Mon Apr 8 03:15:52 1996

From majordom  Mon Apr  8 03:15:52 1996
Return-Path: 
Received: by scholar.cc.emory.edu (5.0/SMI-SVR4)
	id AA09681; Mon, 8 Apr 1996 03:15:52 +0500
Message-Id: <31684E81.E77@ucr.campus.mci.net>
Date: Sun, 07 Apr 1996 23:23:45 +0000
From: Don Wilkins 
Organization: UC Riverside
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.0 (Macintosh; I; 68K)
Mime-Version: 1.0
To: tc-list@scholar.cc.emory.edu
Subject: Re: The long ending of Mark
References: 
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Length: 755
Sender: owner-tc-list@scholar.cc.emory.edu
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: tc-list@scholar.cc.emory.edu

Maurice Robinson wrote:
> 
> On Sat, 6 Apr 1996, Don Wilkins wrote to Carlton Winbery:
> 
> > Carlton, I am very weary of the so-called "assured result" of Marcan
> > priority, so it's refreshing to see such a remark as this. Two
> > questions: do you agree with this conflation theory (I infer that you
> > do), and are there many other textual critics that would agree with
> > it? My guess would be no, but I would love to hear otherwise.
> 
> Like the early fathers, I happen to hold to Matthean priority, but this
> does not mean that I consider Mark a mere conflation or abridgment of Matt
> and Lk.

This is very interesting. I would be grateful if you would explain 
your view of Mark, as briefly (or fully) as you like.

Don Wilkins
UC Riverside

Back