The Ending of Mark Again

Discussion in '2004 Archive' started by Phillip, Oct 15, 2004.

  1. Phillip

    Phillip
    Expand Collapse
    <b>Moderator</b>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2001
    Messages:
    6,708
    Likes Received:
    0
    Per bulletin board rules, I am starting a new thread. Unlike the thread that was closed due to personal attacks, I would like to stick strictly to documented evidence and manuscript evidence.

    If this goes off thread, I give my wholehearted agreement to close it immediately.

    Dr. Bob posed a very interesting question that was never really answered to my satisfaction.

    Please, just provide manuscripts and endings, not opinions of such. I would really like to compare how many manuscripts have the ending, how many do not, and how many disagree and what they say. It would be nice to get the manuscript numbers or designation also, if that can be provided.

    If you cannot add positive information or ask intelligent questions, please don't post on this thread.
     
  2. manchester

    manchester
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2004
    Messages:
    401
    Likes Received:
    0
    I believe we should reject the late additions to Mark. It ends where it ends. The various additions should be footnotes.
     
  3. NaasPreacher (C4K)

    NaasPreacher (C4K)
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2003
    Messages:
    26,806
    Likes Received:
    78
    This is a worthwhile thread, as was the original. Please try to keep it on topic and do not let it be truned into a KJVO debate.
     
  4. michelle

    michelle
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2003
    Messages:
    3,217
    Likes Received:
    0
    --------------------------------------------------
    Please, just provide manuscripts and endings, not opinions of such. I would really like to compare how many manuscripts have the ending, how many do not, and how many disagree and what they say. It would be nice to get the manuscript numbers or designation also, if that can be provided.

    --------------------------------------------------


    I thought the poster Ziggy provided this information in the last thread on this topic. If you are really interested in learning of these irrelevant things, maybe you could ask others of any books or resources that might provide the information for you.


    love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
    michelle
     
  5. NaasPreacher (C4K)

    NaasPreacher (C4K)
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2003
    Messages:
    26,806
    Likes Received:
    78
    One of the purposes of a forum is for discussion and education. This thread is not "irrelevant" and deserves a fair run on topic.
     
  6. Phillip

    Phillip
    Expand Collapse
    <b>Moderator</b>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2001
    Messages:
    6,708
    Likes Received:
    0
    You do make a good point, but the purpose of the debate is to allow the sharing of information both pro and con toward translations. Sure, we could end every debate with providing books to everyone, but that would end the purpose of the debate. The debate is to SHARE knowledge among Christians (and in this section Baptists in particular).

    So, therefore, I wish to discuss the history behind the ending of Mark as evidenced by manuscripts. Obviously, you don't. That is fine. Don't . . . . . . .

    What may be irrelevant to you, may be revevant to 90% of the other posters. This is not an insult, just a fact that if you are not interested in it, then nobody said you had to join in.

    It is a VERY interesting thread and hopefully we can continue in a Christian like manner from here.
     
  7. williemakeit

    williemakeit
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2004
    Messages:
    393
    Likes Received:
    0
    Yes, but Michelle had a valid point. I was following the original thread with interest up to and including Ziggy's post. Afterwards, the thread was taken down the same ol' trail, so I didn't bother to wade through the slop and mud. Did anyone ever reply, or refute Ziggy's post. Believe me, I am reading for the education.
     
  8. Phillip

    Phillip
    Expand Collapse
    <b>Moderator</b>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2001
    Messages:
    6,708
    Likes Received:
    0
    Sorry, C4K, didn't mean to steal your thunder. I was writing when you posted.
     
  9. Phillip

    Phillip
    Expand Collapse
    <b>Moderator</b>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2001
    Messages:
    6,708
    Likes Received:
    0
    Does someone have a list of alternative endings in manuscripts and what they say?
     
  10. Phillip

    Phillip
    Expand Collapse
    <b>Moderator</b>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2001
    Messages:
    6,708
    Likes Received:
    0
    Yes, but Michelle had a valid point. I was following the original thread with interest up to and including Ziggy's post. Afterwards, the thread was taken down the same ol' trail, so I didn't bother to wade through the slop and mud. Did anyone ever reply, or refute Ziggy's post. Believe me, I am reading for the education. </font>[/QUOTE]Do you mean, Ziggy's post in the original "ending of Mark thread"? I will have to go and look it up in the archive. I forgot what he said.

    As we used to say in military communications; the static seems to be very high today, letting through only bursts of important info.

    I'll check his last post and maybe even pull it forward with the permission of our moderator.
     
  11. michelle

    michelle
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2003
    Messages:
    3,217
    Likes Received:
    0
    --------------------------------------------------
    You do make a good point, but the purpose of the debate is to allow the sharing of information both pro and con toward translations. Sure, we could end every debate with providing books to everyone, but that would end the purpose of the debate. The debate is to SHARE knowledge among Christians (and in this section Baptists in particular).

    --------------------------------------------------


    Now I am confused, as I thought you said this:


    --------------------------------------------------
    Please, just provide manuscripts and endings, not opinions of such. I would really like to compare how many manuscripts have the ending, how many do not, and how many disagree and what they say. It would be nice to get the manuscript numbers or designation also, if that can be provided.

    If you cannot add positive information or ask intelligent questions, please don't post on this thread.
    --------------------------------------------------


    This is the meaning of debate:

    debate: to discuss reasons for or against something 2. to take part in a debate with (a person) or about (a question) -n. 1. a discussion of opposing reasons 2. a formal contest of skill in reasoned argument.


    A reasoned argument goes against what your stated INTENT of this thread is, and then you contradict yourself in the above. One cannot debate, or partake in reasoned arguments, unless "OPINIONS" are included in that. Is this an attempt to keep the "OPINIONS" of who you label KJVO out? Seems to be the case to me, as very evident on the other thread.


    love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
    michelle
     
  12. TC

    TC
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    May 7, 2003
    Messages:
    2,225
    Likes Received:
    10
    Before one can debate anything, facts must be presented. He is asking for facts. Opinions without facts are meaningless (IMO).
     
  13. Phillip

    Phillip
    Expand Collapse
    <b>Moderator</b>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2001
    Messages:
    6,708
    Likes Received:
    0
    Michelle, oh Michelle,

    You may state your opinion, but don't keep interrupting with nonsensical statements when we start a good discussion. If you want to discuss "INTENT" your INTENT is to derail every subject that does not fit your little world.

    See, we shouldn't even be discussing this here. I opened the thread, I set the ground rules within the bounds of the boards rules. Open your own thread and rant all you want. Nobody will stop you, unless you resort to personal attacks.

    I am trying to obtain historical information here, not "OPINIONS". Regardless of the definition of debate, I think I have a right, within the boards rules to ask for that.

    When you keep interrupting with "I know your real intents, blah, blah, blah ad nauseum." The thread is ruined. If that is your plan of attack, then I ask you in all humbleness to not do it.

    I honestly feel that the moderators have been VERY generous to you by letting you rant as much as you do.

    If I were a moderator, I might not have had as much patience when it came to calling people "liars", "you know better", "you are trying to deceive us with your intent", "I know the intent of your thread.", blah, blah blah.

    If you realize this, you could be a good debater, but every single thread that has been cut off has one common variable.

    Because I believe you mean well, I would rather see you stay here and debate, but when you become a stumbling stone to every single thread that you disagree with, then that becomes a problem for everybody.

    Stick to what the INTENT of the thread is STATED. Not what YOU think the author is trying to do. It doesn't MATTER what the author is trying to do. If he/she comes up with a conclusion to open another thread and use that information, then you can step in.

    When the intent is to find historical data, your opinion is worthless. So is that of every single other person on this board, including myself. Now, if the thread invites opinions, that is a whole other story.

    You need to lighten up before you blow a gasket. I for one, respect you as a Christian, but I do get tired of you bringing the "attitude" to the discussion.

    I am only spending this much time and wasting the boards band-width in order to try to help you understand what the problem is and how you too can provide good input to our debates.

    I am not going to do this again, because technically it is against rules, but somebody needs to be blunt and tell you what is going on and hopefully you can realize this and become a good debator and we don't lose you. Otherwise, you are headed for a shut-down, I'm afraid (I do not speak for the moderators) but, as I said before, if threads keep closing they are going to HAVE to do something in order to prevent damage to the bulletin board.
     
  14. Phillip

    Phillip
    Expand Collapse
    <b>Moderator</b>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2001
    Messages:
    6,708
    Likes Received:
    0
    Thank you, TC! [​IMG]
     
  15. NaasPreacher (C4K)

    NaasPreacher (C4K)
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2003
    Messages:
    26,806
    Likes Received:
    78
    Basic facts to start the debate please.

    Can a manuscript scholar please share with us what MSS conained the longer ending of Mark and which did not?
     
  16. rsr

    rsr
    Expand Collapse
    <b> 7,000 posts club</b>
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2001
    Messages:
    10,073
    Likes Received:
    101
  17. Phillip

    Phillip
    Expand Collapse
    <b>Moderator</b>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2001
    Messages:
    6,708
    Likes Received:
    0
    NOW, can we get back to Mark?

    A good point was made in a link that was graciously provided to me. (You might want to share it with all.)

    I did not realize that even church fathers of the early church did not refer to Mark's ending and that there was pretty good evidence of exactly who wrote it. Very interesting.

    I did know, that no older manuscript contains the correct ending.
     
  18. Phillip

    Phillip
    Expand Collapse
    <b>Moderator</b>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2001
    Messages:
    6,708
    Likes Received:
    0
    THANKS RSR, you already did share. . . [​IMG]

    GREAT information there. I suggest everybody look at it.
     
  19. williemakeit

    williemakeit
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2004
    Messages:
    393
    Likes Received:
    0
    I went to the link, and it was very difficult reading for me considering I am not that familiar with early church history, including history of the manuscripts.

    Bottom line--there have been disagreements regarding the ending of Mark for centuries. I have had my bible for 30 years, and the ending is in there. At the age of 17, it was the only bible I had to read, and there wasn't a footnote telling me that it did not appear in older manuscripts, so I literally took it as the Word of God.

    When reading the Scrivener portion, was he defending the additional verses as the correct ending?

    BTW Phillip, does your statement "I did know, that no older manuscript contains the correct ending" mean that in your opinion, the additional verses in Mark 16 are the correct ending?
     
  20. michelle

    michelle
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2003
    Messages:
    3,217
    Likes Received:
    0

Share This Page

Loading...