Featured Mark 16: 9-20?

It would be perfectly acceptable to me to have a New Testament in English without the L.E.; P.A. or any other passage that wasn't in the original. To have them in the text is just traditionalism, plain and simple.

 

I think you'll find it's in Uncial D 05 which dates from the 5th Century. It's in more than 900 mss of John's Gospel, which is quite enough for me.

 

Try and get it right, please. Two of the oldest manuscripts do not have Mark 16:9ff. Whether they are the best is open to debate.

 

Vs. 8 as an ending doesn't line up with the endings to the other Gospels. The end of John is an admonition for Peter (and a lesson for all) to not worry about others, but to follow Him. The actual ending to John is 21:24-25 which is about all the works that Jesus did. This wraps up John perfectly. The long ending to Mark fits. The short ending doesn't - in my opinion.

 

Among others that do not have the P.A. : Codex Sinaiticus(344), Codex Vaticanus(312), p66 (175)and p75(200).

 

Gone, as God wants us to worship Him, and not the Book he authorized to us....

 

Ypu are correct, and I do not have a problem with the longer ending, but still do not think that it fits....

 

Sinaiticus and Vaticanus are the two I mentioned. For the rest, I am depending on the textual apparatus in my copy of the UBS Greek New Testament dated 1993. It appears to list only one other ms that does not have the verses in question (304). If I am reading it wrong or if the UBS NT is unreliable, my apologies. What cannot be denied is that the vast majority of extant Greek mss, well over 99%, have Mark 16:9-20.

 

Here is a defense of Mark 16:9-20 written by the Trinitarian Bible Society.
http://www.tbsbibles.org/pdf_information/421-1.pdf

 

I agree with you on that, as this all depends upon which one sees as being the most reliable text source!

 

This thread needs to be moved to another department. It should be moved to the Bible Versions and Translations forum.

 

<---- the catholic.

Ha ha ha ha, ho ho ho ho........

I want to see scriptural evidence for all systems of determining the true scripture.

Earlier is GREATER THEN a later exact copy of the original.

The idea is that earlier is MOST LIKELY original, but not DEFINITE.

But as fancy as that system sounds.....I want biblical evidence



The original is what it is.

I demand the scripture be self determined. Else you now must accept the AUTHORITY of Scholars, scientist, historians, ect,ect.

 

It's interesting that Vaticanus has a blank space where the ending of Mark would be. Obviously the copiest was aware of the ending and left a blank space.

 

Notice how between Luke and John there is not a space: