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

Re: tc-list Re:Mark 16:9-20

Expand Messages
  • Prof. Ron Minton
    ... As I see it we should not normally take the age difference in competing manuscripts as that important unless there are several centuries between the
    Message 1 of 5 , Oct 23, 1998
      On Thu, 22 Oct 1998, Robert B. Waltz wrote:
      >... I would state that the external evidence against the passage is
      > pretty strong. Note:
      >
      > It is omitted by:
      > * The earliest Alexandrian witnesses: Aleph B sa-ms
      > * The earliest "Western" witnesses: (a defective but does not have space)
      > k sin
      > * The earliest "Caesarean" witnesses: arm-mss geo1 geoA
      > Alternate endings are found in:
      > * Many late Alexandrian witnesses: L Psi 579 sa-mss bo-mss pc
      > Some sort of expression of doubt are found in:
      > * certain "Caesarean" witnesses: f1 pc
      > Frankly, to me that adds up to an addition. If the internal evidence
      > happens to agree, wonderful. :-)


      As I see it we should not normally take the age difference in competing
      manuscripts as that important unless there are several centuries between
      the representatives. In this case there is not.

      As I see it we should not normally take the quantitative difference in
      competing manuscripts as that important unless there are enormous
      differences between the representatives. In this case there is. 1800 to
      3 is significant even to those of us who despise mere "nose counting."

      Professor Ron Minton
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.