chapter five
the Diatessaronic version of the story and the separate Syriac gospels. The
fact that Origen’s passage follows Matthew by saying “Master,what good
must I do.. .” also indicates this familiarity. The phrase cannot be found
in the Diatessaronic witnesses with which Origen’s passage agrees, but it
is in the Old Syriac translations (see above).
...Summary and Conclusions
of the Text- and Source Critical Analysis
. Origen’s passage contains several expressions that are typical of
both the editor of Matthew’s gospel and the editor of Luke’s gospel.
Therefore, it clearly represents a tradition that depends on the
canonical gospels of Matthew and Luke.
. Origen’s passage is closely connected to the Syriac gospel tradition
as it is illustrated in the Old Syriac gospels and (other) Diatessaronic
witnesses.
. The passage in Origen’s commentary is based on a text that has had
thesamesequenceofpassagesastheDiatessaron.Thethematicand
terminological connections between theDiatessaronand Origen’s
passage are not restricted only to the passage about the rich man.
They are also to be found in the stories thatsurroundedthe story
about the rich man in theDiatessaron.
. Despite the common sequence of passages and similar phrases, the
the Rich Man’s Question in Origen’s passage is clearly different from
the one in theDiatessaron. It makes a different point and nothing
that is peculiar to Origen’s story (e.g., the rich man scratching his
head) can be found in theDiatessaron.
. Origen’s passage clearly shares some features with the Lawyer’s
Question in the Gospel of Luke. However, in theDiatessaron,the
Rich Man’s Question was not fused together with the Lawyer’s
Question to the same extent as in Origen’s passage.
. Origen’s passage also shares features with the Old Syriac translation
of Matthew’s gospel—in contrast to theDiatessaron’s reading. Fur-
thermore, the wording of the Lawyer’s Question in Origen’s passage
is closer to the Old Syriac translations than theDiatessaron.These facts allow the following conclusions:
. The Latin passage in Origen’s commentary must be based on an
earlier Syriac version.
. Origen’s passage cannot be linked with Syriac gospel tradition only
through theDiatessaronor only through the Old Syriac translations.
It is connected to both of them.