Quote:
|
{Mark was} writing in Latin (with or without a dual-autograph-language theory per Hoskier).
|
I would argue strongly against dual autographs. However, I think that it is very possible that Mark or people close to him translated from his Greek original into a Latin translation. This way the Latin was not the autograph, but Mark could have at a later stage of his life been preaching in Latin from a Latin translation of his own penned book. This actually would show that a. copies were considered as true Scripture as autographs, b. translations were considered as true Scripture as the original language, c. that there was no neccessity to stay in the Greek or have a Greek-only view of Scripture from the earliest days.