What Opened a New Appreciation for the Work of Bart Ehrman (Earliest Complete Copy of Mark's Gospel)

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 05, 2015 7:20 AM GMT
    Stephenoabc

    Do you want us to have a benchmark of the earliest complete manuscript of Mark? Should the Codex Sinaiticus of the 4th century or the Codex Vaticanus of the 4th century.

    So when you reply about two manuscripts from the 4th century, you’re talking about Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Vaticanus?

    I don’t know which 5th century manuscript you’re talking about. There also was the possibility that there was a fragment prior to the 4th century that could have been brought into the discussion.

    # # #
    1. The Greek text of the Gospel of Mark is certainly the worst attested of all the canonical gospels. It is extant in only three papyrus manuscripts, none of which are by any means complete, and of which only one ( 45) is definitely earlier than the fourth century uncials; while one other is perhaps contemporary with them ( 88 ). Thus our knowledge of the text of Mark is more dependent on the early uncial texts than is the case with the other gospels, where early papyri and more substantial comments in church fathers supplement the early uncial texts.

    2. The Greek text of Mark in Sinaiticus is therefore one of the two earliest complete representations of the Greek text of Mark (the other being Codex Vaticanus).

    From The Gospel of Mark in Codex Sinaiticus: Textual and
    Reception-Historical Considerations
    Peter M. Head
    Cambridge University

    # # #

    uncial: of or written in a majuscule script with rounded unjoined letters that is found in European manuscripts of the 4th–8th centuries and from which modern capital letters are derived.

    # # #

    Codex Sinaiticus – 4th century hand written Greek Bible
    Codex Vaticanus – 4th century hand written Greek Bible
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 05, 2015 7:23 AM GMT
    Bart Ehrman

    Yes, I’m talking about Vaticanus and Sinaiticus.
    [Also see] Alexandrinus.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 05, 2015 7:31 AM GMT
    Stephenoabc / Steefen

    Codex Alexandrinus – 5th century hand written Greek Bible
    And to round out the four great uncials (something all members probably could have learned here:
    Codex Ephraemi Rescriptus – 5th century

    Unfortunately, Codex Ephraemi has given me a new appreciation of what Dr. Bart Ehrman does.

    Take a good look at its Wikipedia entry https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Codex_Ephraemi_Rescriptus#History .

    This is the sentence that gave me an aha moment: “The text has been corrected by three correctors.”

    Dr. Ehrman, in what book have you elaborated on that? Have you done a blog post here on Codex Ephraemi?

    In Acts 20:28 it reads του κυριου (of the Lord) along with the manuscripts mathfrak{P}74 D E Ψ 33 36 453 945 1739 1891, but the corrector added και του Θεου (and God) as have P 049 326 1241 2492 and the Byzantine manuscripts.[23][n 2]

    In 1 Corinthians 12:9 the original scribe omits phrase εν τω αυτω πνευματι (in His spirit), but it was added by the third corrector (C3).[24]
    Scrivener’s facsimile with text of 1 Tim 3:15–16

    In 1 Timothy 3:16 it reads ὅς ἐφανερώθη (He was manifested), but the second corrector (C2) changed it into θεός ἐφανερώθη (God was manifested);

    And finally, a What? moment:
    In Matthew 27:49 Codex C contains added text: ἄλλος δὲ λαβὼν λόγχην ἒνυξεν αὐτοῦ τὴν πλευράν, καὶ ἐξῆλθεν ὖδορ καὶ αἳμα (the other took a spear and pierced His side, and immediately came out water and blood). This reading was derived from John 19:34 and occurs in other manuscripts of the Alexandrian text-type (א, B, L, Γ, 1010, 1293, pc, vgmss).[17][18][19]

    Dr. Ehrman, what does this mean? Does it mean “the other took a spear and pierced His side, and immediately came out water and blood,” added, means this is “a later addition” not original, similar to Jesus saves the lady caught in adultery, later addition?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 05, 2015 7:32 AM GMT

    Steefen: Unfortunately, Codex Ephraemi has given me a new appreciation of what Dr. Bart Ehrman does.

    Stephenoabc / Steefen

    What does that mean?

    It means, unfortunately it has taken so many years to fortunately see the point of Dr. Ehrman’s type of work crystallized with the knowledge that Codex Erphraemi had three correctors. While Dr. Ehrman spoke of orthodox corruptions and scribal errors, if I only knew there was a Codex Ephraemi where three correctors are evidenced the welcome to this field would have been more overt.