On this page
-
Text (1)
-
Untitled Article
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.
-
-
Transcript
-
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.
Additionally, when viewing full transcripts, extracted text may not be in the same order as the original document.
Untitled Article
cordiag to Luke , takes its origin , has produced 1 . The Gospel of Mareioa . 2 . Tatiafc ' s Diatessaron ( according to another account ) . The root from which both branches originate ( or , in other words , the
common source of all the Gospels which have perished ) was a very ancient summary of the life of Jesus , an archi-original Gospel ( Urevangelium ) . II . Of the three first Catholic Gospels in general .
1 . Of the Archi-original Gospel , ( Urevangelium , ) or such passages as are to be found in all the three Gospels —In these passages the Evangelists did not make use of each other—but all availed themselves of one common
source—which contained all the pr incipal transactions of the life of Jesus , in a well-connected narrative , the first part of which , however , was not drawn up in strict chronological order , on which account it is altered in the
Gospel according to Matthew- —it was , moreover , originally written in the Aramaean dialect—and was ^ in the sequel recomposetl with additions , by different hands . —These augmented editions were variously translated into Greek , founded on the basis of a Greek
version of the original Gospel , common to all . —Attempts to analyse the three Gospels , with a view to restore the archi-original Gospel ( Urevanffelium ) . 2 . Of Additions to the Archi-original Gospel , ( Urevangelium , ) consisting of passages to be found in two of the Gospels only , or even in one alone—such are
1 . Passages contained only in the Gospels according to Matthew and Mam—these have been adopted by both from the same scriptural source — -which was not one of the Gospels themselves , but a narrative independent and distinct from either—drawn up in
the Aramaean dialect , and translated by different writers—who in the progress of their work availed themselves of a certain Greek document open to all—these passages were , moreover , written and augmented by various
persons . 2 . Passages which are only to be traced in the Gospels of Mark and Luke—these were gathered from some common scriptural source—composed in the Aramaean dialect—with addi-
Untitled Article
tions peculiar to each Evangelistwho made use of a Greek translation founded , however , on no document accessible to both . Origin of the Gospel according to Mark .
3 . Passages common to Matthew and Luke only- —these were admitted into the Gospels of both , from written sources , wholly independent of each other—in two distinct narratives and equally distinct Greek translations from the Aramaean dialect , but with one and the same Greek scriptural record for their common basis .
Origin of the catholic Gospels according to Matthew and Luke . Fresh confirmation of the origin of these Gospels , as deduced from the above—on the supposition that the Greek Gospel according to Mark was the scriptural narrative used in drawing up these translations .
4 . Passages peculiar to each individual evangelist—general view of the manner in which the catholic Gospels have been compiled from the sources above described . Of other Hypotheses regarding the Origin of the Gospels . 1 . Mark did not borrow from
Matthew or Luke . 2 . Matthew and Luke did not borrow from Mark . 3 . The three Evangelists did not borrow from the Gospel of the Hebrews—or from any traditional Gospel !—neither did Mark and Luke borrow
from a Greek edition of Matthew . — Objections to the grounds hitherto adduced in favour of the sources from whence the catholic Gospels took their rise—advantages likely to result from
discovering the true source of the Gospels . III . Of each of the three first Gospels , namely , of Matthew , Mark and Luke , in particular .
1 . Of Matthew , —Accounts extant respecting him—and his Gospel—to what extent he may be considered the author of the Gospel under his name —a . such passages must not be ascribed to Matthew as are to be found in his
Gospel alone—b . nor even a portion of those passages which he possesses in common , partly with Luke and partly with Mark—e . but of those alone is he to be deemed the author , which his Gospel has in common with both the Gospels of Luke and Mark . —
Untitled Article
202 Summary of Eiehhorrfs Introduction t # the New Testament .
-
-
Citation
-
Monthly Repository (1806-1838) and Unitarian Chronicle (1832-1833), April 2, 1821, page 202, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse.ac.uk/periodicals/mruc/issues/vm2-ncseproduct2499/page/10/
-