Mere Islam

Friday, February 01, 2008

Is the New Testament Preserved in the Writings of the Early Church Fathers?

There's a widespread misconception amongst Christians that, in spite of the relative dearth of early manuscript evidence, the text of the New Testament can be almost completely constructed from quotations found in the writings of the Early Church Fathers (i.e. Clement of Alexandria, Origen, Justin Martyr, Tertullian, Irenaeus, Ignatius of Antioch, Polycarp, Eusebius et al). Indeed, a quick Googling using "new testament quotations writings early church fathers" as key words provides a whole host of sites ([1][2][3][4][5][6]) which make this rather vacuous claim. However, the following article from the Islamic-Awareness.org site makes it patently clear that this is not the case:
Sir David Dalrymple (Lord Hailes),
The Patristic Citations Of The Ante-Nicene Church Fathers
And The Search For Eleven Missing Verses Of The New Testament
by 'Abdullah David & M S M Saifullah
Keep in mind that the authors, seemingly for the sake of brevity, actually tread rather easily on this topic. They explain why in saying this: "It must be noted that it is not our aim to show whether or not Dalrymple was correct in his assessment that a particular verse was cited/alluded by a Church Father. The enormous project of verifying whether a Church Father actually cited/alluded to a verse in the New Testament is still being undertaken today. Modern studies on the issue of Patristic citations of the New Testament, specifically those of the apostolic fathers, will be briefly discussed in the next section."

Indeed, a critical stance in regards to the questions of authenticity which plague the manuscripts of the writings of the Early Church Fathers, documents whose authenticity Sir David Dalrymple seems to have just taken for granted, and whether they themselves suffered pious manipulation over the centuries is certainly called for. Maybe the team at Islamic-Awareness.org will provide us more details on that at a later date...wa Allahu 'alim. As it stands right now, the New Testament does not constitute sound enough evidence to justify one abandoning pure Abrahamic monotheism for un-Semitic and Greek-influenced Trinitarianism...as if even a soundly preserved and authentic text would ever justify that!

Deen on...

Labels: ,

4 Comments:

At 2/14/2008 01:13:00 PM, Blogger Jennifer said...

"As it stands right now, the New Testament does not constitute sound enough evidence to justify one abandoning pure Abrahamic monotheism for un-Semitic and Greek-influenced Trinitarianism..."

So true. Have you ever read "Beyond Mere Christianity"? It rather soundly proves that Jesus preached Islam!

 
At 2/16/2008 11:15:00 AM, Blogger Mere Muslim said...

As-salamu 'alaykum,

Not only have I not read it, but I hadn't even heard of it until you mentioned it. I did some searching and was able to find not only Beyond Mere Christianity - C.S. Lewis & the Betrayal of Christianity on Amazon.com, but the IslamBasics.com website as well. The latter is the website of Brandon Toropov, the author of Beyond Mere Christianity, and it contains information of the book...and you can actually download the entire book from there.

Thanks!

 
At 5/13/2008 08:50:00 AM, Blogger E said...

Interesting, you assert that-
'There's a widespread misconception amongst Christians that... the text of the New Testament can be almost completely constructed from quotations found in the writings of the Early Church Fathers.'

I was wondering what evidence you have for this 'widespread misconception'?

 
At 5/13/2008 09:59:00 AM, Blogger Mere Muslim said...

Well if you'd actually read the article that was at the heart of this posting (i.e. Sir David Dalrymple (Lord Hailes), The Patristic Citations Of The Ante-Nicene Church Fathers And The Search For Eleven Missing Verses Of The New Testament), it would be rather tough to miss the first two (rather lengthy) footnotes which are embedded in the following statement: "...these claims are present in a wide selection of contemporary Christian apologetical literature,[1] even finding pride of place in modern manuals of textual criticism, although in a somewhat less dramatic tempered format.[2]" These references provide more than enough evidence to demonstrate that this is a "widespread misconception", since if an argument is in widespread use amongst Christian scholars and apologists, then it's most probably even more widely believed amongst your average pew-warmers.

Indeed, there's no doubt that well-known Christian apologists such as Josh McDowell and John Ankerberg use this argument. Even the well-known and respected Biblical scholar Bruce M. Metzger, under the heading Patristic Quotations from the New Testament, makes the following (demonstrably false) claim on page 86 of his renowned The Text of the New Testament: Its Transmission, Corruption, and Restoration writes: "Indeed, so extensive are these citations that if all other sources for our knowledge of the text of the New Testament were destroyed, they would be sufficient alone for the reconstruction of practically the entire New Testament."

If you want even more evidence, do a Google search using "patristic quotations" and see what you come up with. Here are a few links [(1)(2)(3)(4)(5)] just to get you started...

Enjoy...

 

Post a Comment

<< Home

 

W A R N I N G:  ESCHATOLOGY CAN BREAK OUT AT ANY MOMENT

 


Shukr Islamic Clothing