Re: [textualcriticism] Mark 7:3 and P45
- Here is the precise text of P45 at Mk 7.3, 4 as published in Comfort & Barrett.3εσθειουσιν κρατουντες την] παραδοσιν των πρεσβυτερ[ων 4καιαπ αγορας εαν μη β]α[π]τ[ι]σωνται ουκ εσθειουσιν′ και αλλα π[ολλα εστιν α παρελα]βον κρατειν βαπτισμους ποτηριων κ[αι ξεστων και χαλκιων
gfsomselTherefore, O faithful Christian, search for truth, hear truth,
learn truth, love truth, speak the truth, hold the truth,
defend the truth till death.- Jan Hus
_________----- Original Message ----
From: Steve Puluka <steve@...>
Sent: Friday, November 2, 2007 7:22:05 PM
Subject: Re: [textualcriticism] Mark 7:3 and P45
On Nov 1, 2007, at 4:45 PM, sarban wrote:
> According to the manuals P45 preserves part of Mark 7:3.
> Is it possible to determine whether or not the clause
> "and all the Jews" was included in the text of P45
> Andrew Criddle
According to the transcription in Barrett's "The complete text of the
Earliest NT manuscripts" it does not.
Cantor Holy Ghost Church
Mckees Rocks, PA
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
- AFAIK there is no external evidence whatever to suggest itis not original.However, it was recently suggested on another discussionboard, that on internal evidence it might be a gloss sinceit would seem to correspond more to the situation after70 CE than to that before 70 CE.Andrew Criddle----- Original Message -----From: Eric RoweSent: Friday, November 02, 2007 3:23 PMSubject: [textualcriticism] Re: Mark 7:3 and P45
According to Swanson, P45 has nothing in Mark 7:3 before the word
paradosin. Since the last place in Mark before that that is preserved
in P45 is part of Mark 6:50, I doubt that you could use the space in
between to divine whether "and all the Jews" indeed was present in the
earlier part of 7:3. But why do you ask? This phrase is not in dispute
- The history of hand washing halakha in relation to Mark 7:3 has been
the subject of tons of articles and books already, the fullest of
which that I've seen is Jesus and the Laws of Purity, by Roger Booth,
JSOT, 1986. Scholars aren't all in agreement about the state of hand
washing in pre-70 Judaism. But regardless of pre-70 or post-70 it
seems like the phrase "all the Jews" is not accurate in the strictly
literal sense. I would just read it as hyperbole, just like when Mark
says that "all the Jews" went out to see John the Baptist. I suppose
it is an explanatory gloss, but one Mark made to his source, not one
that a scribe made to Mark. If someone objects that Mark couldn't have
come up with it because it wasn't true in his day, I would say that it
still wasn't true of ALL the Jews at any later time. Since it's
hyperbole it could just as easily have been written before 70 as after.
--- In email@example.com, "sarban" <sarban@...> wrote:
> AFAIK there is no external evidence whatever to suggest it
> is not original.
> However, it was recently suggested on another discussion
> board, that on internal evidence it might be a gloss since
> it would seem to correspond more to the situation after
> 70 CE than to that before 70 CE.
> Andrew Criddle
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Eric Rowe
> To: firstname.lastname@example.org
> Sent: Friday, November 02, 2007 3:23 PM
> Subject: [textualcriticism] Re: Mark 7:3 and P45
> According to Swanson, P45 has nothing in Mark 7:3 before the word
> paradosin. Since the last place in Mark before that that is preserved
> in P45 is part of Mark 6:50, I doubt that you could use the space in
> between to divine whether "and all the Jews" indeed was present in the
> earlier part of 7:3. But why do you ask? This phrase is not in dispute
> is it?