tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6346409181794331060.post5187662063379104577..comments2024-03-20T12:35:12.828-04:00Comments on The Text of the Gospels: The Tors-Costa Debate, Part 4James Snapp Jrhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09493891380752272603noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6346409181794331060.post-90610366275311860672017-05-01T21:12:34.062-04:002017-05-01T21:12:34.062-04:00Daniel Buck,
See my blog-post that focuses on 304...Daniel Buck, <br />See my blog-post that focuses on 304, with special attention to the ending.<br />http://www.thetextofthegospels.com/2016/05/minuscule-304-theophylact-and-ending-of.html<br /><br />Basically, 304 is a commentary-manuscript in which the text of Mark is interspersed with the commentary-material. Its text of Mark ends at the end of 16:8 and after this there is a little verse that conveys that the book is finished. On the other hand, the commentary-material is drawn extensively from the earlier commentary by Theophylact, whose commentary included comments on Mark 16:9-20. <br /><br />Plus, the text of Mark in 304 is essentially Byzantine. See the post for details.James Snapp Jrhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09493891380752272603noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6346409181794331060.post-21766159017584432772017-05-01T12:28:59.909-04:002017-05-01T12:28:59.909-04:00"Gaffe: they are missing in three (taking da..."Gaffe: they are missing in three (taking damage into account) – though their absence in minuscule 304 is barely worth mentioning."<br />I'm tired of this on-again, off-again use of 304 on the Marcan ending. What's the latest evidence, and is it actually conclusive?Daniel Buckhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02600146498880358592noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6346409181794331060.post-53569105727904362452017-04-28T22:10:30.707-04:002017-04-28T22:10:30.707-04:00Thanks James for the past posts on the debate. I ...Thanks James for the past posts on the debate. I wish I could have attended. It sounded like a lively exchange. <br /><br />So, when are you going to debate James White and Daniel Wallace on this topic? It would be a great help to the body to hear someone who understands and can clearly present the other side of the debate (i.e., the non-alexandrian priority side) in a informed, coherent manner as you have done on this blog.<br /><br />Blessings,<br /><br />Ken GanskieKen Ganskiehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02040919525390779050noreply@blogger.com