Featured Is it inconsistent...

And a Google search for "crown" gets "About 192,000,000 results".

So the word "crown" is used 19 times for every time the word "diadem" is used.

Even the word "coronet" yields a Google search result of "About 12,500,000 results" making "coronet" slightly more common than "diadem".

 

I agree with your point, but...

Coronet is also a rank and an instrument. Crown will yield hits about dentistry, cars, currency, and my very own cow lick producing triple crown.

 

It's toilet paper!

Extra value is what you get when you buy Coronet. —Rosemary Clooney

 

Touche. But my point still stands, that the term "diadem" is still in wide usage.

 

No offense, but I hope you'll include sources in the future, as per the BB rules and common courtesy.

 

The oldest surviving Greek manuscript that has the account of the woman taken in adultery, in John 7:53-8:11, is the Codex Bezae Cantabrigiensis, which dates from the 5th century A.D.. I use the word "surviving", because when the scholar Jerome (A.D.347-420) wrote on this passage, he says that it was present in, "in many manuscripts both Greek and Latin". (c Pelag. II, 17). It is found in the Old Latin and Vulgate, the former representing a Greek text of the 2nd century. Augustine says of the passage, "Certain persons of little faith, or rather enemies of the true faith, fearing, I suppose, lest their wives should be given impunity in sinning, removed from their manuscripts the Lord's act of forgiveness toward the adulteress, as if he who had said, Sin no more, had granted permission to sin"

On Acts 8:37, and the confession in Jesus Christ by the Eunuch, it is quoted as Scripture by Irenaeus, as early as the 2nd century (130-202), in his Greek New Testament. And Cyprian, Bishop of Carthage (210-258), who, though of the Latin Church, also used the Greek New Testament. It is also in the Old Latin, and known as Scripture to Augustine.

1 John 5:7, which is the best and clearest single text on the Holy Trinity, is beyond any doubt part of the original autograph by the Apostle John. I have done a study into the Greek grammar of the passage, in which this verse is, and shown that there is no question that it has to be genuine. http://www.trinitystudies.org/Trinity/1jn5.6-10.pdf

On the ending of the Gospel of Mark, no one has in over 100 years, be able to refute the great work on this passage by John Burgon, https://archive.org/details/lasttwelveverse00burggoog IMO it will never be proven as not part of the original Gospel of Mark.

 

Colossians 1:23 KJV If ye continue in the faith grounded and settled, and be not moved away from the hope of the gospel, which ye have heard, and which was preached to every creature which is under heaven; whereof I Paul am made a minister;

So I COULD preach the “every creature” from Colossians even if we exclude Mark 16. (Not that I would.)

 

Note what I said: "mandate," not "account." Col. 1:23 is an account, but Mark 16:15 is a mandate, a command if you will. None of the other 4 statements of the Great Commission have the explicit "every creature" mandate that Mark does.

 

So you have no problem with Paul claiming that he preached the Gospel to every cockroach, it is only Mark claiming that we are commanded to preach to every cockroach that gives you pause?

I think you might be straining gnats and swallowing camels on this one (but what do I know).

 

Oh, please. Really? That has nothing to do with this discussion.

So you see no difference between the imperative and an aorist participle in Greek (or the imperative and declarative in English, for that matter)?? And by the way, "every creature" is the same Greek construction in Mark 16:15 and Col. 1:23 (πάσῃ τῇ κτίσει), so throwing out Mark's longer ending solves nothing about the rendering in Col. ("Every cockroach" in Col.?)