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

Re: [textualcriticism] Re: Images of MS 2427

Expand Messages
  • sarban
    ... From: Daniel Buck To: Sent: Thursday, April 21, 2005 1:22 AM Subject: [textualcriticism] Re:
    Message 1 of 9 , Apr 23, 2005
    • 0 Attachment
      ----- Original Message -----
      From: "Daniel Buck" <elwabook@...>
      To: <textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com>
      Sent: Thursday, April 21, 2005 1:22 AM
      Subject: [textualcriticism] Re: Images of MS 2427

      > Yet before one jumps to any conclusions based on this evidence, the
      > question must be asked: If the number of scribes who were aware of the
      > textual problem with vv. 9-20--yet included the passage--numbered in
      > the hundreds, why did (according to Tischendorf) the only Greek scribe
      > to ever omit it--and intentionally so in the case of B--make no note
      > whatosoever of his reasons?
      > And again I ask, why did the numerous Byzantine correctors of B never
      > take the opportunity granted them and fill in the empty column with
      > the missing passage?
      IIUC the empty space in B doesn't really provide sufficient room
      for all of Mark16:9-20. If I'm right about this it would have been
      difficult for a later corrector to insert it there.

      It may be that the passage B was intentionally omitting at the end
      of Mark was not the 'long ending' but the 'short ending' as found
      in the Latin Bobiensis, in various (mostly Alexandrian) Greek
      manuscripts and in some Coptic and Ethiopic texts.

      Andrew Criddle
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.