John Lupia wrote:

Your examples are absurd. Perhaps they appear to work
out in English or other modern language tanslations
but in Greek they are ludicrous. I thought your claim
is that you are a Text Critic. For example, the number
four (tessares) only appears in Mk 2:3; 13:27 (bis,
not for times). Four-thousand (tetrakischilioi)is not
four just as tetradion meaning four squadrons or
tetrakosioi meaning four hundred is not "four" as you
claim written in an unaltered way (tetra-,
vs.tessares-, tessera-, and the late tesseres-). So TC
claims are incredible.

John this paragraph you wrote was the cause of my
reaction. I think it has the tone of a personal attack
rather than a scholarly response. The comment on what
I call myself can hardly be understood as impersonal.
I am an avid student of the Texts of the New
Testament; that is my claim nothing more nothing less.
I have established my commitment to learning from
these texts at one of the most prestigious
universities in American by the grace of God. And I
have a right to express the results of my research
within this forum, which is all that I am doing and
all that I intend to do.

With respect to your comments about the root of
tessares; these other uses of the root have caused me
to reconsider Mark's formula, and for that I am
grateful. I had assumed that all the numbers were
relevant to the formula and it appears that four
thousand is not relevant as a control number.


Mark 8:13

Why do you discuss the fact that you have no bread? Do
you not yet perceive or understand? Are your hearts
hardened? 18 Having eyes do you not see, and having
ears do you not hear? And do you not remember? 19 When
I broke the five loaves for the five thousand, how
many baskets full of broken pieces did you take up?"
They said to him, "Twelve." 20 "And the seven for the
four thousand, how many baskets full of broken pieces
did you take up?" And they said to him, "Seven." 21
And he said to them, "Do you not yet understand?"

The word four does not actually appear in the formula
text and it is not a word that directly involves the
loaves or the leftovers; therefore it makes sense that
it would not be a control number for counting. On the
other hand, 5, 7 and 12 all appear here as cardinal
numbers while four does not. There may be a separate
significance to the words that appear four times but I
think you are correct and that it is not part of
Mark's test formula. Technically five thousand is not
either except that it contains the root of five which
does appear in its indeclinable form aa a cardinal
number within the context of the riddle. So then John,
let me say thank you for your challenging insight.

Respectfully

Rick Richmond




Rick Richmond rickr2889@...



____________________________________________________
Sell on Yahoo! Auctions – no fees. Bid on great items.
http://auctions.yahoo.com/

Synoptic-L Homepage: http://www.bham.ac.uk/theology/synoptic-l
List Owner: Synoptic-L-Owner@...