|
|
|
|
church of Christ at 26th and Connecticut |
|
Home|
Phone |
|
Worship Schedule |
|
|
|
Upcoming Activities |
|
|
|
|
|
IS
IT GOSPEL? You may have noticed some notes in your Bible about Mark
16:9-20. For example, the English
Standard Version has this heading above Mark 16:9-20: “[Some of the earliest manuscripts do not include 16:9-20.]” Likewise, the American Standard Version has this footnote:
“The two oldest Greek manuscripts and some other authorities, omit from ver. 9
to the end. Some other authorities have
a different ending to the Gospel.” Why, you might wonder, are such notes in your Bible? What do they mean? What should we make of them? First, it might be helpful to define the word
“manuscripts,” which appears in the above notes. “Manuscripts” are “Handwritten documents, in
a particular sense early copies of biblical books in scroll or codex form,” and
“codex,” by the way, is defined as, “A wooden tablet (or tablets connected with
thongs laced through holes bored near the edges). The codex, the earliest form of book…in Roman
times began to replace the more cumbersome scroll” (Eerdmans Bible Dictionary). Actually, the footnote in the American Standard Version
[which says, “The two oldest Greek manuscripts and some other authorities, omit
from ver. 9 to the end”] is a little misleading. We don’t have the oldest (that is, the
original) manuscript of Mark, or of any other book in the New Testament for
that matter. In an article
called, “A Professor’s Criticism,” our brother Hugo McCord made this
observation, along with many other observations, saying: The principal
reason why critics reject the verses is because the "two oldest Greek
manuscripts … omit verse 9 to the end" (ASV, margin). But, as far as
is known, the "two oldest Greek manuscripts," from the first century,
are not in existence, while the two oldest now in existence were made in the
fourth century. More over, one
of the alleged "two oldest" has a blank column with enough space left
that would accommodate verses 9-20. This would indicate that, for some reason,
the copyist stopped his work before he had finished. This implies "the
presence of 16:9-20 in Mark" (Bruce M. Metzger, THE TEXT OF THE NEW
TESTAMENT, 15f). Moreover, the
so-called "two oldest Greek manuscripts" cannot be depended on for
accuracy. Their combined testimony leaves the Bible contradictory and the
reader confused in Matthew 1:7, 8, 10; 5:22; 27:9; Mark 1:2; 2:26; 6:22; Luke
2:22; 4:44; John 1:18, 42; 21:15, 16, 21; Acts 11:20; 12:25; 1 Thessalonians
2:7; 2 Peter 3:10. To be
specific, the alleged "two oldest Greek manuscripts" attribute a
passage that Matthew quoted from Zechariah (11:12-13) as being from Isaiah
(Mark 1:2). The two manuscripts
mistakenly name a certain high priest "Abiathar" in Mark 2:26,
instead of "Ahimelach" (1 Samuel 21:1-8). The two manuscripts say Mark 6:22 that
Herodias, the dancing girl, was the daughter of Herod. This mistake forces Mark
to contradict Matthew 14:6. Bruce Metzger
(THE TEXT, 228) says that verse 8 of Mark 16 is not a fitting conclusion to the
Gospel. It is a "melancholy statement of the women who were afraid,"
and he cannot believe “That the note of fear would have been regarded as an
appropriate conclusion to an account of the Evangel, or Good News.” However,
Metzger speculates that "the last leaf of the original copy [of Mark
16:9-20] was accidentally lost before other copies had been made." But the
indestructibility of God’s word is affirmed in both the Old (Isaiah 40:8) and
the New (1 Peter 1:25) Testaments. |