Results 1 - 3 of 3
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | believeth and is baptized | Mark 16:16 | lightedsteps | 222906 | ||
In relation to the thread that is going on now, (Becoming a Christian) I ask for some clarification on this verse spoken by Jesus. Mar 16:16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned. Does not this verse clearly equate believing with baptism, as part of the same package? Grace lightedsteps |
||||||
2 | believeth and is baptized | Mark 16:16 | lightedsteps | 222928 | ||
To: the thread The place where these verses are missing, is in the Codex Vaticanus from (350AD) and also the Codex Sinaiticus from (375AD) plus some other early manuscripts. But within the vast majority of the ancient manuscripts, the verses in question do appear (Mk.16:9-20) There is an entire blank column the Codex Vaticanus From Mk.16:9-20 to Lk.1:1 which gives the appearance that something should indeed be there. This long ending of Mark as some may call it, was known to both Justin Martyr, and to Tatian in the second century which was from 130 - 150 AD). The question that comes to my mind then is, with so much controversy regarding these verses from Mk.16 over the centuries, as all of you have said, why then have they been repeatedly published within the Bible as though the do indeed belong? I have taken the time to go to 23 different translations, and this verse is in every one, including the KJV, NASB, NIV, AMPLIFIED, and even the MESSAGE, but most surprising of all is that Calvin even put it in the Geneva Bible. Therefore if the publishers of these Bibles do continually reprint , and publish these verses, then they must feel they do belong. I for one, would say "if the consensus is that these verses do not belong, and should not be there, then they should not be there. Otherwise these types of arguments against them should cease. I no not what course others may take, but as for me, this will be my last post on this thread. Thank you all, for your interest participation, and input. Grace be unto you all lightedsteps |
||||||
3 | believeth and is baptized | Mark 16:16 | DocTrinsograce | 222930 | ||
Dear lightedsteps, Here is a very good article that exposes the Mark 16:9-20 debate for all sides: http://apologeticspress.com/articles/2780 I would not say that I am fully persuaded one way or another. Mostly that is because I am simply not educated enough to land on one side of the issue or the other. Let me explain a little better, then, how I handle what I do know. I accept, at face value, that this passage -- or something similar to it -- must necessarily have been included in the original autograph. However, I am not required to build orthodoxy or orthopraxy in these verses alone -- as, for example, the snake handlers do. You see, a fundamental tenet of the doctrine of sola Scriptura is what is called the analogy of faith; viz. "The infallible rule of interpretation of Scripture is the Scripture itself; and therefore when there is a question about the true and full sense of any Scripture (which is not manifold, but one), it must be searched by other places that speak more clearly (2 Peter 1:20-21; Acts 15:15-16)." 1689 LBCF 1.9 Consequently, I am able to deal with any doctrine that it raises, by resorting to passages that articulate them more clearly. Nor am I left in an untenable position of embracing a doctrine for which this passage is the sole support. You're right -- God only has to say something once. Nevertheless, like the good teacher that He is, he repeats, and repeats, and repeats all those things necessary and sufficient for "all saving knowledge, faith and obedience." In Him, Doc |
||||||