• **Notifications**: Notifications can be dismissed by clicking on the "x" on the righthand side of the notice.
  • **New Style**: You can now change style options. Click on the paintbrush at the bottom of this page.
  • **Donations**: If the Lord leads you please consider helping with monthly costs and up keep on our Forum. Click on the Donate link In the top menu bar. Thanks
  • **New Blog section**: There is now a blog section. Check it out near the Private Debates forum or click on the Blog link in the top menu bar.
  • Welcome Visitors! Join us and be blessed while fellowshipping and celebrating our Glorious Salvation In Christ Jesus.

Bible version

No, according to Mark 16:8.




Why not?
You know why not. You removed the "why not" part of my post when you quoted it!

Here it is again, since you deleted it "accidentally".

The manuscript evidence is that 98.5% of extant Greek manuscripts that contain the ending of Mark, have verses 9-20 (with slight variations) - many hundreds of them. Of the rest, precisely three manuscripts end at verse 8. One of the three is not regarded as important by anyone; the other two disagree with each other over 3,000 times, in the gospels alone, and are riddled with copyists errors.

Here is the footnote re. this, from the NKJV, "Vv. 9-20 are bracketed in NU as not in the original text. They are lacking in Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Vaticanus, although nearly all other mss. of Mark contain them.".

Here is the footnote from the World English Bible, "NU includes the text of verses 9-20, but mentions in a footnote that a few manuscripts omitted it. The translators of the World English Bible regard Mark 16:9-20 as reliable based on an overwhelming majority of textual evidence, including not only the authoritative Greek Majority Text New Testament, but also the TR and many of the manuscripts cited in the NU text.".
 
You know why not. You removed the "why not" part of my post when you quoted it!

Here it is again, since you deleted it "accidentally".

The manuscript evidence is that 98.5% of extant Greek manuscripts that contain the ending of Mark, have verses 9-20 (with slight variations) - many hundreds of them. Of the rest, precisely three manuscripts end at verse 8. One of the three is not regarded as important by anyone; the other two disagree with each other over 3,000 times, in the gospels alone, and are riddled with copyists errors.

Here is the footnote re. this, from the NKJV, "Vv. 9-20 are bracketed in NU as not in the original text. They are lacking in Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Vaticanus, although nearly all other mss. of Mark contain them.".

Here is the footnote from the World English Bible, "NU includes the text of verses 9-20, but mentions in a footnote that a few manuscripts omitted it. The translators of the World English Bible regard Mark 16:9-20 as reliable based on an overwhelming majority of textual evidence, including not only the authoritative Greek Majority Text New Testament, but also the TR and many of the manuscripts cited in the NU text.".

Manuscripts have to be weighed and not merely counted.

Alot of witnesses to an event does not trump a few that are more trustworthy.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TB2
Manuscripts have to be weighed and not merely counted.

Alot of witnesses to an event does not trump a few that are more trustworthy.
The "few" are anything but trustworthy, in this case, as I've pointed out.
 
I already read that years ago.

Make your case because so far you are doing a terrible job.
You haven't given any real answers to any of the points I've made, yet now you resort to vacuous pejoratives. Never mind...
 
8 They went out, and fled from the tomb, for trembling and astonishment had come on them. They said nothing to anyone; for they were afraid.

Does anyone, apart from Fred and Civic, think that this is a remotely appropriate place to end a gospel?

Why wouldn't it be?
 
The "few" are anything but trustworthy, in this case, as I've pointed out.
A biased, value judgment statement. The "few" were the majority for the first eight centuries of church history.
 
That is incorrect. There over 100 manuscripts
Oh, really; well, perhaps you're the first person ever to discover this, because everyone else (including textual experts) says otherwise. Even those who claim that Mark 16 ends at verse 8, admit that at least 99% of extant Greek manuscripts that contain Mark 16 do not end at verse 8.
 
A biased, value judgment statement. The "few" were the majority for the first eight centuries of church history.
The Alexandrian readings have never been the majority, during any period of church history.
 
The majority of NT scholars do (!)
Then they reject God's providential preservation of the Scriptures, along with verbal and plenary inspiration. In fact, it's true that most "experts" who support the so-called Critical Text are Liberal heretics.
 
Then they reject God's providential preservation of the Scriptures, along with verbal and plenary inspiration. In fact, it's true that most "experts" who support the so-called Critical Text are Liberal heretics.
The Majority-Text doesn't meet its own standards of majority reading and providential preservation in every age
 
Oh, really; well, perhaps you're the first person ever to discover this, because everyone else (including textual experts) says otherwise. Even those who claim that Mark 16 ends at verse 8, admit that at least 99% of extant Greek manuscripts that contain Mark 16 do not end at verse 8.
That's a different claim than saying there are only 3 manuscripts
 
The Alexandrian readings have never been the majority, during any period of church history.
For the first eight centuries

phpt7etli.jpg
 
Didn't realize evidence was so funny, but to each his own
 
That's a different claim than saying there are only 3 manuscripts
There certainly are nothing like a hundred. I've have only heard of three that contain Mark 16 that stop at verse 8; and one of those is not regarded as important by anyone.
 
Back
Top