The Long Ending of Mark and The Woman Caught in Adultery According To The Byzantine Text

[Conan]

Double tap.

 

[Conan]

No one claimed those two were exact copies of the originals, or that they overrule other copies, since they are fallible versions of the originals.

They are "respected" but the NET does not say why they are respected. Perhaps they are more reliable than most?

They were heavily favored in the past. People are learning that they are not as reliable as once thought.
The 2 manuscripts are from the 4th Century AD, making them very ancient and valuable. The 2 manuscripts have many, many differences between them in the Gospels. So they are not immediate cousins. But they do have agreements that go back in time, unique to those two. They are good representatives of the Alexandrian Text. They were once thought to be the best, but people have doubts. The tide is turning. They share many errors, or if correct original readings. But I notice that when Vaticanus and Sinaiticus disagree, one or the other will agree with the Byzantine Text. I first heard that from Professor Maurice Robinson. From what I have seen I think that is correct. In my opinion, I think that means the Byzantine Text is what is behind every Manuscript on this planet, but variant readings were caused by errors, most accidental perhaps some intentionally. Vaticanus and Sinaiticus are offshoots of the original Text. That's just my opinion but I believe it to be true. I once thought differently, because I read that Vaticanus and Sinaiticus were the best, and thought it true because others said it. But after studying Textual Criticism after many years, maybe 30+, I now think diffently. I am not an expert, nor claiming to be someone. But that is what I have found out by God's grace through reading on the subject. Again, I am no qualified expert, just a layman. But Westcott and Hort, Bruce Metzger, Kurt Aland I believe to have wrong theories. They seemed to me to rely on the 2 ancient manuscripts to heavily.

Here is a little information about Codex Sinaiticus.

Critical use of manuscripts

 

[Van]

Not at all. All mss except 3.

The Net footnote says the opposite, the alternate endings indicate the gospel ends at verse 8.

 

[37818]

The Net footnote says the opposite, the alternate endings indicate the gospel ends at verse 8.

I am persuaded verse 20. [All.mss of.Mark except,3 mss]

 

[Conan]

I believe we are down to 2 manuscripts. The 3rd one, manuscript 301 I think. I cannot remember but it lacks the passage because damage has occurred exactly at verse 8. Can't remember where I heard it but I will try to find out.

 

[Conan]

 

[Van]

We have about 4 variations. 1) The long ending, 2) the short ending, 3) both endings, and 4) Mark ends at 16:8.

Logic dictates the three extensions are all questionable. Something denied in post 24.

There is nothing more I can say...

 

[37818]

We have about 4 variations. 1) The long ending, 2) the short ending, 3) both endings, and 4) Mark ends at 16:8.

Logic dictates the three extensions are all questionable. Something denied in post 24.

There is nothing more I can say...

Again.

All whole mss of Mark except 3 have the long ending.
About,6 mss include the so called short ending.

See video post #26

 

[Silverhair]

Wes Huff on the Mark 16 question.

Google Search

 

[Van]

Again.

All whole mss of Mark except 3 have the long ending.
About,6 mss include the so called short ending.

See video post #26

Please address the fact that multiple endings indicate alteration of the text, such that the best choice is without an addition past verse 8.

​

" All of the witnesses for alternative endings to vv. 9-20 thus indirectly confirm the Gospel as ending at v. 8.) Because of such problems regarding the authenticity of these alternative endings, 16:8 is usually regarded as the last verse of the Gospel of Mark." ​

 

[Conan]

 

[Conan]

Please address the fact that multiple endings indicate alteration of the text, such that the best choice is without an addition past verse 8.

​

​

" All of the witnesses for alternative endings to vv. 9-20 thus indirectly confirm the Gospel as ending at v. 8.) Because of such problems regarding the authenticity of these alternative endings, 16:8 is usually regarded as the last verse of the Gospel of Mark." ​

Scribes copied what was before them. Someone combined endings, but only few were copied, and were not widespread. What was widespread was the long ending. By far. That someone included an alternative ending when they were aware was not surprising.

 

[Van]

Scribes copied what was before them. Someone combined endings, but only few were copied, and were not widespread. What was widespread was the long ending. By far. That someone included an alternative ending when they were aware was not surprising.

The fact of the many variety endings demonstrates addition or alteration, not found in the text before verse 8. Still waiting for a cogent argument, rather than the absurdity that multiply copies of error adds to the credibility of that error.