Wednesday, October 23, 2024

NA28 and Colossians 1:17-24 (Page 614, Including the Apparatus Criticus)

 


20 comments:

Duncan said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Duncan said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Edgar Foster said...

As a reminder, this thread is dealing with Colossians 1:17ff and specifically, 1:18. We've discussed Marcion some before and I'm not at all convinced by the Marcion revisionist arguments. Furthermore, I've seen no compelling reasons to doubt the originality of Col. 1:15-6. However, that is not really the focus of this thread.

Duncan said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Duncan said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Duncan said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Edgar Foster said...

I think it's highly revisionist when scholars suggest that Marcion preceded Paul or Luke and they make these claims with thin "evidence." I agree that the Fathers could and did say things about their opponents that might have been in error/inconsistent, but some recent writers take things too far. Nevertheless, as I said, this thread has nothing to do with Marcion or ancient propaganda.

Why focus on Col. 1:18? Because a blog reader asked what NA28 had to say about it, and this deals with some of what Nincsnevem has written. Again, I would agree that it's not one of the most disputed verses, but I was trying to help out a blog reader since I own NA28.

Edgar Foster said...

I did not approve the video link becaause it's off-topic and like many YT videos of that lot, sensationalistic.

Duncan said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Duncan said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Edgar Foster said...

Do we have to now define swearing here? It's about more than the motive since words themselves can constitute swearing or profanity. If you walk up and punch somebody in the mouth, regardless of your motive, it's a violent act. The same for using racial epithets or slandering someone. At any rate, I prefer not to hear profane speech.

Marcionite Priority and its problems: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Priority_of_the_Gospel_of_Marcion

I know the traditional account of Marcion, but I've seen revisionism the last few years. Yeah,, we're not going to agree. I see no evidence for Marcionite Priority.

Regarding Luke, see https://etsjets.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/files_JETS-PDFs_7_7-3_BETS_7_3_69-82_Aune.pdf

Synoptic Problem: https://www.drtimwhite.net/blog/2020/8/8/review-of-the-synoptic-problem-by-daniel-wallace-at-bibleorg

Now, can we go back to the actual topic?

Edgar Foster said...

Anonymous, see https://fosterheologicalreflections.blogspot.com/2015/05/colossians-115-18-ek.html

Duncan said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Terence said...

Found this... couldn't make out where verse 18 begins as regards the omission of "ek" in p46.

https://www.earlybible.com/manuscripts/p46-Col-3.html

Edgar Foster said...

Duncan, you've read profanity in the church fathers? Can you point me to specific passages where they use profane speech? Anytime we've talked about MSS from the second century or whatever, I found myself disagreeing with practically all of your claims. You now brought up Marcion again, so I was addressing those claims. Not much to hang those assertions on either.

Duncan said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Duncan said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Duncan said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Edgar Foster said...

You must have misunderstood me, but I'm dropping the issue. I asked for examples of profanity in the fathers' writings, but got something else. Yes, I've read Tertullian and Irenaeus and other fathers. Never seen them swear though.

Edgar Foster said...

Thanks Terence. This thread will now close.