Sun Nov 3 14:01:51 1996

From owner-tc-list  Sun Nov  3 14:01:51 1996
Return-Path: 
Received: by scholar.cc.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4)
	id OAA25541; Sun, 3 Nov 1996 14:00:55 -0500
Date: Sun, 3 Nov 1996 13:57:07 -0500 (EST)
From: Maurice Robinson 
To: tc-list@scholar.cc.emory.edu
Subject: Re: Uncials & majuscules et al.
In-Reply-To: <961103031734_344689006@emout02.mail.aol.com>
Message-ID: 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-tc-list@scholar.cc.emory.edu
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: tc-list@scholar.cc.emory.edu
content-length: 2025



On Sun, 3 Nov 1996 REElliott@aol.com wrote:

[re: the Ending of Mark]

> as Mark 16) then the versional MSS et al can only be secondary and tertiary
> at best, they cannot supersede the primary Greek.  As much as I would love to
> have mountains of Greek evidence for the long ending of Mark, I have to
> follow these rules to be true to the discipline.  

I of course tend to agree with Elliott here, and consider the versional
and patristic evidence secondary and tertiary, but still an essential
component part of the question regarding the transmissional history of the
various endings of Mark.  However, I am uncertain as to the intent of the
final sentence, since we _do_ have in the Greek MSS, one of the old Syriac
versions, and patristic comment the "mountains of evidence" for the Long
Ending of Mark.  It seems the shortchanging is more in regard to the
"shorter ending" of Mark and also in regard to the omission of the
passage entirely.  I have a theory in regard to the shorter ending, but I
will have to write it up in a more extended form before I loose it upon
the world. *;-)

> Therefore I must disagree with the ending statement that DC made saying that
> the Greek MSS give a misleading history of the text.  What is misleading is
> attempting to build a theory on secondary and tertiary MSS.  

Elliott's comment here also reflects my own viewpoint of the matter. I do
not deprecate the secondary and tertiary evidence, but recognize it within
its proper bounds as evidence primarily concerning transmissional history,
and not regarding original authenticity of the text.

> Perhaps there
> are still some more Greek MSS to be found regarding this variant, who knows?

I would not hold my breath. *;-)

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

Back