Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: [Synoptic-L] The structure of the archetype of Mark

Expand Messages
  • Ron Price
    ... Bruce, My conclusions about the scope of interpolations in the NT text were based on the presence or absence of foreign (non-author) interpolations. They
    Message 1 of 13 , Sep 1, 2008
      Bruce Brooks wrote:

      > .....Luke ... has rearranged several pieces between his first stage and
      > his second. Unfortunately, at least as far as my own work has gone, Luke has
      > also partly rewritten some of those moved modules, a conspicuous example
      > being the Nazareth scene (in this case, we can't recover the original by
      > taking out the part that was added when it was moved, and more generally, we
      > can't completely recover Proto-Luke simply by reversing the rearrangements;
      > I mentioned a few cases in my SBL 2007 paper).

      Bruce,

      My conclusions about the scope of interpolations in the NT text were based
      on the presence or absence of foreign (non-author) interpolations. They did
      not include rearrangements. I do not believe the text of Luke has suffered
      rearrangements. Nor do I think it includes any foreign (non-author) text
      other than what can be deduced from manuscript variations, most notably the
      'Western non-interpolations'. However I do posit a first 'edition' of Luke
      which excluded the birth stories. All these conclusions about the text of
      Luke are supported by a page analysis which shows that both the first
      edition and the second edition were almost certainly penned from the
      beginning on codices.

      > ..... What was the "only one exception" of a prescribal
      > interpolation that you recognize beyond the zone of Mark/John/Corinthians?

      First I should clarify that I have here taken the word "interpolation"
      literally, i.e. it refers to insertions and not additions at the end of a
      book. If end additions were to be included I would have to add Romans to the
      list of affected books.

      The one exception is Rev 14:17, which initially came to light essentially
      because my page hypothesis requires the subsection Rev 14:6-20 to be
      shorter than NA27 indicates.

      Just for the record, the interpolation Mk 14:61b-64 initially came to light
      essentially because my page hypothesis requires the subsection Mk 14:53-72
      to be much shorter than NA27 indicates.

      Of course in both cases the rules for interpolation set out previously on
      this thread can be shown to be fully satisfied.

      Ron Price

      Derbyshire, UK

      Web site: http://homepage.virgin.net/ron.price/index.htm
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.