Results 1 - 3 of 3
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | Mark 16:9-20 | Mark 16:9 | Jaded13 | 13253 | ||
Makr 16:9-20 In my bible it says early manuscripts dont have 9-20. Where did this section come from? Is it considered devinely inspired? |
||||||
2 | Mark 16:9-20 | Mark 16:9 | Searcher56 | 13266 | ||
From those who know more ... The NASV, NIV, RSV, NRSV, NEB, TEV, CEV, etc., all agree that the last 12 verses of Mark are NOT in the "originals". However, their only basis for this belief comes from manuscripts "B" (vaticanus) and "Aleph" (sinaiticus). These are the only 2 manuscripts that omit these last 12 verses from Mark 16. At least 1,800 unicals, 600 cursives, every known lectionary of the East, 10 ancient versions and quotations from 19 church fathers bear united witness to the genuineness of Mark 16:9-20! Since "B" and "Aleph" have failed here, they should be distrusted throughout the New Testament ... however, they are the BEDROCK text of the English perversions listed above as well as all the others! Source: "The Fatal Blow to Manuscripts 'B' and 'Aleph'", by Dean Burgeon. My reasons for questioning Mark's authorship of verses 9-20 is that these verses are lacking in the two earliest complete copies of the Bible (Vaticanus and Sinaiticus). The verses also do not appear in the earliest African Old Latin text, the Sinaitic Syriac text and other very early manuscripts. Early church fathers, such as Clement of Alexandria and Origen seem not to have know these verses. According to Eusebius, the famous church historian who was born about the year A.D. 260 and died about 340, "the most accurate copies" and "almost all the copies" of Mark's Gospel ended with the words of 16:8. Jerome, writing about the same time, said that almost all the Greek copies verses 9-20. Source: Pastor Dennis Mk. 16 in manuscript B The scribe of manuscript B finished Mk. 16:8 near the bottom of a column then left the next column entirely blank. It is the only blank column in the entire manuscript. This blank space may indicate that the copyist was reading from a torn or obliterated manuscript and left a space hoping to supply the ending later from another source. The empty column after verse 8 is large enough to contain the last 12 verses. This large blank space testifies loudly to the fact that the scribe of B knew that Mk 16 did not end at verse 8. Source: John Darby's translation of the New Testament, 3rd rev. ed. introductory notes Mk 16 in manuscript Aleph ... "The leaf containing the omission is one of 6 leaves in Aleph that were not done by the hand that produced the rest of the manuscript. "This (spread out printing) suggests that the page as originally written must have contained something of considerable length which was omitted in the substituted copy. Unless some precaution were taken, an omission of the kind would leave a tell-tale blank [as there is in manuscript B]. But by spreading out his writing the scribe was enabled to carry over 37 letters to a new column, the rest of which could be left blank without attracting notice, since it was the conclusion of a Gospel." "I do not think these...phenomena can be reasonably explained in any other way than that the leaf, as originally copied, had contained the disputed verses; and that the corrector, regarding these as not a genuine part of the Gospel, canceled the leaf, recopying it in such a way as to cover the gap left by the erasure. It follows that the archetype of Aleph had contained the disputed verses." Source: A Historical Introduction to the Books of the New Testament, George Salmon. Plus some note I have ... -Irenaeus in 180 A.D. quoted from Mk. 16:19 in his book Against Heresies. "Also towards the conclusion of his Gospel, Mark says; "So then, after the Lord Jesus had spoken to them, He was received up into heaven, and sits on the right hand of God." -Tatian's Diatessaron, which is a harmony of the four Gospels written around 175 A.D. contains Mk. 16:9-20. -This shows that the passage existed at least 200 years before either Aleph or B were produced. -Suppose Mark ended with ch 16:8. This would make the conclusion of Mark read; "And they went out quickly, and fled from the sepulcher; for they trembled and were amazed; neither said they any thing to any man; for they were afraid." Not a very inspiring ending! Steve |
||||||
3 | Mark 16:9-20 | Mark 16:9 | RCSCROLL | 13278 | ||
There is a very interesting thing about Mark's gospel. In its original form it stops at Mk 16:8. We know that for two reasons. First, the verses which follow (Mk 16:9-20) are not in any of the great early manuscripts; only later and inferior manuscripts contain them. Second, the style of the Greek is so different that they cannot have been written by the same person as wrote the rest of the gospel. But the gospel cannot have been meant to stop at Mk 16:8. What then happened? It may be that Mark died, perhaps even suffered martyrdom, before he could complete his gospel. More likely, it may be that at one time only one copy of the gospel remained, and that a copy in which the last part of the roll on which it was written had got torn off. There was a time when the church did not much use Mark, preferring Matthew and Luke. It may well be that Mark's gospel was so neglected that all copies except for a mutilated one were lost. If that is so we were within an ace of losing the gospel which in many ways is the most important of all. We can surmise many a thing, the one thing we can't forget is the very fact that each and every scripture here in effect has either allready been said, or was shortly there after fulfilled by the Apostles them selves. So in conclusion let it be said that these events are biblical,and stand in light of scripture, of whats already been said in one place or another, If we didn't have Mark 16:9-20 we would still arrive at the same conclusion.Love in CHRIST.RC.Scroll P.S.Irenaeus in 180 A.D. I don't quite remember him naming the verse or book I could be wrong, |
||||||