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

Re: [textualcriticism] Re: Mark 16:9-20, the Diatessaron, and Non-tangents

Expand Messages
  • George F Somsel
    The Ethiopic, Sahidic, Armenian, Eusebius, and some manuscript of Jerome. george gfsomsel search for truth, hear truth, learn truth, love truth, speak the
    Message 1 of 49 , Sep 9, 2012
    View Source
    • 0 Attachment
      The Ethiopic, Sahidic, Armenian, Eusebius, and some manuscript of Jerome.
       
      george
      gfsomsel

      search for truth, hear truth,
      learn truth, love truth, speak the truth, hold the truth,
      defend the truth till death.

      - Jan Hus
      _________

      From: Ross Purdy <rossjpurdy@...>
      To: textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com
      Sent: Sunday, September 9, 2012 11:04 AM
      Subject: [textualcriticism] Re: Mark 16:9-20, the Diatessaron, and Non-tangents

       
      Hi Gary,

      On 9/9/2012 10:35 AM, Gary Cummings wrote:
      > Do not forget that many early translations of the NT do not include
      > the LE, and that there are alternative endings to Mark. These two
      > facts speak against the inclusion of the LE as the true ending of Mark.

      Which early translations do not include the LE and what are the
      alternative endings and in what manuscripts do they appear?

      Thanks,
      Ross Purdy


    • mikek
      Ross, I just bascially know the bare facts about the Long Ending of Mark. But having done some research (a little) and reading this thread I understand that
      Message 49 of 49 , Sep 24, 2012
      View Source
      • 0 Attachment
        Ross, I just bascially know the bare facts about the Long Ending of Mark. But having done some research (a little) and reading this thread I understand that the Long Ending of Mark is in just about every translation (including the early Syriac Peshitta, which some say is the original behind the "Greek skin.")

        As far as the Alternate ending are concerned, (correct me if I am wrong here folks) but only a very small, tiny (minute number) of mansucripts include the alternate Long Endings. IOW, the alternate Long Endings did not reproduce at all in the manuscript copies.

        Mike Karoules
        Georgia, USA

        --- In textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com, Ross Purdy <rossjpurdy@...> wrote:
        >
        > Hi Gary,
        >
        > On 9/9/2012 10:35 AM, Gary Cummings wrote:
        > > Do not forget that many early translations of the NT do not include
        > > the LE, and that there are alternative endings to Mark. These two
        > > facts speak against the inclusion of the LE as the true ending of Mark.
        >
        > Which early translations do not include the LE and what are the
        > alternative endings and in what manuscripts do they appear?
        >
        > Thanks,
        > Ross Purdy
        >
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.