1. Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Mark ends at Mark 16:8

Discussion in 'Other Christian Denominations' started by Darron Steele, Mar 20, 2007.

Top Posters
Page 3 of 3
  1. Gerhard Ebersoehn

    Gerhard Ebersoehn Active Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2004
    Messages:
    9,025
    Likes Received:
    8
    Faith:
    Non Baptist Christian
    GE:

    Well explained! That's why I say one good thing about this ending which marks its genuineness, is that it exposes all those wonderworkers for fakes, and confirms the Apostles' authority for God-given. Christianity rests on the sure foundation -- and it says so, that the Apostles are its foundation. Not quackery.
     
    #41 Gerhard Ebersoehn, Mar 23, 2007
  2. Eliyahu

    Eliyahu Active Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2005
    Messages:
    4,957
    Likes Received:
    16
    Faith:
    Baptist
    I knew A and C are a little later than B and א(Aleph) but as you mentioned they were in the same millenium, only the difference is 50-100 years.

    I know B and Aleph worshippers don't like Alexandrianus even though they belong to the same Alexandrian text group.


    Why don't you answer my question?

    Is Vaticanus really reliable?

    What does it omit?

    Genesis 1-45,
    Luke 23:34 " Father forgive them for they know not what they do"
    John 7:53-8:11 Woman caught in the adultery
    1 Timothy ( RC didn't like "Bishop should be a husband of one wife")
    2 Timothy
    Hebrews 9:15- 13:25 ( Because they don't like " there is no more sacrifice for the sin Heb 10:18)

    Do you believe that John 8:1-11 is not a part of the Bible because the story is not found in the oldest Bible ( Vaticanus and Aleph)?

    How can you trust such texts as B and Aleph full of modifications and omissions?
     
    #42 Eliyahu, Mar 23, 2007
    Last edited: Mar 23, 2007
  3. Darron Steele

    Darron Steele New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2006
    Messages:
    1,327
    Likes Received:
    0
    Actually, Genesis 1-45 were torn out. The last part of the manuscript was also torn away. The manuscript did not "omit" them. The loss of those original contents reflects on its handlers, not its original text.

    As for the other passages, again, this thread is not about those. Each variant of the New Testament text needs to be considered on the basis of the ancient evidence on each. I prefer to keep threads on-topic.

    If you want to throw your anti-Catholic bigotries into this, you should notice that the Vatican went to drastic measures to keep the contents of this manuscript from being widely known. You should also keep in mind that the Latin Vulgate has material after Mark 16:8, as does the King James Version, when this ancient manuscript never did.

    I am somewhat surprised that someone as anti-Catholic as you is so willing to trust manuscripts from the Middle Ages over ancient manuscripts -- especially one that the Vatican secluded.

    However, going after one or two manuscripts will not even remotely vindicate the traditional embellishment after Mark 16:8.

    I, for one, am more comfortable accepting the consensus of the ancient evidence. Very ancient translations translated ancient Greek manuscripts, and often do not have text after Mark 16:8, and/or something have other than the traditional embellishment. As reported by two writers from the 300's, most manuscripts at their time still did not include the traditional embellishment after Mark 16:8. Do you wish to try to impugn on the trustworthiness of most manuscripts at that time as well?
     
    #43 Darron Steele, Mar 23, 2007
  4. Eliyahu

    Eliyahu Active Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2005
    Messages:
    4,957
    Likes Received:
    16
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Darron,

    You conveniently evade my question.
    I asked you if you believe that the Pericope Adulturae ( John 7:53-8:11) is not a part of Bible. You didn't answer me!

    Do you believe Luke 23:34 " Father forgive them, for they know not what they do" is not written in Gospel Luke?

    These 2 questions are important because we can judge the credibility of the mss and texts

    If your judgment soley rely on " The older, the better" principle, then why P66 which is 150 years older than Vatican text and Sinaiticus have " Hagion" in John 7:39, while Aleph doesn't have ? B has Hagion dedomenon. Only 2 mss ( p75 and Aleph) omit it. In that case can you trust the other majority? Read this: http://members.aol.com/user192905/photos/P66.htm

    Is Sinaiticus still reliable?

    Why do only 2 mss omit Hagion while more than 900 mss have hagion? Most of modern versions follow Sinaiticus ( only 2 mss bases).

    Why does the oldest mss betray Aleph?

    ONe problem is that p45 has the last chapter of Mark torn out, even though many presume it would have had the longer ending.

    You must note that the medieval age mss are from Byzantine area, not the Roman religion area.
     
    #44 Eliyahu, Mar 23, 2007
    Last edited: Mar 23, 2007
  5. Darron Steele

    Darron Steele New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2006
    Messages:
    1,327
    Likes Received:
    0
    [ Darn it; I thought I was editing this. Evidently, I created a new post. Please see below for what was supposed to go here.]
     
    #45 Darron Steele, Mar 23, 2007
    Last edited by a moderator: Mar 23, 2007
  6. Darron Steele

    Darron Steele New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2006
    Messages:
    1,327
    Likes Received:
    0
    Eliyahu: I am not "evading" anything. I am restricting my conversation to the thread's topic to keep it on topic. It is really very simple.

    Judging a manuscript's credibility on the basis of its agreement with passages you assume original is circular. The Vatican did not rush to publish the text of Codex Vaticanus because it did not closely match the Latin Vulgate, which from the Council of Trent to 1943, they held to be indisputable.

    By the way, the "Roman religion" era started in 1054, right around the start of the second millennium, which is when the majority of manuscripts were created.

    Third, all through the time periods after the first few centuries of the Christian era, it was the `Roman era' in the dominant church body. Orthodox sources point out that the bishop of Rome was preferred "first among equals" before he claimed absolute primacy. Therefore, after the first few centuries, the bishop of Rome was the `main player.'

    Even without Codex Vaticanus or Sinaiticus being super reliable, the reports by two 300's church authors, the evidence of the ancient translations plus the very existence of another attempt to add to Mark 16:8 is enough to make me reject the traditional embellishment.
     
    #46 Darron Steele, Mar 23, 2007
    Last edited by a moderator: Mar 23, 2007
  7. tragic_pizza

    tragic_pizza New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2001
    Messages:
    3,395
    Likes Received:
    0
    Remember, folks, that in the struggle for textual accuracy, it generally isn't
    a given manuscript, but the number of manuscripts, which holds the key.

    We know given parts are missing from a manuscript because a given number of older manuscripts include them. We know that it is a "log" in your own eye and not an "apple" because we compare one manuscript with others to see the typographical error.
     
    #47 tragic_pizza, Mar 24, 2007
  8. Eliyahu

    Eliyahu Active Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2005
    Messages:
    4,957
    Likes Received:
    16
    Faith:
    Baptist
    I repeatedly asked you about Pericope Adulturae and Father Forgive Them for they know not what they do, because it is related to the credibility of the texts.

    I think I have explained enough in defense of the Longer Ending, if you cannot believe, I have no more remedy for you.
     
    #48 Eliyahu, Mar 24, 2007
(You must log in or sign up to post here.)
Page 3 of 3
Loading...