Re: Textual Criticism in Mk 4:28

Carlton Winbery (winberyc@popalex1.linknet.net)
Sat, 15 Nov 1997 09:32:44 +0400

Johan DF van Halsema wrote;
>I have got a question as regards a variant reading in Mark 4:28:
>
>Basically there are three readings:
>1a PLHRHS SITON 042 28
> b PLHRES SITON C*vid
>2a PLHRH SITON 01 A C2 L 037 fam1 fam13 33 etc, Koine
> b PLHRH TON SITON 038 565 700 1424
>3a PLHRHS SITOS 2427 arm
> b PLHRES SITOS B
> c PLHRHS O SITOS D W
>
>Reading 3a can be found in Tischendorff (Octava), NA25,
>Reading 2a can be found in Westcott/Hort, Von Soden, Vogels, Merk and Bover
>Reading 1a (1b) is found in GNT 3.4 and NA 26.27
>
>Question: It is my impression that reading 1 is grammatically speaking
>incorrect: an adjective in masc. (neuter in C*vid, compare B) nominative,
>with a noun in masc accusative.
>
>How can reading 1a defended?
>
The basic principle at work in the UBS4/N-A27 is the reading which best
explains the origin of all the others, though reading 3b is difficult. It
possibly arose through the influence of other efforts to correct the
grammar of reading 1a. The scribes of what we call the Alexandrian text
were also concerned for correct grammar.

Carlton Winbery
Fogleman Professor of Religion
Louisiana College
Pineville, LA 71359
winberyc@popalex1.linknet.net
winbery@andria.lacollege.edu