Chapter 16 - Mark's ending

[Guest Butero]

I agree with Ezra that the verses in question are scripture.  When the Bible says that one of the signs you are a believer is that you shall take up serpents, it clearly doesn't mean to intentionally handle poisonous snakes.  It would be a situation like the one Paul encountered.  Jesus himself stated that we are not to tempt God. 

Controversy over verses being removed from the Bible has been the main reason I object to most of the modern English translations. 

[simplejeff]

How many people ((there are some, but comparatively )) are in a place exposed to snakes these days, 

vs deceptions of the serpent ((thousands of various religions / false gospels/ false teachers and prophets)) ?

i.e. Could the serpents (also) refer to the serpent who tempted Havah(Eve) ? 

Or, are we not protected form false doctrines, lies the public accepts, and so on ? ((especially with the helmet of Salvation  in Jesus! ))

Different subject or overlapping ?

7 minutes ago, Butero said:

I agree with Ezra that the verses in question are scripture.  When the Bible says that one of the signs you are a believer is that you shall take up serpents, it clearly doesn't mean to intentionally handle poisonous snakes.  It would be a situation like the one Paul encountered.  Jesus himself stated that we are not to tempt God. 

Controversy over verses being removed from the Bible has been the main reason I object to most of the modern English translations. 

 

[Your closest friendnt]

On 9 February, 2016 at 8:29 AM, Melony said:

Chapter 16 - Mark's ending

 

I like this text. What do you think: What is new of the new? For these 6 Verses. Mark 16, 15- 20 (NIV version) feel free to use your text.

¹⁵ He said to them, “Go into all the world and preach the gospel to all creation. ¹⁶ Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned. ¹⁷ And these signs will accompany those who believe: In my name they will drive out demons; they will speak in new tongues; ¹⁸ they will pick up snakes with their hands; and when they drink deadly poison, it will not hurt them at all; they will place their hands on sick people, and they will get well.”  ¹⁹ After the Lord Jesus had spoken to them, he was taken up into heaven and he sat at the right hand of God. ²⁰ Then the disciples went out and preached everywhere, and the Lord worked with them and confirmed his word by the signs that accompanied it.

Best wishes – M

Sorry: I had the german text in my first version. It is not – study groop posting (just daring to start free zone, Christian, doctor. Germany)

 

 

Hello Melony,

I see than one of your request is the referrence to the poison and or the snakes.

I have taken some History lessons of those times in the past, and also  for watching historical and coultural movies of the nations the disciples visited and preach the Gospel.

In most of the countries at that time it was very common to use poison as a means to murder people for a number of reasons, and in some countries as in Egypt, Noth Africa and Asian countries it was very common to release poisonous snakes into someone's bedroom at night.

Jesus knowing that his disciples will make many enemies by preaching the Gospel, and knowing that many and not a few people would like to see them dead, for many and deferent reasons,

 and at the same time trying to protect them from becoming paranoid, looking over their  shoulders, and being distracted from their mission, he told them;

I have given you divine protection, those things won't hurt you, and many of the people who will put poison to your food or drink will believe, seeing that the poison ( or the snake byte as it may be), did not hurt you, and they may believe that your message is truth.

He mean to tell them not to worry to carry monkeys around with them, who try the food before them or something else, that they will consume the poison in their ignorance but nothing will happen to them. 

[Melony]

High- dearest !  at this 14. Feb - vallentienes - <3 " take virtual flowers" - sorry (yes I was thinking of snakes) but let us go on.. to listen to this church father -  from there.

Now lets first say: Mark 16, 8 „And having heard this they fled. and they said nothing to anyone, for they were afraid.“ Fine! is one option... [quoting Eusebius- @ Lunn.book - on ending of Mark. 93pg.]

Than let me add these wise words: This Saying – that is not mine: He was asked about both of the forms of Marks gospel endings.  „On the other hand, someone else, who dares to set aside, nothing whatsoever of things which appear, by whatever means, in the text of the Gosples, say [greek] that the reading is double, as also in many other [cases] and [that] each of the two [readings] must be accepted in that [they both] are approved in the oppinion of the faithfull and pios not this [reading] rather than that, or this [reading] rather than this.“ Eusebius at about 340 AD, Church fathers response „ad martinum“. Discussion of letters. (He referes here to this churchy consensus. Much rather than a question of truth.)

and full quot

 

 

[Melony]

Today it almost seems that – we are left with this riddle: Our finding in this is more than compleatly oposite to what this church father tried to comment on (17 centuries back – in timeline). This truth is what learned scolars had knowledge of and it was well discussed 130 years back.

[Melony]

Feel into [repetition] please. (My search - „ad marinus Mark ending“ found Lunn 2014) 93pg:

I. 1. b) ... they were afraid.“

For in this way the ending of the gospel of Mark is defined in nearly all the copies. The thing that appearce next, seldom [and] in some but not in [all of the copies] may be spurious [greek], especially as it implies a contradiction to the testamony of the rest of the evangelists. This than [is what] someone might say [greek] and avoid compleatly do away with a superflourus question [greek].

On the other hand, someone else, who dares to set aside, nothing whatsoever of things which appear, by whatever means, in the text of the Gosples, say [greek] that the reading is double, as also in many other [cases] and [that] each of the two [readings] must be accepted in that [they both] are approved in the oppinion of the faithfull and pios not this [reading] rather than that, or this [reading] rather than this.“

 

(1)Kelhoffer #footnote 137„Wittness of Eusebius ad martinum“ 80- 83 page, wrote this... (2)Lunn N. Original ending of Mark.Pickwick 2014: 93pg. (I found it here- online)

Edited February 15, 2016 by Melony

[Melony]

Yes – I love this all. @simple.jeff and @closest friend.NT great joining this- on snakes. Many thanks. I appreachiat all what you say. (on the one hand.)  / Thank y @junobet [later added] like y quoting.

 

I searched what most earlie authorities have to say about this. Never knew befor, what our church fathers – might be good for... (new version)

This most strange finding of Marks ending – is going – throuhg 2 phases of this discussion. (a) by giving the text 15- 20 (in Mark 16) we had looked at text – in early phase. All this to imagine also – Yes, how spiritual and important this text is for all of us. We do agree. Than there is Quotes and sugestions – that I partly found already 12 years back, when I first tackeled and misunderstood this mater for a long time. Now I have searched for this one anew. My finding (b) is – and I never quite agreed with @Esra on this one (his NO 1 quote). As I expanded - now that there is – one source (only) that had clearly referred to all this Marks ending. In that Eusebius also is the most significant source – early (320- 340 ad) and fully competent in addressing this mater for our behalf. To me – it is incredible, that this was church politics to- yes acept it all. As it was now handed over to us... (c ) [please see the middle passage of this thred] And as given – in verry my shortest-possible- Micki-Mouse-style overview-(please 1. check – your one study bilbe – 'magadan'- is the new-form). Than 2. this is like a second- fairly large- leekin window in our churches roff – of the Johns 8a Gospel text. That makes it – as demonstrated above – [2x long passages – of 12 verses]. I get affraid in saying this. Bluntly: that – is how compomising attitude of man – had wanted to leave it – in early historic christianity centuries. Both of these long passages – that now might be shortened - have verry likely been well known – in all the early church historie. Let me boldly claim that one (without much proovings).

All other findings – compared to that [of these – two gospel- big leaks Mark 16 b, John 8 a] are fairly minimal. Even if one and a half vers – later fall out. It is not big (only happens once in the 4 gospels). You need not realy dig in this. I would need some rest- to draw material together – so that it can make more sence also. Thanks.

Hope this can bes of help- Melony

ps. As a devoted christian – I would fully follow your advice (and this Mark 16. 9-20 scripture). This text only came from the learned mind of my scolarship also. In this coming times. Please I do urge you to have and – expand much of the both! Do this thorough and deep scripture learning. Next day though use with the full 100% the other aspect of all your professional upbringing also. If we not learn very quick – to do wisely all we can – on diffrent levels. How can we expect to succed in times- that might become difficult. And again I do say. „Fear not!“Dear little flock: Our father has chosen to already and continually giving to us all the Kingdom.

 

Edited February 15, 2016 by Melony
version 2, smile - to y coment (below). Yes knoledge has always been accesable. -distributes much faster these days .. best wishes Mel.

[simplejeff]

14 minutes ago, Melony said:

I tried quoting authority. Never knew befor, what church fathers – might be good for...

 

Sad comedy.  Not reliable.  Deceived many billions of people .....

Not always.... but they were used for that, so they're not reliable to decide by.

serpents back then,  serpents today, everywhere what is false is and has been published as the truth, and the truth ((of Scripture)) is called a lie/ discredited completely by man's traditions.

one main serpent, same like in the Garden of Eden.

a lot of subservient ones, willingly serving it. 

here, there, everywhere we go.

[junobet]

On 10.2.2016 at 4:42 PM, Melony said:

We should not - feel much thread ! Other than (calculating or) giving a vague figure below, this going through more extended lists never edified much. So I decided to not mention more about minor or miniscule changes. Let see what there is:

(1) HE sais: Love your enemies,[bless them] that curse you Mt 5,44;     (2) Jesus... rebuked them, and said [what manner of spirit are ye of].Lk 9, 55.    (3)  this ending of Mark [16 9- 20];                         (4) An adultary word  [ John 8, 1-- 11 ] that makes it 2x 12 verses. [= not in old text wittness]

At Mt 15,39 a single-word on this is: 'Magadan', the name of a galileen harbor. Or containing the other hint 'Magdala' (is likely the King James -versions used). Such wording might lead one to suspect also the greek text of a personal bible. I have crosschecked that many times.  I will give a vague calculation for 4 gospel content below (with my disclaimer – in some cases it is not easy to tell and proof). Going through more extended lists had in my hands - never edified much. So I learned to not mention more minor or miniscule changes.  - I hope that helps.

We, as a 'worthy' Jesus orientated community - might not have to look into this in far details. And many of us would not work through such things our selfs. Though some of the more qualified might proof there accuracy and deligence in this field also. This will one day help those (of very few) that realy want to know about this..I count 26 changes in our 4500 gospel verses (like above). In the first 1400 years of non-print-copying (befor Luther) there may be up to a total of 200 (like 4,44%) of gospel verses having to do with any (miniscule or) minor text diversion. One eight's of that is what y see here above. It is not more

Yours - M

 

Indeed, there is no threat in the findings of textual criticism. I deeply admire the meticulous work that goes into the "Novum Testamentum Graece". And the scholars that work(ed) on it assure us how marvelously accurately the texts have been handed down to us:

“"Thus in nearly two-thirds of the New Testament text, the seven editions of the Greek New Testament which we have reviewed are in complete accord, with no differences other than in orthographical details (e.g., the spelling of names, etc.). Verses in which any one of the seven editions differs by a single word are not counted. This result is quite amazing, demonstrating a far greater agreement among the Greek texts of the New Testament during the past century than textual scholars would have suspected […]. In the Gospels, Acts, and Revelation the agreement is less, while in the letters it is much greater"^[12] For over 250 years, New Testament scholars have argued that no textual variant affects key Christian doctrine.” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Novum_Testamentum_Graece#Accuracy_of_the_New_Testament

And as for the ending of Mark, the Novum Testamentum Graece still follows Bruce Metzger’s reasoning who saw it as not written by the evangelist, but honours its canonization:

“Thus, on the basis of good external evidence and strong internal considerations it appears that the earliest ascertainable form of the Gospel of Mark ended with 16.8. At the same time, however out of deference to the evident antiquity of the longer ending and its importance in the textual tradition of the Gospel, the Committee decided to include verses 9-20 as part of the text, but to enclose them within double square brackets to indicate that they are the work of an author other than the evangelist.”

Bruce Metzger: A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament (Stuttgart, 1971)

 

“Today we know that the last twelve verses of the Gospel according to Mark (xvi. 9-20) are absent from the oldest Greek, Latin, Syriac, Coptic, and Armenian manuscripts, and that in other manuscripts asterisks or obeli mark the verses as doubtful or spurious. Eusebius and Jerome, well aware of such variation in the witnesses, discussed which form of text was to be preferred. It is noteworthy, however, that neither Father suggested that one form was canonical and the other was not. Furthermore, the perception that the canon was basically closed did not lead to a slavish fixing of the text of the canonical books. Thus, the category of 'canonical' appears to have been broad enough to include all variant readings (as well as variant renderings in early versions) that emerged during the course of the transmission of the New Testament documents while apostolic tradition was still a living entity, with an intermingling of written and oral forms of that tradition. Already in the second century, for example, the so-called long ending of Mark was known to Justin Martyr and to Tatian, who incorporated it into his Diatesseron. There seems to be good reason, therefore, to conclude that, though external and internal evidence is conclusive against the authenticity of the last twelve verses as coming from the same pen as the rest of the Gospel, the passage ought to be accepted as part of the canonical text of Mark.”

Bruce Metzger: The Canon of the New Testament: its Origin, Development, and Significance (Oxford, 1987)

[Melony]

My first reaction – was fear, with mouth open. Remember this John 8.1- 11 might fall (with a Mk 16 ending). My reaction was to not daring to see much into this – as a true finding. For me this finding is like 2 of these XXL church-roof-leaks. Yes, this is real. You too old ones: Trying to play like toddlers in you soap boxes – of slandery in old testament things - far too long. Yes in these things it would have always been good to learn from the more understanding ones. Also my beginners steps were - not daring to see much into this – as a true finding.

So today there is some understanding on my side. Having myself gone through this at a time. However after some 12 y of realy knowing this – I am much more in the calm. My soft smile to all this is there: Oh, how much we all loved these (seeming so valuable) extras. There will be a second discussion – for this. See this - cit.: #6 footnote. Kelhoffer 2001: 81pg

A given (cit.. as below) - list of last centuries scolary discussion :

A. Birch, Variae Lectiones ad Textum IV Evangeliorum, Hauniae 1801,226.

K. Lachmann, Rechenschaft über seine Ausgabe des Neuen Testaments, ThStKr 1830; 3: 843- 845.

K. Lachmann, Rechenschaft über die Ausgabe des Novum Testamentum Graece et Latine, Berlin 1842; 1: 314.

S. P. Tregelles, An Account of the Printed Text of the Greek New Testament, London 1854, 247- 251.

J. W. Burgon, The Last Twelve Verses of the Gospel According to S.Mark Vindicated against Recent Critical Objectors and Established, Oxford/London 1871, 41- 51.

B. F. Westcott/F. J. A. Hort, The New Testament in the Original Greek,Cambridge 1896; 2: 30- 33 Appendix.

C. R. Williams, The Appendices to the Gospel according to Mark, Transact of Conne Acad Art Scienc, 1915; 18: 444- 447.

G. Bardy, La litterature patristique des 'quaesstiones et responsiones' sur l'e criture sainte, RB 1932; 41: 228- 236;

J. Quasten, Patrology,3,337;

K. Aland, Bemerkungen zum Schluß des Markusevangeliums, in: Neotestamentica et Semitica. Studies in Honour of Matthew Black, Edinburgh 1969, see ( 160, 287,) 438 pg.

J. K. Elliott, The Text and Language of the Endings to Mark’s Gospel (1971), in:The Language and Style of the Gospel of Mark: An Edition of C. H. Turner’s “Notes on Marcan Usage” together with Comparable Studies (NT.S 71), Leiden/New York 1993, 203- 211 (here: 204 pg).

J. Hug, La finale de l’evangile de Marc: Mc 16,9 - 20 (Etudes Bibliques), Paris 1978, 11- 12, 193- 194.

From: J Kelhoffer. The witness of Eusebius ad martinum and other christian writings. To text-critical debates concerning the original conclusion to Mark's Gospel. Zeitrschrift NT wissenschaft u aeltere Kirche. 2001; 92: 78- 112. [80-81 pg.] Univ Upsala.

 

My- Prayer Request for – the very good leadership personal in greek text knoledge …DE

ps. NA (Nestle Aland text) was 2012 at a 28 th change. All changes are 2 or 3 years later taken by every bible society - world wide. Barbara Aland was 22 y married to K. Aland and has lead his work on to new standarts since 1994. She is now in her 79 th year. And still functions as Co-Autor at Muenster -Greek NT research. The true and upright succesion – A lokal leadership to uprise for the next 3 decads in great scolars quality at the University town (muenster Germany) is - much wanted. This is a mater that God wants to handle.                         (Having had only a glimpse here of what is happening )-       We are to pray into that one – please.

Passages that they now have started to handle- for the last 2- 3 years at INTF muenster DE – are: Acts, and starting to review gospel sections soon. (30 verses – were again changed at this NA 28- 2012 greek text readings – of catholoic letter. ) similar style - of deep cross-check work will still come. 

 

 

Edited February 15, 2016 by Melony
Pray: a leader - in Muenster Germany- for this work