I asked you to find some Bible verses quoted by the early Church fathers, and compare them with the different Bible versions and come to your own conclusions.

Instead of doing that, you found a quote you think proves there's nothing wrong with Alexandrian manuscripts.

[Philip declared] that this was Jesus, and that the Scripture was fulfilled in Him; as did also the believing eunuch himself: and, immediately requesting to be baptized, he said,“I believe Jesus Christ to be the Son of God.” This man was also sent into the regions of Ethiopia, to preach what he had himself believed, that there was one God preached by the prophets, but that the Son of this [God] had already made [His] appearance in human nature (secundum hominem), and had been led as a sheep to the slaughter; and all the other statements which the prophets made regarding Him.

Why is Acts 8:37 missing from Codex Vaticanus?

If you can explain why Irenaeus quoted the verse that supposedly didn't exist in the "earliest" manuscripts, I'm all ears.

After all, the verse "I believe Jesus Christ to be the Son of God" is a very damaging statement to Gnostics.

I asked you to find some Bible verses quoted by the early Church fathers, and compare them with the different Bible versions and come to your own conclusions.

Instead of doing that, you found a quote you think proves there's nothing wrong with Alexandrian manuscripts.

[Philip declared] that this was Jesus, and that the Scripture was fulfilled in Him; as did also the believing eunuch himself: and, immediately requesting to be baptized, he said,“I believe Jesus Christ to be the Son of God.” This man was also sent into the regions of Ethiopia, to preach what he had himself believed, that there was one God preached by the prophets, but that the Son of this [God] had already made [His] appearance in human nature (secundum hominem), and had been led as a sheep to the slaughter; and all the other statements which the prophets made regarding Him.

Why is Acts 8:37 missing from Codex Vaticanus?

If you can explain why Irenaeus quoted the verse that supposedly didn't exist in the "earliest" manuscripts, I'm all ears.

I asked you to find some Bible verses quoted by the early Church fathers, and compare them with the different Bible versions and come to your own conclusions.

Instead of doing that, you found a quote you think proves there's nothing wrong with Alexandrian manuscripts.