When.com Web Search

Search results

  1. Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
  2. Mark 16 - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_16

    Mark 16:9-20 as Forgery or Fabrication A detailed case against Mark 16:9–20, including all relevant stylistic, textual, manuscript, and patristic evidence, and an extensive bibliography. Mark 16 King James Bible - Wikisource; English Translation with Parallel Latin Vulgate Archived 2020-09-22 at the Wayback Machine

  3. List of New Testament verses not included in modern English ...

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_New_Testament...

    The stylistic differences suggest that none of these was written by the author of the Gospel of St. Mark. Metzger speaks of the "inconcinnities" between the first 8 verses of chapter 16 and the longer ending, and suggests, "all these features indicate that the section was added by someone who knew a form of Mark that ended abruptly with verse 8 ...

  4. Talk:Mark 16 - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Mark_16

    Section 13.1 is completely useless and so should be deleted. It simply restates what the other says earlier -- that scholars think Mark 16:9-20 is added, but just in a much longer space. It also has some fringe views about the ending being authentic from Craig Evans. Totally useless, hard to read, redundant.

  5. Criticism of the Bible - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_the_Bible

    For example, many versions of the Bible specifically point out that the most reliable early manuscripts and other ancient witnesses did not include Mark 16:9–20, i.e., the Gospel of Mark originally ended at Mark 16:8, and additional verses were added a few hundred years later. This is known as the "Markan Appendix".

  6. Textus Receptus - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Textus_Receptus

    Mark 16:9-20 or the longer ending of Mark is a variant found within the Textus Receptus which has generally been assumed to have been a later addition into the text by modern textual critics. [110] The earliest extant complete manuscripts of Mark, Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Vaticanus , two 4th-century manuscripts, do not contain the last twelve ...

  7. Textual variants in the Gospel of Mark - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Textual_variants_in_the...

    Compare Matthew 3:12; Luke 3:16. [13] ἐν πνεύματι ἁγίῳ καὶ πυρί (with the Holy Spirit and fire) – P 1195 1241 ℓ 44m syr h*. [13] Compare Matthew 3:12; Luke 3:16. [13] Mark 1:13 καὶ ἦν ἐν τῇ ερημω (he was in the wilderness) – א A B D L Θ 33. 579. 892. 1342.

  8. Gospel of Mark - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel_of_Mark

    A young man in a robe also appears in Mark 16:5–7. Mark does not name the High Priest. [114] Witness testimony against Jesus does not agree. [115] The cock crows "twice" as predicted. [116] See also Fayyum Fragment. The other Gospels simply record, "the cock crew". Early codices 01, W, and most Western texts have the simpler version. [117]

  9. Codex Vaticanus - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Codex_Vaticanus

    Mark 9:46 [21]: 121 Mark 11:26 [21]: 128 Mark 15:28 [21]: 144 The end of Mark in Vaticanus contains an empty column after Verse 16:8, possibly suggesting that the scribe was aware of the missing ending. It is the only empty New Testament column in the Codex. [22]: 252 Mark 16:9–20 — The Book of Mark ends with verse 16:8.