Chapter XXIV: Appendix: VIII. New Editions of the Peshitto-Syriac and the (3)

600 “Scriptum est in evangelio quodam quod dicitur secundum Hebraeos,...
_Dixit ei alter divitum:_ Magister quid boni faciens vivam?”—(Orig.
Vet. Interp. iii. 670.) I suppose the mention of εἶς προσελθών, in
ver. 16, suggested this.

601 The Marcionite Gospel exhibited Μή με λέγετε ἀγαθόν (Hippol. Phil.
254; Epiph. i. 315 c).—Comp. the Clement. Hom. (_ap._ Galland. ii.
752 b, 759 a d).

602 Hammond, quoted approvingly by Scrivener,—I. 328 (cd. 4).

603 C. R. Gregory’s Prolegomena, p. 7.

604 Printed Text, pp. 133-8.

605 Introduction (1883),—pp. 573-6. [Also Vol. II. (1894), pp. 327-9. I
did not as Editor think myself entitled to alter Dr. Scrivener’s
expressed opinion. E. M.]

606 It is right to state that Tischendorf thought differently. “Videtur
illud huic quidem loco parum apte illatum.” He can only bring
himself to admit that the text had been “jam Irenaei tempore nobili
additamento auctum.” He insists that it is absurd, as well as at
variance with the entire history of the sacred text, to suppose that
the title “SON OF GOD” has here been removed by unscrupulous
Unbelief, rather than thrust in by officious Piety.

607 v. 10; vii. 17; and in the Vulgate. Twice however (viz. i. 311 and
vi. 969) Jerome _omits_ the clause.

608 In Joan. iv. 15, 16.—See also contra Cels. i. 389 d e f, where
Origen says the same thing more briefly. The other places are iv.
125 and 464.

609 Οὔτε ἐπιστήμην τοῦ εὐαγγελίου ἔχουσι, τὴν τῶν εὐαγγελίων ἀρχὴν μὴ
παραλαβόντες; ἀρχὴ τοῦ εὐαγγελίου Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ. καθὼς γέγραπται ἐν
Ἠσαΐα τῷ προφήτῃ. _adv._ Manichaeos (_ap._ Galland. v. 61).

_ 610 ap._ Galland. v. 329.

611 i. 250.

_ 612 ap._ Galland. iv. 55.

613 p. 42.

614 A.D. 400. De Sigill. _ap._ Chrys. xii. 412:—ὁ μακάριος Μάρκος,
καθεὶς ἑαυτὸν εἶς τὸ εὐαγγέλιον, καὶ θαρσήσας τοῖς
προγεγυμνασμένοις, λέγει μὲν “υἱὸν Θεοῦ,” ἀλλ᾽ εὐθέως συνέστειλε τὸν
λόγον, καὶ ἐκολόβωσε τὴν ἔννοιαν, ἵνα μαλάξῃ τὸν ἀκροατήν. ἐπάγει
οὖν εὐθέως τὰ κατὰ τὸν Βαπτιστήν, λέγων, “ἀρχὴ τοῦ εὐαγγελίου Ἰησοῦ
Χριστοῦ, καθὼς γέγραπται ἐν Ἠσαίᾳ τῷ προφήτῃ ἰδου” κ.τ.λ. ἔδειξε τὴν
λαμπάδα τῆς ἀληθείας, καὶ εὐθέας ἀπέκρυψε.

615 i. 427:—ἀρχὴ τοῦ εὐαγγελίου ... ὡς γέγραπται ἐν Ἠσαΐᾳ τῷ προφήτῃ ...
φωνὴ βοῶντος ἐν τῇ ἐρήμῳ.

616 i. 506 (lib. iii. cap. xvi).

617 i. 461 (lib. iii. cap. x).

618 Midway between the two places cited above, Irenaeus shews how the
four Gospels may be severally identified with the four living
creatures described in the Apocalypse. He sees the lion in St. John,
who says: “_In the beginning was the Word: and ... all things were
made by him: and without him was not anything made:_” the flying
eagle in St. Mark, because he begins his gospel with an appeal to
“the prophetic spirit which comes down upon men from on high;
saying, ‘_The beginning of the Gospel ... as it is written in the
prophets._’ Hence the Evangelists’ concise and elliptical manner,
which is a characteristic of prophecy” (lib. iii. cap. xi. § 8, p.
470). Such quotations as these (18 words being omitted in one case,
5 in the other) do not help us. I derive the above notice from the
scholium in Evan. 238 (Matthaei’s e,—N. T. ii. 21); Curzon’s “73.
8.”

The lost Greek of the passage in Irenaeus was first supplied by
Grabe from a MS. of the Quaestiones of Anastasius Sinaita, in the
Bodleian (Barocc. 206, fol. πβ). It is the solution of the 144th
Quaestio. But it is to be found in many other places besides. In
Evan. 238, by the way, twelve more of the lost words of Irenaeus are
found: viz. Οὔτε πλείονα τὸν ἀριθμόν, οὔτε ἀλάττονα ἀνδέχεται εἶναι
τὰ εὐαγγέλια; ἐπεὶ γὰρ ... Germanus also (A.D. 715, ap. Gall. xiii.
215) quoting the place, confirms the reading ἐν τοῖς
προφήταις,—which must obviously have stood in the original.

619 Note, that he actually reads “The beginning of the Gospel of the Son
of God,”—omitting the words “JESUS CHRIST”: not, of course, as
disallowing them, but in order the more effectually to emphasize the
Divine Sonship of MESSIAH.

620 Ἐγώ φησι (_sc._ ὁ Μάρκος) τὴν ἀρχὴν τοῦ Εὐαγγελίου ἀπὸ Ἰωάννου
ποιήσομαι; Εὐαγγελίου δὲ τοῦ υἱοῦ Θεοῦ, οὕτω γὰρ ἐν τοῖς προφήταις
γέγραπται, ὅτι υἱός ἐστι Θεοῦ.... δύνασαι δὲ τό, ὡς γέγραπται ἐν
τοῖς προφήταις, συνάψαι τῷ, ἰδοὺ ἐγὼ ἀποστέλλω τὸν ἄγγελόν μου; ἵνα
τὴν ἀρχὴν ποιήσομαι τοῦ Εὐαγγελίου τοῦ υἱοῦ Θεοῦ τὸ τοῖς προφήταις
περὶ Ἰωάννου εἰρημένον. This is the first scholium in the Catena as
edited by Possinus,—p. 6. What follows is a well-known scholium of
the same Catena, (the first in Cramer’s ed.), which C. F. Matthaei
(N. T. ii. 20) prints from six of his MSS.:—Ἰωάννην οὖν τὸν
τελευταῖον τῶν προφητῶν ἀρχὴν εἶναι τοῦ Εὐαγγελίου φησὶν ὁ Μάρκος,
ἐπιφέρων “ὡς γέγραπται ἐν τοῖς προφήταις; Ἰδοὺ κ.τ.λ.”

_ 621 Ap._ Hieron. vii. 17.

622 vi. 330 _diserte_.

623 ii. 413.

624 A.D. 890. De objectionibus Manichaeorum, _ap._ Galland. xiii. 667.

625 i. 1529 d.

626 Cons. 39.

627 E2 of the Acts and Cath. Epp. (Laudianus) in the Bodleian Library at
Oxford, of the sixth century.

628 This observation is due to Dr. Salmon; see the Note appended to
Lecture IX of his Historical Introduction to the New Testament (5th
edition, p. 147).

629 This fact was first pointed out by Dr. Gwynn in a memorandum
communicated by him to Dr. Scrivener, who inserted it in his Plain
Introduction to the Criticism of the New Testament (3rd edition, p.
xii; cp. 4th edition, vol. I, p. 94), and I am indebted to the same
source for this admirable amplification of part of that memorandum.

630 A sufficient facsimile of the page in question (29 _r__o_) is given
by Dean Burgon in his Last Twelve Verses, reproduced from a
photograph.

631 On the contrary, in Tatian’s Diatessaron γυναικί is left out and
μεμνηστευμένη is translated. For the Curetonian, see above, p. 295.