Bart Ehrman - Mark 16:9-20
- Thread starter canada-man
- Start date
Mark 16:9-20 has been called a later addition to the Gospel of Mark by most New Testament scholars in the past century. The main reason for doubting the authenticity of the ending is that it does not appear in some of the oldest existing witnesses, and it is reported to be absent from many others in ancient times by early writers of the Church. Moreover, the ending has some stylistic features which also suggest that it came from another hand. The Gospel is obviously incomplete without these verses, and so most scholars believe that the final leaf of the original manuscript was lost, and that the ending which appears in English versions today (verses 9-20) was supplied during the second century. Below are some excerpts from various scholarly sources that conclude that the verses are a later addition.
Nevertheless, some scholars have not been impressed with the evidence against these verses, and have maintained that they are original. These scholars have pointed out that the witnesses which bring the verses into question are few, and that the verses are quoted by church Fathers very early, even in the second century. To represent this point of view we give below a long excerpt from F.H.A. Scrivener, together with its footnotes.
http://www.bible-researcher.com/endmark.html
Nevertheless, some scholars have not been impressed with the evidence against these verses, and have maintained that they are original. These scholars have pointed out that the witnesses which bring the verses into question are few, and that the verses are quoted by church Fathers very early, even in the second century. To represent this point of view we give below a long excerpt from F.H.A. Scrivener, together with its footnotes.
http://www.bible-researcher.com/endmark.html
Poor C-M always thinking that most Christians are uneducated and going to loose their faith over something as stupid as this.
p.s. I don't believe in snake handling.
p.s. I don't believe in snake handling.
US atheists know more about religion than believers, quiz finds
Atheist Americans know more about religion than their faithful compatriots, research has found.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/rel...about-religion-than-believers-quiz-finds.html
Had the scores been the reverse you never would have seen the results. We are talking about only one country in a world of 200+. I wonder how the other 199+ made out on the test. The US is also the country that the electorate barely knows how their government works. This is more a comment of the US not religious people. Keep swinging C-M.
So in 7 posts you've changed the topic of your own thread onto something totally different. We started out talking about Mr Ehrman and his incomplete analysis of a single Bible passage to something as relevant to the price of rice in Sweden. Good work C-M.
here is the editor of a website blacrock13 linked to:
About the Editor, Michael Marlowe
Concerning the Bible, I believe that it is the inerrant, living and powerful word of God. God has used it to inspire and strengthen me for many years now, and it means everything to me. Over the years I have given much of my time and energy to studying it and helping others to understand and believe it.
http://www.bible-researcher.com/biog.html
this is blackrock13's source. a man who claims the bible is the divine word of god and takes the bible literally. claiming that Bart Erhman who is an expert in the field of biblical studies is incomplete
this is no different from a creationist claiming a scientist who is an expert in evolutionary biology is wrong and mistaken
Do you think he's the only source, for crying out loud?
Mark 16:9–20, describing some disciples' encounters with the resurrected Jesus, appears to be a later addition to the gospel. Mark 16:8 stops at a description of the empty tomb, which is immediately preceded by a statement by a "young man dressed in a white robe" that Jesus is "risen" and is "going ahead of you into Galilee." The last twelve verses are missing from the oldest manuscripts of Mark's Gospel.[41] The style of these verses differs from the rest of Mark, suggesting they were a later addition. In a handful of manuscripts, a "short ending" is included after 16:8, but before the "long ending", and exists by itself in one of the earliest Old Latin codices, Codex Bobiensis. By the 5th century, at least four different endings have been attested. (See Mark 16 for a more comprehensive treatment of this topic.) Possibly, the Long Ending (16:9–20) started as a summary of evidence for Jesus' resurrection and the apostles' divine mission, based on other gospels.[42] It was probably composed early in the 2nd century and incorporated into the gospel around the middle of the 2nd century.[42]
The 3rd-century theologian Origen of Alexandria quoted the resurrection stories in Matthew, Luke, and John, but failed to quote anything after Mark 16:8, suggesting that his copy of Mark stopped there. Eusebius and Jerome both mention the majority of texts available to them omitted the longer ending.[43] Critics are divided over whether the original ending at 16:8 was intentional, whether it resulted from accidental loss, or even the author's death.[44] Those who believe that 16:8 was not the intended ending argue that it would be very unusual syntax for the text to end with the conjunction gar (γάρ), as does Mark 16:8, and that thematically it would be strange for a book of good news to end with a note of fear (ἐφοβοῦντο γὰρ, "for they were afraid").[45] If the 16:8 ending was intentional, it could indicate a connection to the theme of the "Messianic Secret". This abrupt ending is also used to support the identification of this book as an example of closet drama, which characteristically ended without resolution and often with a tragic or shocking event that prevents closure.[46]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel_of_Mark
Mark 16 is the final chapter of the Gospel of Mark in the New Testament of the Christian Bible. It begins with the discovery of the empty tomb by Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James, and Salome. There they encounter a man dressed in white who announces the Resurrection of Jesus.
Verse 8 ends with the women fleeing from the empty tomb, and saying "nothing to anyone, because they were afraid." Many scholars take 16:8 as the original ending and believe the longer ending (16:9-20) was written later by someone else as a summary of Jesus' resurrection appearances and several miracles performed by Christians. In this 12-verse passage, the author refers to Jesus' appearances to Mary Magdalene, two disciples, and then the Eleven (the Twelve Apostles minus Judas). The text concludes with the Great Commission, declaring that believers that have been baptized will be saved while nonbelievers will be condemned, and pictures Jesus taken to Heaven and sitting at the Right Hand of God.[1]
Most scholars, following the approach of the textual critic Bruce Metzger, hold the view that verses 9-20 were not part of the original text.[1] Textual critics have identified two distinct endings—the "Longer Ending" (vv. 9-20) and the "Shorter Ending," which appear together in six Greek manuscripts, and in dozens of Ethiopic copies. The "Shorter Ending," with slight variations, runs as follows: "But they reported briefly to Peter and those with him all that they had been told. And after this, Jesus himself sent out by means of them, from east to west, the sacred and imperishable proclamation of eternal salvation."
In one Latin manuscript from c. 430, the "Shorter Ending" appears without the "Longer Ending." In this Latin copy (Codex Bobbiensis, "k"), the text of Mark 16 is anomalous: it contains an interpolation between 16:3 and 16:4 which appears to present Christ's ascension occurring at that point; it omits the last part of 16:8, and it contains some strange errors in its presentation of the "Shorter Ending." Other irregularities in Codex Bobbiensis lead to the conclusion that it was produced by a copyist (probably in Egypt) who was unfamiliar with the material he was copying.
Because of patristic evidence from the late 2nd century for the existence of copies of Mark with the "Longer Ending," it is contended by a majority of scholars that the "Longer Ending" must have been written and attached no later than the early 2nd century.[2] Scholars are divided on the question of whether the "Longer Ending" was created deliberately to finish the Gospel of Mark (as contended by James Kelhoffer) or if it began its existence as a freestanding text which was used to "patch" the otherwise abruptly ending text of Mark. Its failure to smoothly pick up the narrative from the scene at the end of 16:8 is a point in favor of the latter option. There is disagreement among scholars as to whether Mark originally stopped writing at 16:8—and if he did so, if it was deliberate or not—or if he continued writing an ending which is now lost. Allusions to a future meeting in Galilee between Jesus and the disciples (in Mark 14:28 and 16:7) seem to suggest that Mark intended to write beyond 16:8.[2]
The Council of Trent, reacting to Protestant criticism, defined the Canon of Trent which is the Roman Catholic biblical canon. "Decretum de Canonicis Scripturis," issued in 1546 at the fourth session of the Council, affirms that Jesus commanded that the gospel was to be preached by His apostles to every creature—a statement clearly based on Mark 16:15. The decree proceeded to affirm, after listing the books of the Bible according to the Roman Catholic canon, that "If anyone receive not, as sacred and canonical, the said books entire with all their parts, as they have been used to be read in the Catholic Church, and as they are contained in the old Latin Vulgate edition, and knowingly and deliberately condemn the traditions aforesaid; let him be anathema." Since Mark 16:9-20 is part of the Gospel of Mark in the Vulgate, and the passage has been routinely read in the churches since ancient times (as demonstrated by its use by Ambrose, Augustine, Peter Chrysologus, Severus of Antioch, Leo, etc.), the Council's decree affirms the canonical status of the passage. This passage was also used by Protestants during the Protestant Reformation; Martin Luther used Mark 16:16 as the basis for a doctrine in his Shorter Catechism. Mark 16:9-20 was included in the Rheims New Testament, and in the King James Bible and other influential translations. In most modern-day translations based primarily on the Alexandrian Text, it is included but is accompanied by brackets or by special notes, or both.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_16
Bert not raising a new question and it's been answered and put to sleep each and every time.
There have been over 200 translation of the original scripts and there are changes made in most to suit the intended audience, but the message is the same in the end. This is not a mystery or a conspiracy.
With the exception of that single word " inerrant" with which I too would disagree. I would say it isn't far from: "this Book, [is] the most valuable thing that this world affords. Here is Wisdom; This is the royal Law; These are the lively Oracles of God."
That as well as "I believe that it is the living and powerful word of God. God has used it to inspire and strengthen me" are statements with which every Christian can agree.
Does that mean every passage is great - no, does that mean it is the story of God working out his purpose with mankind - yes.
