[vladimir998]

You wrote:

“You can bluster all you want but there is no proof whatsoever the “originals” ever existed.”

There then is also no evidence whatsoever that the NT gospel “originals” ever existed either. All we have are copies of copies of copies.

“The copies which do exist, both the “long recension” and the “short recension” were made hundreds of years after the death of Ignatius.”

Again, much like the gospel books we have - at least as agreed on by most scholars.

“You have nothing going,except wishful thinking, for your claims.”

No, actually I have history, archeology and the Church to bolster the truth. You have the claims. We have Christianity in its fullness.

[OLD REGGIE]

There then is also no evidence whatsoever that the NT gospel “originals” ever existed either. All we have are copies of copies of copies.

You have an Ecumenical Council which established the authenticity of the Bible. What Council ruled on the letters of Ignatius?

Again, much like the gospel books we have - at least as agreed on by most scholars.

Not true, but even if it were, what Council or Pope acting Ex Cathedra made this "infallible" judgement?

No, actually I have history, archeology and the Church to bolster the truth. You have the claims. We have Christianity in its fullness.

You do not have the Church. The "Church" has not acted upon the veracity of the letters.

You have wishful thinking and imagination, nothing else.