Results 1 - 4 of 4
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | short and long version of Mark 16:8 | Mark 16:9 | LSmith | 123129 | ||
why is there a short and long version of Mark 16:8 | ||||||
2 | short and long version of Mark 16:8 | Mark 16:9 | kalos | 125334 | ||
Words were ADDED to later manuscripts that WERE NOT IN earlier manuscripts. ____________________ "One of the rules of textual criticism is that a shorter reading is preferable to a longer reading." "Another rule of textual criticism is that a more difficult reading is to be preferred to a less difficult one." ____________________ 'An additional factor that contributed to the reliability and accuracy of the Greek text was advancement in the art of textual criticism itself. While this important subject can be complicated, its basic aim is quite straightforward. It is important to remember that the original manuscripts of the biblical books, technically called the autographa, have not survived, and the copies made from these original documents contain readings, called variants, that do not always agree with one another. The goal of textual criticism is to formulate and apply rules that enable an editor to select the variant reading to achieve the most accurate text. 'An illustration of the application of these rules of textual criticism may aid us in understanding what an editor does. For example, one of the rules of textual criticism is that a shorter reading is preferable to a longer reading. THE REASON FOR THIS RULE IS THAT A SCRIBE WOULD TEND TO ADD WORDS FOR CLARIFICATION OR EXPLANATION RATHER THAN DELETING THEM.' [Words were ADDED to later manuscripts that WERE NOT IN earlier manuscripts.] 'Another rule of textual criticism is that a more difficult reading is to be preferred to a less difficult one. A SCRIBE WOULD BE TEMPTED TO ADD WORDS OF EXPLANATION that would enable the reader to understand the meaning of a difficult text rather than leaving such a reading unexplained' ['A scribe would be tempted to add words of explanation' to a later manuscript -- words that WERE NOT IN the earlier manuscript. Words added to later manuscripts WERE PUT THERE BY SCRIBES, not by divine inspiration.] ____________________ (http://www.solagroup.org/articles/historyofthebible/hotb_0002.html) (Emphasis added) |
||||||
3 | short and long version of Mark 16:8 | Mark 16:9 | EdB | 125336 | ||
Kalos Since you offered this quote. Does this author offer any suggestion to the correct ending of Mark? Does he feel Mark should end with "They went out and fled from the tomb, for trembling and astonishment had gripped them; and they said nothing to anyone, for they were afraid."? To me that seems abrupt and ending on a negative. I find that unlikely. What is his thoughts. EdB |
||||||
4 | short and long version of Mark 16:8 | Mark 16:9 | kalos | 125340 | ||
EdB: The quote I posted does not make any mention of "Mark". However, I will here provide further information on Mark 16:9-20. 'I might also mention that many textual scholars think it unlikely that [Mark 16] vv. 9-20 are an authentic part of Mark's gospel. We can't discuss here all the textual evidence that has caused many New Testament scholars to reject the passage. But you can find a thorough discussion in Bruce Metzger, et al., A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament, pp. 122-128, and William Hendriksen, The Gospel of Mark, pp. 682-687' (http://www.gty.org/IssuesandAnswers/archive/baptism.htm). Mark 16:9-20, including v. 17. 'Serious doubt exists as to whether these verses belong to the Gospel of Mark. They are absent from important early manuscripts and display certain peculiarities of vocabulary, style and theological content that are unlike the rest of Mark. His Gospel probably ended at 16:8, or its original ending has been lost' (p. 1455, Zondervan NASB Study Bible, Zondervan, 1999) "Mark 16:9-20. The external evidence strongly suggests these verses were not originally part of Mark's gospel. While the majority of Gr. manuscripts contain these verses, the earliest and most reliable do not. ... Further, some that include the passage note that it was missing from older Gr. manuscripts, while others have scribal marks indicating the passage was considered spurious. The fourth-century church fathers Eusebius and Jerome noted that almost all Gr. manuscripts available to them lacked vv. 9-20. "The internal evidence from this passage also weighs heavily against Mark's authorship. ... "While for the most part summarizing truths taught elsewhere in Scripture, vv. 9-20 should always be compared with the rest of Scripture, and no doctrines should be formulated based solely on them. ...(The MacArthur Study Bible, 1997, Word Publishing)." Grace to you, John |
||||||