tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3839131113481621095.post75874667442025028..comments2023-06-16T07:01:52.541-07:00Comments on The Blog of Dr. T. Michael W. Halcomb: The Most Valuable Markan Resources: Studies in Mark, Pt. 79TMWHhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06807155020816222182noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3839131113481621095.post-82908573001239795852008-11-16T14:34:00.000-08:002008-11-16T14:34:00.000-08:00steph,again, i'm not saying i didn't take ...steph,<br>again, i'm not saying i didn't take his work seriously. i read the book and took a lot from it. <br><br>as for "valaube" that's hilarious. even the title is wrong! ha. I did spell it right twice in my previous comment to you and once wrong. i'm laughing at myself now. hilarious.T. Michael W. Halcombhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01119080394574322124noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3839131113481621095.post-14260151049013663252008-11-16T14:24:00.000-08:002008-11-16T14:24:00.000-08:00BTW you are consistently mistyping "valuable&...BTW you are consistently mistyping "valuable"! :-)stephnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3839131113481621095.post-53518612433095350382008-11-16T14:22:00.000-08:002008-11-16T14:22:00.000-08:00but it lacks text critical work on Aramaic sources...but it lacks text critical work on Aramaic sources which your entire list ignores!<br><br>Established beaurocratised scholarship is frightened by James' work because it upsets the boat. It is, fortunately for the future of scholarship, a sound thesis and will be taken more seriously when scholars become properly educated in Aramaic and Judaism.stephnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3839131113481621095.post-12379302961933803442008-11-16T11:45:00.000-08:002008-11-16T11:45:00.000-08:00Steph,You're certainly right that those are al...Steph,<br>You're certainly right that those are all good books. I do take issue that Taylor's commentary is "the" best however. As for the Casey and Crossley books, the former which I own and both of which I have read, they are certainly valuabe sources but not the #1 in their genre. If you compare Casey's work, for instance with the WBC text I listed in text-critical, there is not even a comparison to be made really! The WBC text is 2 volumens and has tons of text-crit info. The Casey book is not very big and while it has a lot to offer, is only selective. The WBC set goes through the entire text of Mk. line by line. Crossley's text, which I find quite compelling is also good. I still don't know if I agree with it, however. Dating Mk. that early (in the 30's) is highly debatable. I think Kloppenborg makes good arguments against it in his article as do many others in their works.<br><br>The point of the post was not to list a bibliography but to list what I found to be the most valuable Markan text in its respective genre. That's not to say the others aren't valuable, it's just to say, here's where one should start and here are texts you can return to again and again to draw info from.<br><br>Had I been doing a select bibliography even, I certainly would have included the works you mentioned. <br><br>As for the Taylor work, while it is heavy on form critical stuff, it is worthwhile. Still, I'd cast my vote elsewhere (as I have).<br><br>I appreciate your thoughts. No reason to be disappointed. Certainly, all of the sources I've listed are good ones and are worthy of praise.T. Michael W. Halcombhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01119080394574322124noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3839131113481621095.post-6290342387667665472008-11-16T00:42:00.000-08:002008-11-16T00:42:00.000-08:00Not only have you left out what is still the best ...Not only have you left out what is still the best critical commentary on Mark to date by Vincent Taylor "The Gospel According to St. Mark" but you have also left out "Aramaic Sources of Mark's Gospel" by Maurice Casey, not to mention James Crossley's book "The Date of Mark". I'm disappointed!stephnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3839131113481621095.post-36165685354598775262008-11-14T19:59:00.000-08:002008-11-14T19:59:00.000-08:00Michael,I will most definitely check out the Waetj...Michael,<br>I will most definitely check out the Waetjen work. Of course, I am familiar with Gundry's text too. He does offer a number of novel insights that other scholars do not and he's certainly very adept in all-things-Markan. Even though I disagree with a lot of Myers's work, I placed him at the top of the list because of his creativity, uniqueness and attempt at a socio-cultural-political-rhetorical hermeneutic.<br><br>Thanks for the lead on a new work (new to me) and your comments! And by the way, since you're a "Mark-man" are you looking for any "Mark-students" to do some PhD work with? :)T. Michael W. Halcombhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01119080394574322124noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3839131113481621095.post-65834748854419708092008-11-14T14:43:00.000-08:002008-11-14T14:43:00.000-08:00Michael, I would add in the commentary genre the l...Michael, I would add in the commentary genre the little known gem by Herman C. Waetjen called "A Reordering of Power" which is one of my best picks for Mark commentaries. Also, I think Bob Gundry's commentary trumps alot of stuff and he rightly captures the notion of Mark's Gospel as an apology for the cross! As a Mark-man, I'd say Gundry is my favourite!Michael F. Birdhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09713482855679578651noreply@blogger.com