.google.com/books?id=rpBXjVdOtlAC&pg=PA106

Now, Ethiopia precedes (praevenit) in its
confession of faith through the eunuch of Candace;
for while he demanded for himself the grace of baptism, saying
'See, there is water, who will prevent my being baptized?',
he so anticipated (praeveniens) with his hand that very sacrament of
baptism in the desire of his impatient longing, that, desirous of his own
salvation, he exacted from a deacon the ministering of an apostolic duty.
(Hillary, Tract in Ps. 67.33)
==================================================

While this is not a quotation, the "confession of faith through the eunuch of Candace" clearly references :

"and he answered and said,
I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God. "

from Acts 8:37.

And thus our Acts 8:37 verse would be in the Bible of Hilary, or at least we have compelling evidence that this is the case. This reference is unknown in the literature on the early church writers support for Acts 8:37. Afaik it does not show up in any apparatus. Note: a sound apparatus will always include such strong allusions, short of quotation. They may put the reference in parenthesis (Hilary) or have another method to indicate an allusion rather than a quotation, however such references are standard fare. They may even be much less clear than this reference from Hilary.

An interesting research project would be to see if the unpublished color-coded research material of Dean John Burgon in the British Library includes references on Act 8:37. And if so are there references such as Pontinus the Deacon and Hilary, still missing in the apparatus today more than a century later ? On many verses today Dean John Burgon remains the starting point for early church writer study, for those who really seek to know the material. However we do not have a published section from the Dean on Acts 8:37.

The reference was discovered in:

Arator on the Acts of the Apostles: A Baptismal Commentary
Richard Hillier 1993 p. 106

Writings of Hilary of Poitiers (c. 310 - c. 368)
http://www.fourthcentury.com/index.php/hilary-chart
Hilary - Commentary on the Psalms
http://www.fourthcentury.com/index.p...-on-the-psalms

While Hilary wrote in Latin, Hilary read the Greek early church writers. Presumably he was bilingual, note that he even commented that :

"an exact verbal translation from Greek into Latin generally causes obscurity"
St. Hilary of Poitiers and St. Martin of Tours By John Gibson Cazenove p. 132 (1883)

Hilary's early education and studies included Greek :

"evidently embraced a certain measure of acquaintance with Greek" (p. 16)
"was able to obtain and to study the ...Greek translation known as that of the Seventy (the Septuagint) ... and the New Testament in the original language" (p. 120).

Later in life Hilary was said to be :
"translating from Greek authors" (p. 96) including
"Athanasius" (p. 139).

The Greek-Latin aspect I note with Hilary (and other authors) for full context, lest it is thought that they will only have knowledge of Bibles in one language. And to point out that the "Chinese Wall Syndrome" in textual criticism discussions of early writers (that tries to look at evidence with parsed statements like "all Greek fathers till... ") has at least one major flaw .. in that many of the learned writers were bilingual.

Erasmus was once again familiar with the writings of Hilary.

Shalom
Steven Avery

Steven Avery

Reminder Note:

Since this study will have a number of additional references, please refrain from posting on this thread material that is not directly related to the ECW references discussed and the apparatus, and then please try to make comments helpful and substantive. This will be greatly appreciated.

Feel free to start a secondary thread for more general comments.

Thanks.

Steven Avery

Hi Folks,

While the next reference is given in the modern Münster apparatus (after Irenaeus and Cyprian) it is unclear when it was discovered and whether it was available to Erasmus, Scrivener, Westcott, Metzger and others. (I have not checked any earlier UBS apparatus.)

==================================================

CHRMOMATIUS (c. 390) of Aquileia (Northest Italy today)

Arator on the Acts of the Apostles: a baptismal commentary by Richard Hillier (p. 98)
http://books.google.com/books?id=rpBXjVdOtlAC&pg=PA98
(more fully available on Questia)

Sermon 2:8

"Thus this eunuch, since he is a dove, is chosen,
but Simon the magician, since he is a raven, is rejected;
for the former believed with his whole heart and whole faith,
but the latter drew near, doubting in his mind and all full of faithlessness.
And therefore one was received and the other cast out;
one was commended and the other condemned."

Also the book by Richard Hillier references another quote from Chromatius
the Eunuch and Cornelius as having being : "rewarded for their righteous
conduct with the gift of baptism" with a reference to Romans 2:14-15.

==================================================

Chromatius was highly educated, a learned scholar, and studied Chrysostom, although conceivably that was in Latin translation. I have not seen discussion as to whether he is thought to have had Greek skills.

Dictionary of Christian Biography and Literature to the End of the Sixth Century A.D.
with an Account of the Principal Sects and Heresies.
http://www.ccel.org/ccel/wace/biodic...0of%20Aquileia
Chromatius, bp. of Aquileia, one of the most influential Western prelates of his day, the friend and correspondent of Ambrose, Jerome, Rufinus, and other leading ecclesiastics, and a warm supporter of Chrysostom against his Oriental assailants. He was a native of Aquileia .

Additional Chromatius writings have recently been made web-available courtesy of Stephen Carlson and Roger Pearse

Chromatius of Aquileia: Sermons on the Gospel of Matthew - Prologue (2005)
http://www.hypotyposeis.org/weblog/2...ermons-on.html

Shalom,
Steven Avery

spin

I hope Steven Avery gets a chance to soak this response in. It should help him understand why Acts 8:37 isn't original to the context it was found in.

The papyrus P45, the earliest manuscript of the section, dated around 250CE doesn't feature this verse. In fact the first manuscript to have it is Codex Laudianus, dated 550CE. A survey of early manuscripts shows an extremely poor presence of the verse. So the manuscript tradition is strongly against its originality.

This is where Steven Avery's quotes of various church fathers comes into the analysis. They show knowledge of the context and include indications of the contents of the verse and these church fathers are older in the case of Irenaeus or around the same age, Cyprian, or a little later than P45.

Now, let's look at Irenaeus's evidence. First, Against Heresies, 3.12.8

8. But again: Whom did Philip preach to the eunuch of the queen of the Ethiopians, returning from Jerusalem, and reading Esaias the prophet, when he and this man were alone together? Was it not He of whom the prophet spoke: "He was led as a sheep to the slaughter, and as a lamb dumb before the shearer, so He opened not the mouth?" "But who shall declare His nativity? for His life shall be taken away from the earth." [Philip declared] that this was Jesus, and that the Scripture was fulfilled in Him; as did also the believing eunuch himself: and, immediately requesting to be baptized, he said, "I believe Jesus Christ to be the Son of God." This man was also sent into the regions of Ethiopia, to preach what he had himself believed, that there was one God preached by the prophets, but that the Son of this [God] had already made [His] appearance in human nature, and had been led as a sheep to the slaughter; and all the other statements which the prophets made regarding Him.

The statement in blue reflects Acts 8:37, as does the summary in the preceding clause. But look at the sections in red. They are not from Acts 8, nor from 8:37, but are a large amount of extra material, that doesn't belong to the canonical KJV narrative at all. And, if we examine the second relevant passage from Irenaeus we find exact the same problem (4.23.2):

For this reason, also, Philip, when he had discovered the eunuch of the Ethiopians' queen reading these words which had been written: "He was led as a sheep to the slaughter; and as a lamb is dumb before the shearer, so He opened not His mouth: in His humiliation His judgment was taken away;" and all the rest which the prophet proceeded to relate in regard to His passion and His coming in the flesh, and how He was dishonoured by those who did not believe Him; easily persuaded him to believe on Him, that He was Christ Jesus, who was crucified under Pontius Pilate, and suffered whatsoever the prophet had predicted, and that He was the Son of God, who gives eternal life to men. And immediately when [Philip] had baptized him, he departed from him.

This is a different version and includes different material: the unstated proclamation of the good news has become elaborated and the ending doesn't feature the eunuch's own mission, as the first version does. It doesn't contain the material from 8:37 (though Steven Avery tries to find it later in the text).

Irenaeus features developments on the story found in Acts 8 and the two tellings we have are not consistent with each other or any version of the story, except that of Hilary of Poitiers. (Neither Cyprian's nor Pontius's tellings provide us with enough context for them to be useful in understanding where the material in 8:37 came from.)

Now, Ethiopia precedes in its confession of faith through the eunuch of Candace; for while he demanded for himself the grace of baptism, saying 'See, there is water, who will prevent my being baptized?', he so anticipated with his hand that very sacrament of baptism in the desire of his impatient longing, that, desirous of his own salvation, he exacted from a deacon the ministering of an apostolic duty.

This is a brief telling of the Acts 8 story, but it contains a large proportion of material that isn't derived from the canonical version. So, where did it come from and why isn't it in the KJV? More interestingly, note the italicized red section, "he exacted from the deacon the ministering of an apostolic duty". Though clearly not from canon, it is obviously related to the first version of the story supplied by Irenaeus, which shows the eunuch given his apostolic duty going off to fulfill it in "the regions of Ethiopia".

What we plainly see in Irenaeus and in Hilary is the existence of a non-canonical tradition closely related to canon Acts 8, an expanded version, that didn't make it into a manuscript tradition, perhaps until a little of it (8:37) crept into the Codex Laudianus. The verse had a very insecure life, given its instability in the manuscript tradition: where it appears there are several variations. It crept out of the margin of one of Erasmus's Greek source texts, when he decided to include it in his Greek edition.

Steven Avery's examples of the material related to Acts 8:37 help us to see that not all traditions in circulation in the earliest christian era made it into the canonical text. From material related to the Hebrew bible stories Josephus preserves a number of non-canonical traditions that had quasi-acceptance in various Jewish circles. This type of non-canonical material can also be noted in the existence of apocryphal gospels, apocryphal letters, and small sections of the KJV text that are generally not regarded as original (though Steven Avery doesn't accept the status of this last group).


spin

Steven Avery

Hi Folks,

Thanks for your thoughts, spin.

I will ask the moderators to spin this off to another thread, since much of the post is not relevant to this thread, but is an overall discussion of the textual theory, which is a realm about 100 times wider and ripe for diversion. If we start discussing the interrelationships of early writer testimony to manuscript testimony to internal evidence and the paradigms of how to view addition/ommision evidences (worthy of a thread for sure) to various commentaries on the text (some are excellent) to this and that .. the thread as set up will simply be buried. That is not my desire, as I would like to complete the review. Hopefully some appreciate the effort, even if you do not have a special or high view of the Bible, simply studying one evidence closely like this can be very informative.

The goal of this thread is very simple.

#1 - showing the early church writer evidences
#2 - showing how the apparatus and commentators represent (or misrepresent) the evidence.

After those are done, there would be some ongoing tweaking about how to view the early references.. e.g. how allusions and quotations interact, what are the intermediate references, how to consider silences of various types, how to consider the writing style of a particular writer.

Then spin's post would be appropriate, but if it is to be now, it should be on another thread. spin, if you want to resubmit your thoughts on Irenaeus here, that would then be fine, just state them simply and let them rest. (You clearly have a unique view of how to look at the Irenaeus scripture exegesis, somehow constraining him to one chapter of Acts, this would easily have the potential of one of those wild diversion discussions. So while I do not think they are very consequent to the picture as a whole, they would, especially if done without the hubris, at least be appropriate to what is posted.)

Even that might be better elsewhere, to allow free-wheeling continuation, however short succinct and clear comments of anyone's view of a reference given would be welcome and have the potential of making the thread more interesting to every reader.

Overall I am much more interested though in scholarship additions such as :

A: I looked up Dean Burgon in the British Museum .. correction from British Library above .. and he has .. does not have .. Acts 8:37 ..

B: Such and such a commentator or apparatus offers this evidence or review. e.g. Bart Ehrman or Thomas Holland includes the following early writer references.

C: Schaff's notes do indicate Pontius the Deacon (an actual addition to above, Pontius is not a newish reference. This was on a forum, even though the source of the Schaff notes was not given, the one who shared it is reliable enough not to require further checking on a relatively minor point.)

D. The Speculum has ... (The Speculum is a manuscript that is borderline early church writer and manuscript .. Aquinas mentions .. Jerome says) etc. You can ask if I have them planned if you like, however there are a lot of references that are not yet found.

E. There is an alternate translation of Reference A .. or an additional section to consider, or the specific Latin or Greek or Syriac or Language ABC is given as ___. The source is Migne xyz.

F. The manuscript used was discovered in Paris in 1860 and translated by Sam in 1870 and is in the Paris Library and there are now 3 manuscripts with similar texts which are dated to the 8th century.

Honestly, I am more interested in first going through the ECW than parsing each evidence. Let them be presented as a whole and each one, and the group, speak for themselves, first. Often there is a complementary nature to the references. (e.g definitely on Cyprian and Pontius, something I did not get around to discussing above.) Thus the full picture first.

Thanks.

Shalom,
Steven Avery

Steven Avery

Hi Folks,

Continuting with our sixth writer (7th reference), Pacian was mentioned in Scrivener, of the commentators above. We have little information about Pacian outside his writings, in Latin.

180-270 AD
Iraneaus (2 refs)
Cyprian
Pontius the Deacon

360-400 AD
Hilary
Chromatius
Pacian

========================================

PACIAN (c. 380) - Bishop of Barcelona

http://www.tertullian.org/fathers/pacian_5_baptism.htm
DISCOURSE ON BAPTISM TO THE FAITHFUL AND THE CATECHUMENS.

We must believe therefore that we can be born.
For so saith Philip, If thou believest . . . thou mayest.
Christ therefore must be received that He may beget,
for thus saith the Apostle John,
As many as received Him,
to them gave He power to become the sons of God.

Pacian (Pacianus) (ca. 310*391 AD) was a bishop of Barcelona during the fourth century. He was bishop from about 365 AD to 391 AD ,,, Pacian is eulogized in Jerome's De viris illustribus, in which Jerome praises his eloquence, learning, chastity, and holiness of life.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pacian

========================================

Shalom,
Steven Avery

Steven Avery

Hi Folks,

From the same era, a bit later, we now look at the very well-known Augustine, who gives us two references. The second is auxiliary, complementary to Sermon 49, a direct Acts 8:37 reference, phrase-by-phrase. We will look later at the apparatus. For now note that this reference is given in Scrivener and Schaff, not at all in the Westcott or Metzger sections.

===========================

AUGUSTINE of Hippo (354-430 AD) - Roman North Africa, today Algeria

http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf106.vii.li.html
http://books.google.com/books?id=EG8...J&pg=RA2-PT170

Sermon 49

Philip being admonished went up to his chariot,
explained the Scripture, unfolded the faith, preached Christ.
The eunuch believed on Christ,
and said when they came unto a certain water,

“See water, who doth hinder me to be baptized?
Philip said to him, Dost thou believe on Jesus Christ?
He answered, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.
Immediately he went down with him into the water.” -

http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf...x.iii.liv-p8.1
http://books.google.com/books?id=B30XAAAAIAAJ&pg=PT112

Anti-Pelagian Writings

The whole of this passage of prophecy is that famous one in Isaiah
which was expounded by Philip to the eunuch of Queen Candace,
and he believed in Jesus.

=======================================

While Augustine wrote in Latin, he had some competence in Greek, having learned it when young and then again as a Bishop. Overall weak, although with access to Latin translations of Greek works.

The issue came up interestingly in the Erasmus-Lee correspondence. Augustine's Greek was being compared to Jerome's broad language background (better Greek, and also Hebrew and Syriac).

Shalom,
Steven Avery

jakejonesiv

Your "self suspended" posting on this subject, which we were to have no expectation of you continuing or responding lasted all of what, 2 days? :eating_popcorn:

Steven Avery

Hi Folks,

Maybe less . I decided to attempt to get the most salient references posted, since no place on the Internet has this degree of completeness on the references to Acts 8:37. And before I post any reference, I seek to get additional background material, so there can be a lag.

Plus, some other concerns I decided to put aside a bit. For the most part (one exception) I have not gone into new threads, which I avoid, but have continued the threads in process, the WIP.

So I hope you, and others, have appreciated the seven writers so far, as an aid to NT textual understanding and the early writers as well. Please note that I am specifically avoiding the issue of significance of the references individually or as a group, that is a whole nother discussion, I simply want to get them posted and discussed a little, and point out how they are handled in commentaries and apparatuses.

Shalom,
Steven Avery

jakejonesiv

Irenaeus didn't have "believest with all thine heart" in his version. Should not that be addressed in your defense of the KJB of Acts 8:37?