Enough scripture quotes in ECF to recompile whole bible?

  • Thread starter Thread starter James924
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
J

James924

Guest
I remember a protestant apologist, maybe Lee Strobel, once countering the claim that the new testament was written hundreds of years after the fact, by pointing out that there were enough quotes of the bible in the early Church fathers’ writings that if we compiled them all we’d have the whole bible (think he mant NT) except for a handful of verses.

Has anyone heard this and if so do you know who says it, and where? Links would be appreciated.
 
I have read this multiple times over the course of my Christian life. It would be hard to prove or disprove, but given the long quotatons I have read in some of the Fathers’ writings, I tend to believe it.
 
Absolutely true! I have 2 different collections of the Fathers as well as Bible commentaries. It’s said that Augustine quoted Scripture around 40,000 times. I can only imagine how much Chrysostom did with all his writings, homilies, and commentaries on Scripture. Theodoret of Cyrus has full commentaries on much of Scripture. St. Bede, Jerome, Cyril of Alexandria, etc etc cover so much of Scripture. Many people have no idea how much the Fathers wrote unless they have studied the Fathers. There are still many of the Fathers writings that have not been translated into English.
 
Someone must have done a study to verify this. I need something citable.
 
James924 said:
I remember a protestant apologist, maybe Lee Strobel, once countering the claim that the new testament was written hundreds of years after the fact, by pointing out that there were enough quotes of the bible in the early Church fathers’ writings that if we compiled them all we’d have the whole bible (think he mant NT) except for a handful of verses.

Has anyone heard this and if so do you know who says it, and where? Links would be appreciated.
Click to expand...
If that alone is the criteria for determining what scripture is for Lee Strobel, then why not add “The book of Enoch”, and the “Assumption of Moses?” Jude quoted from them, and if it wasn’t the book of Enoch, but some other book quoting Enoch, then if that book is found will it be under review for a Protestant Canon? Why is the Protestant Canon closed, or is it?

Lee is working from the presupposition that there are only 27 books of the N.T. He would be hard pressed to come up with the same 27 books from historical data alone!

How would Lee Strobel discern what was Canon from the Early Church Fathers without being forced to return many of the deuterocanonical books?

The Didache quotes Sirach twice [Sir. 1:28] [Sir. 4:31]" (Didache 4:5 [A.D. 70]).

The Letter of Barnabas quotes [Wis. 2:12.] (Letter of Barnabas 6:7 [A.D. 74]).

Clement of Rome quotes [Wis. 12:12]" (Letter to the Corinthians 27:5 [ca. A.D. 80]).

Polycarp of Smyrna quotes [Tob. 4:10, 12:9]. (Letter to the Philadelphians 10 [A.D. 135]).

Irenaeus [Dan. 13:56]. [Bar. 4:36—5:9]" (Against Heresies 4:26:3 [A.D. 189])

Hippolytus The story of Susannah [Dan. 13] (Commentary on Daniel [A.D. 204]

Cyprian of Carthage quotes [Wis. 3:4]. [1 Macc. 2:52; ]" (Treatises 7:3:15 [A.D. 248]).
[Dan. 14:5]" (Letters 55:5 [A.D. 253];

So If Lee Strobel’s intent to rebuild the Canon through the eyes of History, he will be forced to add Deuterocanonical books, Old Testament Apocrapha, Hebrew Pseudepigrapha, Greek Pseudepigrapha, and who known what else Lee would be forced to thrown in there.

Peace and Love in Christ
 
onemangang said:
If that alone is the criteria for determining what scripture is for Lee Strobel, then why not add “The book of Enoch”, and the “Assumption of Moses?” Jude quoted from them, and if it wasn’t the book of Enoch, but some other book quoting Enoch, then if that book is found will it be under review for a Protestant Canon? Why is the Protestant Canon closed, or is it?

Lee is working from the presupposition that there are only 27 books of the N.T. He would be hard pressed to come up with the same 27 books from historical data alone!

How would Lee Strobel discern what was Canon from the Early Church Fathers without being forced to return many of the deuterocanonical books?

The Didache quotes Sirach twice [Sir. 1:28] [Sir. 4:31]" (Didache 4:5 [A.D. 70]).

The Letter of Barnabas quotes [Wis. 2:12.] (Letter of Barnabas 6:7 [A.D. 74]).

Clement of Rome quotes [Wis. 12:12]" (Letter to the Corinthians 27:5 [ca. A.D. 80]).

Polycarp of Smyrna quotes [Tob. 4:10, 12:9]. (Letter to the Philadelphians 10 [A.D. 135]).

Irenaeus [Dan. 13:56]. [Bar. 4:36—5:9]" (Against Heresies 4:26:3 [A.D. 189])

Hippolytus The story of Susannah [Dan. 13] (Commentary on Daniel [A.D. 204]

Cyprian of Carthage quotes [Wis. 3:4]. [1 Macc. 2:52; ]" (Treatises 7:3:15 [A.D. 248]).
[Dan. 14:5]" (Letters 55:5 [A.D. 253];

So If Lee Strobel’s intent to rebuild the Canon through the eyes of History, he will be forced to add Deuterocanonical books, Old Testament Apocrapha, Hebrew Pseudepigrapha, Greek Pseudepigrapha, and who known what else Lee would be forced to thrown in there.

Peace and Love in Christ
Click to expand...
Speaking of presuppositions… 🙂
You’re misunderstanding the argument. Strobel was using that as evidence against the Davinci code type atheist crowd who claimed most of the scriptures had been written many hundreds of years later. There isn’t anything Protestant about the argument. Tim Staples once used a similar one (but with out the specific claim about recreating the whole NT.)
 
James924 said:
Speaking of presuppositions… 🙂
You’re misunderstanding the argument. Strobel was using that as evidence against the Davinci code type atheist crowd who claimed most of the scriptures had been written many hundreds of years later. There isn’t anything Protestant about the argument. Tim Staples once used a similar one (but with out the specific claim about recreating the whole NT.)
Click to expand...
Your right! I was preemptive in my judgement, due to the fact I saw this being discussed weeks back with Lee Strobel with Dr. Lutzer on youtube!

I think it’s great for making the case that the writings were in existence from some very early dates, but Lee Strobel with Dr. Erwin Lutzer also claim that Canon can be discerned apart from the Church councils, by the Early Church Fathers.

I can agree to the prior contention, but not the later!

Here is Lee Strobel with Dr. Lutzer talking about some of this on the link below!

youtu.be/cu-AdrSl3Zo
 
Let me list off the top of my head those books that have been quote by the Fathers such as commentaries.

Genesis- St. Bede, Chyrsostom, St. Ephrem, Theodoret of Cyrus

Exodus- Theodoret of Cyrus, Paterius, Origen

Leviticus- Origen, Theodoret of Cyrus, Paterius

Numbers- Theodoret of Cyrus, Paterius, Origen

Deuteronomy- Theodoret of Cyrus, Origen, Paterius

Joshua- Origen, Theodoret

Judges- Origen, Theodoret

Ruth- Theodoret, St. Isidore

1-2 Samuel- Theodoret, Bede for 1 Sam

1 Kings- Gregory the Great, Bede, Theodoret, St. Ephrem

2 Kings- Bede, Theodoret, St. Ephrem

1-2 Chronicles- Ps. Jerome, Theodoret, Procopius of Gaza

Ezra- Bede

Nehemiah- Bede

Tobit- Bede

Judith- ??

Esther- ??

Job- Gregory. The Great, Chrysostom,

Psalms- many fathers wrote complete commentaries

Proverbs- Chrysostom, Bede,

Eclesiastes- Grevory of Nyssa, Didymus the Blind, Evagrius of Pontus, Gregory Thaumaturgus,

Song of Songs, Origen, Bede, Theodoret, Hippolytus

Wisdom- Rabanus Maurus though he is not a Church Father 800AD

Sirach- Rabanus

Isiaiah- Jerome, Theodoret

Jeremiah- Jerome, Theodoret

Lamantations- Theodoret

Baruch- Theodoret

Ezekiel- Theodoret

Daniel- Jerome, Theoroet

12 Minor Prophets- Theodoret

Matthew- Chrysostom, Bede, Jerome

Mark- Bede, Anonymus author

Luke- Ambrose, Origen, Cyril of Alexandria

John- Chrysostom, Augustine, Cyril

Acts- Bede, Chrysostom, Oecumenius

Pauls Epistles- Ambrosiaster, Theodoret, Chrysostom, Oecumenius

James- Bede, Oecumenius, Hilary of Arles

1-2 Peter- Bede, Oecumenius

1 John- Augustine, Bede

2-3 John- Bede

Jude- Bede, Clement of Alexandria, Oecumneius

Revelation- Andrew of Caesarea, Victorinus, Bede, Oecumenius
 
onemangang said:
Your right! I was preemptive in my judgement, due to the fact I saw this being discussed weeks back with Lee Strobel with Dr. Lutzer on youtube!

I think it’s great for making the case that the writings were in existence from some very early dates, but Lee Strobel with Dr. Erwin Lutzer also claim that Canon can be discerned apart from the Church councils, by the Early Church Fathers.

I can agree to the prior contention, but not the later!

Here is Lee Strobel with Dr. Lutzer talking about some of this on the link below!

youtu.be/cu-AdrSl3Zo
Click to expand...
Ah yes, the old “fallible collection of infallible books”, a classic! Makes my blood boil too.

Thanks for the link. If I ever discover that I’ve accidentally ingested something poisonous I’ll be sure to watch it. 🙂
 
Greeting in the Lord Jesus Christ!

I think the quote that you’re thinking of is found in one (or more) of Josh McDowell’s books. Maybe this one: Evidence for Christianity. I think I have a copy of this book out in my garage, but it’s too stinky out there. I’ll check if you want me to. Ha! Or maybe it’s in this one: The New Evidence that Demands a Verdict. Maybe both! I believe it’s a claim made only about the New Testament. Peter Kirby put this rough sketch together, and this may be exactly what you’re looking for: Compiled Allusions to the NT in the Ante-Nicene Fathers. Thanks, Kirby!

Praise God for the preservation of His Holy Word!

With love in Christ,
Pete

“Truly, all the books of Holy Scripture have been corrupted by the ancient enemies of the Church, but by the providence of God they have remained free and pure in the Church’s hands, as a sacred deposit; and they have never been able to spoil so many copies as that there should not remain enough to restore the others” (Saint Francis de Sales, The Catholic Controversy, p. 101).
 
Thanks for the link, Pete.

And absolutely, if you happen to have an opportunity in the next couple days, shove some roses under your nose and brave that garage for us! 🙂
 
I can’t breathe! 🙂 Ok, the quote can be found on pp. 72-73 of the book I mentioned, Evidence for Christianity:

“ ‘Besides textual evidence derived from New Testament Greek manuscripts and from early versions, the textual critic has available the numerous scriptural quotations included in the commentaries, sermons, and other treatises written by early Church Fathers. 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’ (Metzger, TNT, 86).”

McDowell’s bibliography mentions the 1968 and 1992 editions of Metzger’s book, so I’m not sure which one this comes from with page number 86. If McDowell’s quotation is accurate, it looks like the same basic quote is still found on page 126 of the most recent edition (2005):

“Besides textual evidence derived from New Testament Greek manuscripts and from early versions, the textual critic compares numerous scriptural quotations used in commentaries, sermons, and other treatises written by early church fathers. 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” (as quoted in , pg. 49*Dethroning Jesus: Exposing Popular Culture’s Quest to Unseat the Biblical Christ *).

Have a blessed day, everyone!

In Christ,
Pete
 
There are a lot of scholarly/churchy resources for finding Bible passages in the Fathers. I couldn’t find this helpful list yesterday, but here you go.

“How to Find Patristic Biblical Citations,” by Ben Blackwell. Seriously, there are tons of resources. If you’re lucky enough to have a Catholic (or just thorough) university library or seminary library nearby, many of these resources may be plunked down right next to the patristics stuff for your use, or they may subscribe to one of the many helpful databases, or…

I found this post through Roger Pearse’s blog, which has a lot of helpful patristics links. His tertullian.org site is full of good patristics resources, too, and he recently published a new English translation of a Eusebius book that hadn’t been put into English before. And all that’s just his hobby. A renaissance Englishman, seriously.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top