Editing Epistle to the Laodiceans (section)

=== Latin Vulgate Epistle to the Laodiceans ===
A claimed Epistle to the Laodiceans from Paul exists in Latin.  It is quite short at only 20 verses.  It is mentioned by various writers from the fourth century onwards, notably by Pope [[Gregory the Great]]; the oldest known copy of this epistle is in the [[Fulda manuscript]] written for Victor of Capua in 546.  Possibly due to Gregory's endorsement of it, many Western Latin Bibles contained this epistle for centuries afterward.  Pre-modern [[Arabic language|Arabic]] and [[Old Church Slavonic|Slavonic]] translations were created from the Latin text.<ref name="tite2022" />  It also featured in early English Bibles: [[John Wycliffe]] included Paul's letter to the Laodiceans in his Bible translation from the Latin to English.  Medieval German Bibles included it as well, until it was excluded from the [[Luther Bible]] in the 1500s.<ref name="ehrman-deceit" />  However, the epistle is essentially unknown in Eastern Christianity, where it was never used or published; the [[Second Council of Nicea]] of 787 rejected it.<ref name="ehrman-deceit" />  There is no evidence of a Greek text, the language Paul wrote in.  The text was almost unanimously considered [[pseudepigrapha]]l when the [[Development of the Christian biblical canon|Christian Biblical canon]] was decided upon, and does not appear in any Greek copies of the Bible at all, nor is it known in Syriac or other versions. [[Jerome]], who wrote the Latin Vulgate translation, wrote in the 4th century, "it is rejected by everyone".<ref>{{cite wikisource |title=Lives of Illustrious Men |wslink=Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume III/Lives of Illustrious Men/Jerome |author=Jerome |author-link=Jerome  |date=1892 |orig-date=392 |publisher=Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing |location=Grand Rapids, Michigan |chapter=Paul, formerly called Saul }}</ref>

Scholars are unanimous in concurring with Jerome and believing this epistle forged long after Paul's death.  Additionally, the epistle is derided for having no theological content.  It includes Pauline greetings and farewells, but does not appear to have any substantive content: it does not address any problem or advocate for any position.  {{ill|Rudolf Knopf|de}} and {{ill|Gustav Kruger|de|Gustav Krüger (Theologe)}} wrote that the epistle is "nothing other than a worthless patching together of [canonical] Pauline passages and phrases, mainly from the Epistle to the Philippians."<ref name="Schneemelcher">{{cite book |last=Schneemelcher |first=Wilhelm |author-link=Wilhelm Schneemelcher |translator-last1=Wilson |translator-first1=Robert McLachlan |translator-link1=R. McL. Wilson
 |date=1965 |orig-date=1964 |title=New Testament Apocrypha: Volume Two: Writings Relating to the Apostles; Apocalypses and Related Subjects |location=Philadelphia |publisher=Westminster Press |page=128&ndash;131 }}  A 2003 edition can be found [https://books.google.com/books?id=v6IqqnEoN3QC&pg=PA42 here on Google Books], albeit on page 42.</ref>  [[M. R. James]] wrote that "It is not easy to imagine a more feebly constructed [[cento (poetry)|cento]] of Pauline phrases."<ref>{{cite wikisource |title=The Apocryphal New Testament |wslink=The Apocryphal New Testament (1924)/Epistles/The Epistle to the Laodiceans |last=James |first=Montague Rhodes |authorlink=M. R. James |date=1924 |publisher=Clarendon Press |location=Oxford |pages=479 |scan=Page:The_Apocryphal_New_Testament_(1924).djvu/517}}</ref>  [[Wilhelm Schneemelcher]] was "amazed that it ever found a place in Bible manuscripts."<ref name="Schneemelcher"/>  However, it evidently gained a certain degree of respect, having appeared in over 100 surviving early Latin copies of the Bible. According to ''Biblia Sacra iuxta vulgatam versionem'', there are Latin Vulgate manuscripts containing this epistle dating between the 6th and 12th century, including Latin manuscripts F ([[Codex Fuldensis]]), M, Q, B, D ([[Book of Armagh|Ardmachanus]]), C, and Lambda.<ref>''Biblia Sacra Iuxta Vulgatam Versionem'', Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, vierte, verbesserte Auflage, 1994, p. 1976.</ref>

The apocryphal epistle is generally considered a transparent attempt to supply this supposed lost sacred document. Some scholars, such as [[Wolfgang Speyer]], suggest that it was created in response to the Marcionite epistle; it would be easier to reject the Marcionite version if the "real" Epistle to the Laodiceans could be provided to counter it.<ref name="ehrman-deceit" /><ref>{{cite book |last=Speyer |first=Wolfgang |author-link=Wolfgang Speyer |title=Die literarische Fälschung im heidnischen und christlichen Altertum |date=1971 |lang=de |page=229}}  Cited in Ehrman 2012.</ref>

An obvious question is if the Latin epistle and the Marcionite epistle are actually the same document: is it possible that the Muratorian fragment was referring to an early version of the Latin epistle?  While the occasional scholar advocates for this ([[Adolf von Harnack]] for one),<ref name="Schneemelcher" /> most scholars consider this unlikely, because the Latin epistle does not include any Marcionite theology or character.<ref name="elliot-ant">{{cite book |last = Elliott |first = James Keith |title = The Apocryphal New Testament |year = 1993 |publisher = Oxford University Press |isbn = 0-19-826182-9 |page=544 }}</ref>