chapter five
Origen’s passage was composed without trying to decide which expres-
sions were in the originalDiatessaron.
In the following, the agreement with theOld Syriac translations^24 is
indicated withboldand agreement withDiatessaronic witnesses with
double underlining.^25 Italicsindicate a variant readingnot present in the
“original” synoptics.Otherwitnessesforthevariantscanbefoundin
standard text critical editions.^26
At this juncture, the analysis will concentrate solely on the parts that
have a synoptic parallel, leaving out the middle section that is peculiar
to Origen’s story. The middle section is influenced by the context of the
Diatessaronand it will be discussed later in this chapter.
Dixit,inquit,ad eumalter divitum:“magister, quid bonumfaciensvivam?
dixit ei: “homo, legem et prophetas fac.”responditad eum:“feci.” dixit ei:
“vade,vendeomnia quae possides etdividepauperibus et veni sequere
me.”
coepitautemdivesscalperecaputsuumetnonplacuitei.etdixitadeum
dominus: “quomodo dicis: feci legem et prophetas? quoniam scriptum est
in lege: diliges proximum tuum sicut te ipsum, et ecce multi fratres tui filii
Abrahae amicti sunt stercore, morientes prae fame, et domus tua plena est
multis bonis, et non egreditur omnino aliquid ex ea ad eos.” et conversus
dixit Simoni discipulo suo sedenti apud se:
“Simon, fili Ionae,facilius est camelumintrareper foramen acus quam
divitem inregnum coelorum.”Dixit...adeum.Matthew,MarkandLukeallhavethisreadinginSys,c,p.
As was noted earlier the expression “say” instead of “ask” was originally
Matthew’s contribution and not present in Mark and Luke.
alter divitum. In the Liège Harmony and in the Arabic version of the
Diatessaron, there is a sequence of three stories about rich men: ) the
Parable of the Rich Fool (Luke :–), ) The Rich Young Man (Mark
:–; Matthew :–; Luke :–), ) The Parable of the
Rich Man and Lazarus with the introductory note about the Pharisees’
love of wealth (Luke :–, –).^27 Since the Liège Harmony and
(^24) A useful tool for comparison is Kiraz . The standard edition for Syrus Sinaiticus
is Lewis .
(^25) In addition to Klijn’s listing of the Diatessaronic witnesses, in Klijn , –
(see esp. fn. –), I have consulted the following editions and translations: Hogg ;
Leloir ; Pierre .
(^26) However, note that the th edition of Nestle–Aland,Novum Testamentum Graece,
does not give all the pertinent variants for the present passage. In addition, I have used
the synopsis of Huck & Greeven .
(^27) See, Klijn , ; Petersen , –. Petersen provides a helpful summary