Gospel of Mark - a study of conflicting versions

Hi again gb, I should have mentioned this before, but regarding the Acts 13:20 article and the different readings, the WH text doesn't fit the numbers no matter how you try to put it together. The "explanations" provided by those who try to defend it do not match the actual number of years counting from anybody to any time. I thought I had demonstrated that.

If you think it does, please explain. Thanks,

Will

 

Mark chapter 12

Mark 12:4 "And again he sent unto them another servant; AND AT HIM THEY CAST STONES, and wounded him in the head, AND SENT HIM AWAY shamefully handled."

All the capital lettered words are found in the majority of texts, including A, C, the Syriac Peshitta, Harkelian, but Sinaiticus-Vaticanus omit them and so do the NASB, NIV, ESV.

Mark 12:10 "And have ye not read this scripture; The stone which the builders rejected is become THE HEAD OF THE CORNER."

The Revised Version, American Standard Version, Geneva Bible and many others read literally "the head of the corner", and even though the NRSV, ESV read "cornerstone", they both tell us in a footnote that the literal Greek is "head of the corner" (Kephaleen gwvias).

The NKJV, and NASB both read "CHIEF cornerSTONE", and though not literally what the texts say, at least they give the idea that Christ is the foundation of the building. However the NIV actually says: "has become THE CAPSTONE". Now, the capstone is the final stone placed on the top of the building; not the foundation. This is the opposite meaning than the one intended.

Mark 12:19 "Master, Moses wrote unto us, If a man's brother die, and leave his wife behind him, and leave no CHILDREN (plural), that his brother should take his wife..."

The Majority of texts as well as Sinaiticus, A, C, Old Latin, Syriac and the NIV read "CHILDREN", but Vaticanus has the singular "child" and so do the NASB, ESV.

Mark 12:23 "In the resurrection THEREFORE, WHEN THEY SHALL RISE, whose wife shall she be of them?"

The phrase "when they shall rise" (hotan anastoosi) is found in the Majority of all texts, A, Old Latin, Syriac, AND in the Nestle, UBS Greek texts. It is also the reading found in the NASB, ESV, and the Holman Christian Standard.

However, Sinaiticus, Vaticanus, C, and D omit this phrase and it is omitted by the ASV, NIV, RSV, NRSV, and the upcoming ISV. So we see the old RSV omitted it, but the ESV revision puts it back in; The upcoming Holman version puts it in, but the upcoming ISV does not!

Mark 12:29-30 "And Jesus answered him, The first OF ALL THE COMMANDMENTS, is Hear, O Israel; The Lord our God is one Lord: and thou shal love the Lord thy God with all thy heart...and with all thy strength: THIS IS THE FIRST COMMANDMENT."

The capitalized words are found in the majority of all texts, including A, C, the Old Latin, Syriac and even the Catholic Douay version. However Sinaiticus and Vaticanus omit them and so do the NASB, NIV, ESV and the newer Catholic versions too.

Mark 12:32 "And the scribe said unto him, Well, Master, thou hast well said the truth: for there is one GOD: and there is none other but he."

Here the word GOD is found in many manuscripts and ancient versions like the Old Latin, the Syriac Sinaitic, Curetonian, Palestinian, Coptic Sahadic and Boharic, Armenian, Georgian, and in the Spanish too. Even the NIV, and the new ISV include the words "there is one GOD".

However Siniaticus, A, and Vaticanus omit the word GOD and so do the NASB, RSV, ESV, and the upcoming Holman version. The NASB reads: "HE is one, and there is no one else besides him."

Mark 12:33 "And to love him with all the heart, and with all the understanding, AND WITH ALL THE SOUL...is more than all whole burnt offerings and sacrifices."

The words "and with all the soul" are found in the majority of all texts, including A, and D, the Syriac and Old Latin. They are also in the Douay version, but later Catholic versions now omit these words. Sinaiticus and Vaticanus omit them and so do the RSV, NASB, NIV, ESV.

Mark 12:38 "...And THE COMMON PEOPLE heard him gladly."

What was true then, is still true today. The common people hear Him gladly. The example here is one of translation, not textual. The Greek texts have: ho polus oxlos. Versions like the NASB, NIV, RSV, ESV have translated this as "THE GREAT THRONG" (RSV, ESV) or THE LARGE CROWD heard him gladly (NASB, NIV). This translation misses the point that they were the common people as opposed to the Pharisees and Herodians, the religious leaders of the day mentioned in verse 13, who came to catch Him in His words.

The placement of the word polus affects the meaning. The "great multitude" or "the great crowd" is ho oxlos polus, and this is found in places like John 12:9, 12; and Rev. 7:9. However, when the word polus is placed before the word oxlos (people), the meaning changes. Many versions have missed this distinction, but among the versions that correctly have "THE COMMON PEOPLE heard him gladly" are the NKJV, Webster's, the Douay version (though later Catholic versions now follow the RSV reading), the Spanish Reina Valera of 1909 (but not the 1960 version), the Hebrew Names Version, World English Bible, the Bible in Basic English 1970, the KJV 21, and the Third Millenium Bible.


Will Kinney

 

Hi Ed, you post: posted March 15, 2004 08:18
Mark 12:38 "...And THE COMMON PEOPLE heard him gladly."
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Before you use this elsewhere,
please note it should be Mark 12:37. Thank you.


Thanks Ed for catching that. I changed it now.

Then you say:

However the NIV actually says: "has become THE CAPSTONE". Now, the capstone is the final stone placed on the top of the building; not the foundation. This is the opposite meaning than the one intended."

I believe THE CAPSTONE to be the most
important of the stones, hense the exact message
God wanted to be relayed. God was relaying
that Jesus, the Christ, is the most important
of all. What meaning do you
think was intended that "capstone" does
not relate?

Ed, the NIV blew it by calling Christ the capstone. The Lord Jesus Christ is the foundation stone of the church, not the top part. See 1 Cor. 3:11 and a whole slew of verses Acts 4:11, etc. Even the NIV has Christ predicted as the stone, a precious corner stone, a sure FOUNDATION, in Isaiah 28:16.

The NIV is wrong. Thanks though for your question about it.

Will Kinney

 

Mark chapter 13


Mark 13:8 "For nation shall rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom: and there shall be earthquakes in divers places, and there shall be famines AND TROUBLES: these are the beginnings of SORROWS."

There are two problems in this verse - one is textual and the other is translational. The words "and troubles" are found in the majority of all texts, Alexandrinus, some Old Latin, the Syriac and the NKJV, and Spanish translations. However Siniaticus and Vaticanus omit them and so do the NASB, NIV, ESV.

The translational problems has to do with the word "sorrows". Sorrows would be the personal afflictions and difficulties faced by the people themselves. Versions that correctly translate this word as sorrows are Tyndale, Geneva, Young's, Douay, Bishop's Bible, Webster, Third Millenium Bible and the NKJV.

The word translated in the KJB as "sorrows" is also used in the LXX to translate "sorrows" in Exodus 15:14; Psalms 18:4, 5 "the sorrows of death compassed me...the sorrows of hell compassed me about", and as "anguish" in Deut. 2:25 "and be in anguish because of thee".

Other versions have variations of the same meaning. For example: "the beginnings of SUFFERING" RSV, Throes - Darby, travail - RV, ASV; beginnings of troubles - Bible in Basic English, Contemporary English Version; "the horrors to come" - New Living Translation; "but these are nothing compared to what is coming" - the Message.

However the NASB, NIV, ESV have introduced a New Age buzz word by translating this as: "these are the beginnings of BIRTH PANGS." This phrase is often used by New Agers to describe the coming New Age of Christ Consciousness and personal godhood. In fact, the New English Bible 1970 says: "these are the birth pangs of the new age."

Mark 13:14 "But when ye see the abomination of desolation SPOKEN OF BY DANIEL THE PROPHET, standing where it ought not, (let him that readeth understand,) then let them that be in Judea flee to the mountains."

The whole phrase "spoken of by Daniel the prophet" and to which the Lord refers when He says "let him that readeth understand" is found in the majority of all texts as well as Alexandrinus, the Old Latin, the Syriac, Armenian, Ethiopian, and at least 24 other uncial copies. However Sinaiticus and Vaticanus omit this phrase and so do the NASB, NIV, ESV.

Mark 13:17 "But woe to them THAT ARE WITH CHILD, and to them that give suck in those days!"

An interesting and very subtle change has taken place in the modern versions here. They have now become abortion friendly. All the older versions read: "to them that are WITH CHILD" including Tyndale, Geneva, the Revised Version, American Standard Version, even the RSV, and Young's, Darby, Douay, and the Hebrew Names Version.

The NASB read "those that ARE WITH CHILD" from 1960 up through 1977, but then in 1995 the NASB update version changed the reading to: "THOSE THAT ARE PREGNANT", instead of "those that are WITH CHILD".

A modern woman wouldn't think twice about terminating her "pregnancy", but tell her she is terminating HER CHILD and she might reconsider. Now the NKJV, ESV, NIV, ISV, Holman, and the NASB 95 all read: "them that are pregnant".

Mark 13:23 "But take ye heed: BEHOLD , I have foretold you all things."

This little word BEHOLD (idou) is found in the majority of all texts AND Sinaiticus, as well as A and C. It is in the NKJV, the Catholic Douay, Lamsa's translation of the Syriac Peshitta, and in the Revised Version, the American Standard Version, and the NASB.

However Vaticanus omits this little word, and so do the NIV, ESV, and the more modern Catholic versions like the New Jerusalem.

Mark 13:27 "And he shall send HIS (autou) angels, and shall gather together his elect from the four winds..."

This little word HIS is found in the majority of all texts AND in Sinaiticus again, as well as A, C, Old Latin, Syriac, the Catholic Douay, and in the NIV and the upcoming ISV.

However Vaticanus omits the word "his" and this time the NASB, ESV, and later Catholic versions follow Vaticanus and reject Sinaiticus by saying "the angels" instead of His angels.

Mark 13:33 "Take ye heed, watch AND PRAY: for ye know not when the time is."

The words "and pray" are in the majority of all texts including Sinaiticus, A, C, the Old Latin, Syriac, Coptic, Armenian, Ethiopian, Slavonic, and in the Revised Version and the American Standard Version, as well as the Catholic Douay version.

But Vaticanus omits the words "and pray" and so too do the NASB, NIV, ESV, ISV, and the more modern Catholic versions. Nothing like being consistently inconsistent, is there?

Will Kinney

 

Thank you brother Jim for your interest and appreciation of these little studies. God bless.

gb, the quote by Wallace or whoever has been addressed in the study I did on Acts 13:20. I am not going to quote his whole article. There is enough there to know what his point of view is, and he is wrong.

If you can make the numbers found in the nasb, niv, esv, etc. to fit, then please tell us how you do it.

Thanks,

Will

 

gb, I got the quote from Apologetics Press online. They advocate the modern versions, so it is hardly a KJB only site. Here it is. The quote is found towards the bottom of the page.

http://www.apologeticspress.org/rr/rr2002/r&r0206a.htm

If you can't find it, then go to Google and type in

"Wallace stated that “certain formulaic phrases are often employed" and that will take you there.

Will

 

Mark 14:68 and the cock crew

Mark 14:68 AND THE COCK CREW

To appreciate the importance of these inspired words, we need to look at what the Lord had specifically predicted in this chapter. In verse 30 we read: "And Jesus saith unto him, Verily I say unto thee, That this day, even in this night, before the cock crow twice, thou shalt deny me thrice."

Then in verse 68 one of the maids of the high priest sees Peter in the palace grounds and says to him: "And thou also wast with Jesus of Nazareth. But he denied, saying, I know not, neither understand I what thou sayest. And he went out into the porch; AND THE COCK CREW." (The first of the two times the cock crows).

In verses 69-71 twice more Peter is accused of being one of Jesus' disciples and twice more he denies it. Then we read in verse 72 "And THE SECOND TIME THE COCK CREW. And Peter called to mind the word that Jesus said unto him, Before the cock crow twice, thou shalt deny me thrice. And when he thought thereon, he wept."

In verse 68 the words "AND THE COCK CREW" are found in the Majority of all texts including A, C, and D. They are also in the Old Latin, the Syriac Peshitta, Harkelian, Gothic, Armenian, Georgian, and Ethiopian ancient versions.

These words are also found in Wycliffe 1395, Tyndale 1525, Coverdale 1535, Bishop's Bible 1568, the Geneva Bible 1599, and of course in the Authorized King James Holy Bible. In more modern times these words are in the NKJV, Young's, the Revised Version, American Standard Version, the Douay, New Jerusalem Bible, the NRSV, ESV, Holman Christian Standard, and the ISV.
They are even in the modern paraphrase called the Message.

However, Sinaiticus and Vaticanus omit these words and so do the RSV, NASB, NIV and the TNIV. Older versions of the Nestle-Aland Greek text omitted these words (4th edition, 1934), but now (27th edition, and UBS 3 and 4) they put them back in again! So, the RV, ASV, NRSV, ESV, ISV include these words, but the RSV, NASB, NIV, TNIV omit them.

In the King James Bible and many others we have our Lord predicting the cock shall crow TWICE and Peter will deny Him thrice. In the RSV, NASB, NIV, TNIV the first time the cock crows is missing.

Some will say, but the "oldest and best manuscripts" (Sinaiticus and Vaticanus) omit these words. Well, looking at verse 72 we read "And THE SECOND TIME the cock crew. And Peter called to mind the word that Jesus said unto him, Before the cock crow twice, thou shalt deny me thrice. And when he thought thereon, he wept." Here we see that Sinaiticus omits even these words "the second time", but they are found in Vaticanus!!

These are the two so called "oldest and best" manuscripts, which disagree with each thousands of times in the New Testament, and are the primary reason for the omission of some 3000 words and at least 15 whole verses in most modern versions like the NASB, NIV, RSV, ESV, ISV.

For a further look at what Sinaiticus and Vaticanus actually say, please see my article at:

http://www.geocities.com/brandplucked/oldbest.html

 

gb, you're being just plain silly.

When unable to refute sound arguments, sidetrack into insignificant details.

Will

 

Both you fellas are too much. You accuse me of plagarism and gb continued to ask me to provide where I got the quote from Wallace, and yet if either of you had taken the time to notice, I gave the information right there in the article on Acts 13:20 of where I got the quote!

Here it is AGAIN, guys. Open your eyes.

In his Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics, well-known Greek scholar Daniel B. Wallace stated that “certain formulaic phrases are often employed,...referring to the previous events” (1996, p. 333, emp. added). He then listed Acts 13:20 as one of those instances—and therein lies the key to the alleged discrepancy between 1 Kings 6:1 and Acts 13:20. When the Alexandrian manuscripts are translated properly, it becomes clear that Paul’s statement of “about 450 years” in Acts 13:20 was “referring to the previous events” related in verses 17-19, not the following period representing the time of the judges. The best rendering of this fact comes from the NIV.

This from Apologetic Press on the Web http://www.apologeticspress.org/rr/rr2002/r&r0206a.htm

Do you see this last part here? This is the reference to the site where I got the quote. It has always been there from the very first.

Now, if either of you can defend the reading as found in your nasb, niv, esv, etc., then please do.

Will Kinney

 

The following comparative textual study is from this same chapter of Mark 14.


Mark 14:19 "And they began to be sorrowful, and to say unto him one by one, Is it I? AND ANOTHER SAID, IS IT I?"

These last words "And another said, is it I?" are found in the majority of all texts including A and D and some Old Latin copies, and in the Spanish Reina Valera, NKJV, Tyndale, Geneva, Coverdale, Bishop's Bible, and others.

However Sinaiticus, Vaticanus and C omit these words and so do the NASB, NIV, ESV, ISV.

Mark 14:22 "And as they did eat, JESUS took bread, and blessed, and brake it, and gave to them, and said, Take, EAT: this is my body."

The word JESUS is in the majority of all texts as well as Sinaiticus, A and C, and Jesus is in the NIV and the ISV. However Vaticanus omits the word JESUS and so do the NASB, ESV, and the Holman Standard.

The word EAT (fagete) is in the majority of texts plus at least 18 uncials, the Old Latin and some Coptic Boharic versions, and the NKJV, but the Alexandrian texts omit this word and so do the NASB, NIV, ESV, ISV.

Mark 14:24 "And he said unto them, This is my blood of the NEW testament, which is shed for many."

Here the word NEW, as in the NEW testament, is in the majority of all texts, A, the Old Latin, Syriac, Coptic, Armenian, and the Catholic Douay versions. But Sinaiticus, Vaticanus and C omit the word "new" and so do the more recent Catholic versions and the NASB, NIV, ESV, ISV.

Mark 14:27 "And Jesus saith unto them, All ye shall be offended BECAUSE OF ME THIS NIGHT: for it is written, I will smite the shepherd, and the sheep shall be scattered."

There are two problems in this verse. First of all, the KJB as well as Tyndale, Geneva, the Revised Version and the American Standard Version correctly translate this phrase as "shall be offended" - that is, they shall stumble. In fact, the NKJV puts it this way. But beginning with the RSV, the NASB, NIV, and ESV all say "you will FALL AWAY", as though they would commit apostasy and forever be lost. The new ISV now paraphrases this as "you will turn against me", while the Holman Standard says: "you will fall" and then footnotes "or stumble".

The second problem is textual. The words "because of me this night" are in the majority of all texts including A, C correction, the Old Latin, Syriac Peshitta, Harkelian, Coptic, Armenian, Ethiopian and even in the Douay version. But Sinaiticus and Vaticanus omit these words and so do the more recent Catholic versions and the NASB, NIV, ESV, ISV.

Mark 14:41 And he cometh the third time, and saith unto them, SLEEP ON NOW, AND TAKE YOUR REST; it is enough, the hour is come: behold, the Son of man is betrayed into the hands of sinners."

This verse is of interest in that ALL TEXTS, including the Majority, the Textus Receptus and even the UBS, Nestle - Aland texts show these words as a STATEMENT, not as a QUESTION. "Sleep on now, and take your rest" is a statement, and is so translated by Geneva, Tyndale, the Revised Version, American Standard Version, Darby, Young's, Douay, Green's interlinear, Bible in Basic English, Weymouth, and the Catholic Douay.

Some commentators see these words as spoken in irony or as a reproach. I understand them to be highly significant in a spiritual sense. The Lord Jesus Christ was in the midst of establishing the New Covenant with the sacrifice of Himself and the shedding of His own blood for the sins of His people.

We are told in Isaiah 59:16 "And he saw that there was no man, and wondered that there was no intercessor: therefore his arm brought salvation unto him; and his righteousness, it sustained him." Likewise in the prototypical covenant that God first made with Abraham our father, we read in Genesis 15:12-18 that Abraham WAS ASLEEP while God Himself made the covenant. Abraham had no part in the making of this covenant, and we have no part in making the New Covenant.

Genesis 15:12 "And when the sun was going down, A DEEP SLEEP fell upon Abram...and behold a smoking furnace, and a burning lamp that passed between those pieces (the divided bodies of the heifer, goat and ram offered unto God)...In the same day the LORD made a covenant with Abram."

I understand the words of the Lord "Sleep on now and take your rest" to mean that they would have no active part in the making of the New Covenant but that they would enter into the Rest of an accomplished redemption because of Christ's sacrificial death in our place. See Hebrews chapter four where it speaks of the rest for the people of God and those who enter by faith into this rest have ceased from their own works.

In any event, instead of having these words "sleep on now and take your rest" as a statement, the NKJV, NIV, NASB, ESV, and ISV have all changed this to a question, saying "Are you still sleeping and resting?" - NKJV.

 

Mark chapter 15


MARK 15:28 -He was numbered with the transgressors

Mark 15:27-28 "And with him they crucify two thieves; the one on his right hand, and the other on his left. AND THE SCRIPTURE WAS FULFILLED, WHICH SAITH, AND HE WAS NUMBERED WITH THE TRANSGRESSORS."

This verse is a fulfillment of the predictions of the crucified Messiah spoken by the prophet Isaiah in chapter 53 - "...because he hath poured out his soul unto death: and he was numbered with the transgressors; and he bare the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors." Isaiah 53:12.


The whole of verse 28 "and the scripture was fulfilled, which saith, And he was numbered with the transgressors." is missing from Sinaiticus, Vaticanus, A, C, and D. It is omitted entirely from the text in such versions as the RV, ASV, RSV, NRSV, ESV, NIV, The Message, and the Jehovah Witness New World Translation.

The NASB omitted the whole verse from its text from 1960 to 1972, but in 1977 and again in 1995 they placed it back in the text but in brackets, signifying it is probably not in the originals. Of the three new versions coming out, The Complete Jewish Bible omits the verse, the Holman Christian Standard places it in the text but in brackets, while the ISV (International Standard Version) puts the whole verse back in the text with no brackets. How is that for consistency?

The Catholic Douay Version 1950 contains the entire verse while later Catholic bibles like St. Joseph New American Bible, and the New Jerusalem omit the verse. The Catholic versions also disagree among themselves.

The entire verse is found in the Majority of all Greek texts including at least 24 uncials (capital letter manuscripts), the Old Latin, which is a version predating anything we have in the Greek copies, the Syriac Peshitta, Harkelian, Palestinian, some Coptic Boharic copies, the Gothic, Armenian, and Ethiopian ancient versions.

The English Bibles that include this verse are Wycliffe 1395, Tyndale 1525, Coverdale 1535, Bishop's Bible 1568, the Geneva Bible 1587, Wesley's 1755, Webster's 1833, the King James Bible, Young's, the NKJV 1982, KJV 21st Century, World English Bible, Hebrew Names Version, Third Millenium Bible, and the ISV.

I checked out the foreign language Bible versions and Mark 15:28 is found in the following: the Albanian, Arabic, Bulgarian, Cebuano Bible, Chinese, Danish, Dutch, French Darby and French Louis Segond, Gaelic, German, Modern Greek, Gypsy Rhomanese, Haitian Creole Bible, Modern Hebrew, Hungarian, Icelandic, Italian Diodati, Latvian, Maori Bible, Norwegian, Portuguese, Rumanian, Russian, Shuar N.T., Spanish, Turkish, Ukranian, Uma N.T., and the Vietnamese.

This verse in the New Testament is either inspired Scripture or it isn't.

Mark 15:34 "And at the ninth hour JESUS cried with a loud voice, SAYING (legwn), Eloi, Eloi, lamasabachthani? which is, being interpreted, My God, MY GOD, why hast thou forsaken me?"

I have highlighted the words "Jesus" and the second "My God" for a reason. Remember that the whole of verse 28 is omitted in the NASB, NIV, ESV because of Sinaiticus, Vaticanus, A, C, and D, yet these "oldest and best manuscripts" disagree with each other in literally thousands of places.

In 15:34 manuscript D omits the word "Jesus", but it is found in the others. On the other hand, Vaticanus omits the second "MY GOD", but the others have it and this time the NASB, NIV, ESV do not follow Vaticanus but the others instead.

Then in Mark 15:39 we read: "And when the centurion, which stood over against him, saw that he so CRIED OUT (kraksas), and gave up the ghost, he said, Truly this man was the Son of God."

Here the verb "cried out" is in the majority of all texts as well as A, C, D, and the Old Latin, the Syriac, Douay, AND in the NIV, AND the brand new ISV (International Standard Version). However Sinaiticus and Vaticanus omit the words "cried out" and so do the NASB, ESV, and the Holman Standard.

It is obvious the "scholars" don't agree among themselves by the conflicting versions they keep producing. I trust God and believe He has kept His promises to preserve His inerrant words and has done so in the time tested, God approved King James Bible. How about you?

Will Kinney