Mon Apr 8 11:14:29 1996

From majordom  Mon Apr  8 11:14:29 1996
Return-Path: 
Received: by scholar.cc.emory.edu (5.0/SMI-SVR4)
	id AA10748; Mon, 8 Apr 1996 11:14:29 +0500
Date: Mon, 8 Apr 1996 11:11:37 -0400 (EDT)
From: Maurice Robinson 
To: tc-list@scholar.cc.emory.edu
Subject: Re: The long ending of Mark
In-Reply-To: <31684E81.E77@ucr.campus.mci.net>
Message-Id: 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Length: 959
Sender: owner-tc-list@scholar.cc.emory.edu
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: tc-list@scholar.cc.emory.edu



On Sun, 7 Apr 1996, Don Wilkins wrote:

> Maurice Robinson wrote:

> > 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.

This is not pertinent to textual criticism, but briefly, I accept the
early tradition of Mark as Peter's interpreter, and that we basically find
in Mark a reflection of Petrine preaching, probably written from Rome. 
(Once Matthean priority is granted, the Q hypothesis is generally
abandoned). 

_________________________________________________________________________
Maurice A. Robinson, Ph.D.           Assoc. Prof./Greek and New Testament
Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary     Wake Forest, North Carolina
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Back