The Diatessaron (Syriac: ܐܘܢܓܠܝܘܢ ܕܡܚܠܛܐ, romanized: Ewangeliyôn Damhalltê; c. 160–175 AD) is the most prominent early gospel harmony, and was created by Tatian, an Assyrian early Christian apologist and ascetic.[1] Tatian sought to combine all the textual material he found in the four gospels—Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John—into a single coherent narrative of Jesus's life and death. However, and in contradistinction to most later gospel harmonists, Tatian appears not to have been motivated by any aspiration to validate the four separate canonical gospel accounts; or to demonstrate that, as they stood, they could each be shown as being without inconsistency or error.
Although widely used by early Syriac Christians, the original text has not survived, but was reconstructed in 1881 by Theodor Zahn from translations and commentaries.[2]
My guess is that the originals are buried within the vatican. Maybe burnt to a crisp by now. They most certainly will not share them, this I know. Not good for bizness.
THEN YOU HAVE NO PROOF DUMBFUCK. Get your head out of your ass.
There is no Syrian Bible from the 1st-2nd century that we have available. Quit making shit up to support your theories and provide some actual proof and sources.
Vaticanus and Sinaiticus came out of Alexandria, Egypt.
Egypt was full of woke Gnostic scholars who edited the original manuscripts like they did the works of Homer, and made many changes, something the book of Revelation commands us not to do.
The reason those documents are the "oldest" is because nobody read them.
The early Church fathers such as Tertullian and Iraneus quoted the Bible in their writings. Those quotes verify the Byzantine type text as authentic.
Edit - u/CoolaAsACucumber can only downvote because he will lose any real debate.
If you don't have a Bible from the 1st-2nd Century AD you cannot compare the differences/similarities of it to one that is made now. Unless early Church fathers quoted the full Biblical text, you cannot know if there were any changes that were in texts that weren't quoted. This is logic that a 5 year old can understand.
Vaticanus and Sinaiticus came out of Alexandria, Egypt.
There is no proof of that, just suggestions because of its similarity to Papyrus 75.
As I have already observed, the Church, having received this preaching and this faith, although scattered throughout the whole world, yet, as if occupying but one house, carefully preserves it. She also believes these points [of doctrine] just as if she had but one soul, and one and the same heart, and she proclaims them, and teaches them, and hands them down, with perfect harmony, as if she possessed only one mouth. For, although the languages of the world are dissimilar, yet the import of the tradition is one and the same. For the Churches which have been planted in Germany do not believe or hand down anything different, nor do those in Spain, nor those in Gaul, nor those in the East, nor those in Egypt, nor those in Libya, nor those which have been established in the central regions of the world. But as the sun, that creature of God, is one and the same throughout the whole world, so also the preaching of the truth shines everywhere, and enlightens all men that are willing to come to a knowledge of the truth. Nor will any one of the rulers in the Churches, however highly gifted he may be in point of eloquence, teach doctrines different from these (for no one is greater than the Master); nor, on the other hand, will he who is deficient in power of expression inflict injury on the tradition. For the faith being ever one and the same, neither does one who is able at great length to discourse regarding it, make any addition to it, nor does one, who can say but little diminish it.
These may have been the earliest written versions of the Bible but they haven't survived :(
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diatessaron
My guess is that the originals are buried within the vatican. Maybe burnt to a crisp by now. They most certainly will not share them, this I know. Not good for bizness.
THEN YOU HAVE NO PROOF DUMBFUCK. Get your head out of your ass.
There is no Syrian Bible from the 1st-2nd century that we have available. Quit making shit up to support your theories and provide some actual proof and sources.
Byzantine type text came from Asia Minor.
Vaticanus and Sinaiticus came out of Alexandria, Egypt.
Egypt was full of woke Gnostic scholars who edited the original manuscripts like they did the works of Homer, and made many changes, something the book of Revelation commands us not to do.
The reason those documents are the "oldest" is because nobody read them.
The early Church fathers such as Tertullian and Iraneus quoted the Bible in their writings. Those quotes verify the Byzantine type text as authentic.
Edit - u/CoolaAsACucumber can only downvote because he will lose any real debate.
If you don't have a Bible from the 1st-2nd Century AD you cannot compare the differences/similarities of it to one that is made now. Unless early Church fathers quoted the full Biblical text, you cannot know if there were any changes that were in texts that weren't quoted. This is logic that a 5 year old can understand.
There is no proof of that, just suggestions because of its similarity to Papyrus 75.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Codex_Vaticanus#Text-type
Please explain, that makes no sense.
Also if you can please show any sources that Egyptians edited the texts of Homer, I'd be interested in that as well.
Against Heresies (Book I, Chapter 10)
https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0103110.htm