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

[textualcriticism] early and late evidences for the Markan resurrection account of Jesus

Expand Messages
  • schmuel
    Hi Folks, George Somsel to James Snapp, You continue to pile one LATE witness to acceptance of the LE of Mark upon another LATE witness. It would seem to be a
    Message 1 of 1 , Oct 30, 2011
      Hi Folks,

      George Somsel to James Snapp,
      You continue to pile one LATE witness to acceptance of the LE of Mark upon another LATE witness.  It would seem to be a logical conclusion that if such support for a LE of Mark only appears at a LATE time that it is present at a LATE time for a reason, viz because it was at a LATE time that certain elements were lobbying for acceptance of the LE.  This is in contrast to a total silence regarding the LE at an earlier time. 

      This is a bit puzzling.

      Could you first simply explain what is the EARLY or NON-LATE period ? 
      Starting and ending years.

      Start... _________
      Ending _________

      As a simple example .. are the Old Latin manuscripts LATE due to the date of, (e.g after 400 AD) ... or EARLY due to the text they represent ?

      Are references from Ante-Nicene authors EARLY, LATE, or some other category ?

      =============================

      Also, do you have a vector of transmission analysis of how an installed, fabricated ending would take over a wide array of text-lines ?

      Do you have a theory as to when the LATE ending that you posit was installed ?

      Thanks.

      Shalom,
      Steven Avery
      Queens, NY
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.