No Ignatius position at this time.
A lot of effort to even come to an informed opinion, and I have not really seen it as primary.
Oh good! that leaves me free to take any position I want, with virtually no effort
Here it is:
to any body.
If they were any use, I was going to ask the classic Tubingen/F.C. Bauer/Detering
question of: is there any evidence of the existence of the Paulines before Marcion?
I
started a thread to encapsulate the answer, so I'll follow that up over there.
But over here in this thread,
Granted it becomes more of an issue because of Hierosolymitanus.
Exactly. I'm looking at the amount of effort that went into this story line:
1. No one would spend a 13 month long year traveling around the libraries of
Italy when the custodian of the Vatican library wants to write you poetry.
2. After a young Lutheran pastor gets private audiences with the Pope, he
is given access to the most prized document of the most secretive library in
the world, under a ex-(sic) Jesuit soon-to-be Cardinal who has a reputation
for keeping everything to himself. With the help of another Cardinal, no less.
3. After a 13 month year in and around the Vatican you go to the ends of the earth
to make the hugest find in ecclesiastical history, in one of the oldest and most
important monasteries of a church that hates Lutherans as much as the Catholics do.
4. On your way home to your wife, you stop off in Constantinople (having flunked
geography) to visit one of the next most restrictive libraries in the world,
and again are
left alone in the library on the OK of yet another Patriarch,
of a church that also hates Lutherans as much as the Catholics do. Shortly
after which, the library makes the next hugest find in ecclesiastical history.
5. The 2 codices in the story are then said to be the basis for cabal of "scholars"
(Wescott/Hort/Shcaff) to claim that all of the world's bibles need replacing
immediately, even though one of the Codices was rejected by the TR's Erasmus,
and the other one comes in either lily-white or lemon-tea-yellow.
So the question naturally arises: what role does H play in all of this?
Clearly the tea and lemon juice years imply that the Greek Orthodox
hierarchy is cooperating fully, as well as the Patriarch of Jerusalem
Orthodox hierarchy, and the Pope and Vatican hierarchy, just like all they
did during the plandemic. So we must assume they would/are cooperating on H.
I
love the Didache - it is truly the finest Early Church document after Matthew.
And thank-you for
that reference - it's the best writeup of the Didache I've seen.
But because of its beautiful simplicity, it can't see it playing a role in this
affair - it can't be used for anything but primitive Christian simplicity.
(It's in my draft of an Ebionite Canon.) It also came out later (he didn't
notice a work that everyone has been looking for for 1900 years, at first)
so maybe it was a distraction tossed in to take the heat off the Simonides affair.
I can't see Barnabas playing a role either - Simonides turned the Sinaiatic one
into a real embarrassment - and having 2 is two much. It's not a document I like,
nor can see it would be any use - it would be immediately branded as anti-Semitic.
So were left with scrutinizing the Letters of Ignatius of Antioch. What role
could they play? Conveniently, they can say almost anything and not be caught
out because the field is such a mess. And the only relevant question that I can think of
that they would have a bearing on is the Tubingen/F.C. Bauer/Detering question,
as they might buttress a claim to show that Ignatius knew of the Pauline Epistles.
I'm exhausted just writing a summary - I couldn't make this stuff up if I tried!
I'm an amateur - this textual stuff is hard...
I'll follow up
over there.
PS: I don't think 13-month years are only Hebrew - they could also be freemasonic.
Of course, if Loyala was a Marrano, then the lunar year would make sense
