From
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jb21kYW ... Patristica
From 0.47, Mark Bilby:
"One of the things that our team has been working on, for a few years really, is, when restoring Marcion's gospel, how do we deal with different kinds of material(?) So, we have the Church Fathers in some cases that clearly attest to material: where we would say it's 'attested as present.' And you can restore from there using comparisons and all these sorts of things.
"And then we have material that's 'attested as absent.' Which is very important too, as a category. Because once you mine that data you start to see patterns that are very distinctive from the present material.
"But then we have this third category, or bucket or label, of 'unattested.'
"And that's something that scholars really haven't known what to do with.
"I think in a lot of ways it's been a grey area, and our team is really trying to apply data science methods for the first time to sort through this grey material and figure out what is present and what is not present.
"We've heard other scholars that work on Marcion kind of throw shade our direction and say, 'we don't really believe that there's any such thing as unattested material,' and that's just a false statement or just lacking nuance or sophistication."
.
A little later, in Bilby's opening spiel:"... what is taken to be unattested is actually attested: just in phrases in other places ... it's a much more sophisticated process, really, of identification of 'vocal' signals and then decontamination of canonical signals ..."
From 3.35, Markus Vinzent:
"... last time we had a very critical question in the comments, and I thought that was very important, as a critical question ... people were asking and saying, 'well, are we not overstating our case?'
"... how can we make up any text if we haven't got a manuscript? If we have only the church fathers and we have only church fathers who are the opponents of Marcion."
.
From 6.38:."... we can search through these Church Fathers and we can distinguish between what they do attest and what they don't ..."
From 7.15:.
."... we can also trust the church fathers with regards to saying they have read a text which they credit to Marcion; both with regards the gospel and the ten letters of Paul. They don't credit both texts to anybody else ... they are unanimous in saying that these texts that are credited to Marcion only deviate in certain aspects from the canonical text. ... what they are doing is they are showing that we can compare the text that they read, as they have done: namely, they have compared these texts to canonical texts. So, the canonical text is the point of reference ..."
"... it's the logic in Tertullian and it's the logic in Epiphanius that the first witness for Marcion's texts are the canonical texts ... both think from the perspective of Marcion being the baseline and the canonical text being the reference, as if all manuscripts of the canonical texts are witnessing Marcion's text but in a different form ..."
.
From 9.28, Bilby:
"I think it's also important here to note the history of scholarship here.
"Even the most minimalist scholars, like [...] or Roth or Harnack, who only restore about 4,000 words, for instance, for the Evangelion: they would not dispute at all that Marcion's text correlates significantly to the canonical text: that it is a text that we can know at least something about ..."
.
Statistics: Posted by MrMacSon — Mon Sep 16, 2024 8:33 pm
