Wednesday, December 1, 2010

Mark 15:27-29

Mark 15:27-29 (Traditional Text)

και συν αυτω σταυρουσιν δυο ληστας
ενα εκ δεξιων και ενα εξ ευωνυμων αυτου

επληρωθη η γραφη η λεγουσα
και μετα ανομων ελογισθη

και οι παραπορευομενοι εβλασφημουν
αυτον κινουντες τας κεφαλας αυτων
και λεγοντες ουα ο καταλυων τον ναον
και εν τρισιν ημεραις οικοδομων

And with him they crucify two thieves;
the one on his right hand, and the other on his left.

And the scripture was fulfilled, which saith,
And he was numbered with the transgressors
And they that passed by railed on him, shaking their heads,
and saying,
"Ah, thou that destroyest the Gospel of Mark,
and reconstruct it in three editions,..."


Include Verse 27: K L P Δ Θ Π 0112 0250 family 1, family 13, 28 33 565 700 892 1009 1010 1071 1079 1195 1216 1230 1241 1242 1253 1344 1365 1546 1646 2148 2174 Byz Maj (Majority of continuous MSS) lect.-10/211/883/1642/ it-aur/c/ff2/l/n/r1 Vg Syr-P/H/Pal Cop-Bo(mss) Goth Arm Eth Geo Ps.-Hyppolytus(vid) Origen Euseb.Can.(mss) Vigilius(vid)

OMIT: א , A B C D X Ψ Lect. it-d/k Syr-s Cop-Sa/Bo(mss)/fay(vid) Eus.Can.(txt) Ammon.

These passages are also known as the "KAI" passages for a reason:

Its Mark's monotonous habit of starting every sentence, nearly every clause, with "KAI".

Just look at what occurs previously in the narrative:

15:16 ...KAI
17 KAI.....KAI...
18 KAI.....
19 KAI.....KAI.....KAI...
20 KAI.....KAI.....KAI...
21 KAI.....
22 KAI.....
23 KAI.....
24 KAI.....
26 KAI...
27 KAI......KAI...
28 KAI.....
29 KAI.....KAI...

The sheer frequency of this stylism puts experienced copyists on guard, but of course even the best scribe will eventually succumb to a few of these common errors of homoioarcton with KAI.

And so it was inevitable that the Alexandrian tradition would also pick up a few of these "KAI-droppings", and pass them on to infect others.

From there as expected, the self-appointed correctors of the 4th century adopted the gaffe.

Modern editors of the critical text don't hesitate to pounce on this obviously early reading (mistake), incorporating into the reconstruction of the horrible accident that is called the "Alexandrian Text-type".

Unfortunately, as an 'Agreement in Error', this omission is no candidate for the original text of Mark, who wrote in Rome, not Alexandria, and whose text is better preserved by the Latins who Mark evangelized.

'Modern' versions, oblivious to the real nature of the critical Greek text, unanimously omit the verse, in spite of the loud warning in the apparatus of UBS, including the ASV, NAS, NIV, RSV, NEB, etc.

What will it take to get the text of Mark restored to its purity?

The Scripture was certainly fulfilled, but we'll never hear of it if we follow the empty-headed choices of modern editors of the NT.

No comments:

Post a Comment