I have completed my Robinson-Pierpont edition of Mark’s gospel. It alternates verse by verse between the latest edition of the RP Greek “majority text” and my new English translation. It has many new footnotes, for a total of 354.
Victor of Antioch (5th century) in his commentary on the gospel of Mark admits that the verses 16:9-20 “do not appear in the existing Gospel with most copies.” But he says that the better Palestinian copies included it, and he and others added together what material was in the Palestinian gospel about the Resurrection, to the other copies. This comment appears in many minuscules. [Note that Victor is not saying “Egyptian manuscripts” lack the Longer Ending of Mark. He is ‘of Antioch.’]
Victor of Antioch‘s pertinent Greek text from Cramer’s Catena Vol. 1:
Εἰ δὲ καὶ τὸ,”αναστὰς δὲ πρωῒ” μετὰ τὰ ἐπιφερόμενα παρὰ πλείστοις ἀντιγράφοις οὐ κεῖνται ἐν τῷ παρόντι Εὐαγγελίῳ, ὡς νόθα νομίσαντες αὐτὰ εἶναι, ἀλλ’ ἡμεις ἐξ ἀκριβῶν ἀντιγράφων ἐν πλείστοις εὑρόντες αὐτὰ, καὶ κατὰ τὸ Παλαιστιναῖον Εὐαγγέλιον, ὡς ἔχει ἡ ἀλήθεια Μάρκου, συντεθείκαμεν καὶ τὴν ἐν αὐτῷ ἐπιφερομένην δεσποτικὴν ἀνάστασιν, μετὰ τὸ “ἐφοβοῦντο γὰρ,” τουτέστιν ἀπὸ τοῦ “αναστὰς δὲ πρωῒ πρώτῃ σαββάτου” καὶ καθ’ ἑξῆς, μέχρι τοῦ “διὰ τῶν ἐπακολουθούντων σημείων. Ἀμήν.”
‘But even if the words “And having risen early” along with the words following, do not appear in the existing Gospel with most copies, as they are considered spurious, we however, having found them in most of the accurate copies, and in accordance with the Palestinian Gospel, exactly how the truth of Mark really is, have added together also that material in it, that follows the Master’s resurrection- after the words “for they were afraid,” that is, from “And having risen early on the first day of the week” and so on, up to the words “by the signs accompanying. Amen.” ‘
You can download the PDF Gospel of Mark of mine from which I cut and pasted the above.
My son Jacob sent me a list of what he thought might be typos in my translation of Mark:
2:16 – “Torah scholars of the Pharisees” instead of “Torah scholars and the Pharisees”
This is a Greek textual variant between the Nestle/Aland, United Bible Societies’ text, versus the Textus Receptus. The text as I have it is referring to the Torah scholars belonging to the sect of the Pharisees; there were Torah scholars belonging to other sects as well. This is not the only place we find this variant; it is in other passages and other gospels too.
2:23 – The heading is “Man Over the Sabbath”. I was wondering if you meant “Lord Over the Sabbath”?
Well, I have it purposely ambiguous, because not only is there a man who is Lord over the Sabbath, Jesus Christ, but also it means man is more important than the Sabbath. Judaism made the Sabbath the most important thing in the Jewish universe, far more important than people, or any other part of the Torah, even more important than an actual walk with God.
5:35 – “Why inconvenience the teacher any farther?” Farther is used for physical distances. If it is figurative, it should be further. I think it’s a stretch to call it a physical distance.
Yes, further is for abstracts, and farther is for physical distance, but in fact, if you look at it, physical distance is actually what is being talking about. Jesus had not yet traveled all the way to him, so they are saying, why make Jesus come all the way. Why make the Rabbi go even farther out of his way. I do remember thinking about that a long time when I translated it. Maybe I will make a footnote about it. BTW, people are losing that distinction these days, I have heard even news anchors use the words wrongly.
9:23 – Jesus said to him, “‘If I can’?…” First, shouldn’t the single quote mark be after the question mark? Secondly, why is it necessary, since Jesus is paraphrasing the father?
Yeah, the Greek actually says, quoting the father directly “What is this ‘If you can’ you are saying.” I’ll have to think about what to do there. But you are right, the quotation marks are not necessary for an indirect quotation.
14:22 – “taking a loaf of bread and blessing” Should there be an it after blessing to indicate that the bread was being blessed?
Here, the Greek word for blessing is also the Greek word often used to mean “giving thanks,” or “praising.” Jesus was actually blessing God, not the food particularly, but blessing in the sense of praising God for it. The lesson is, you bless the food by praising God for it. I remember making it deliberately ambiguous so that people would stop and think. Catholics would have an easier time understanding it, since they use those words more interchangeably than Protestants do. I guess I should make a footnote explaining it.
EUSEBIUS OF CAESAREA, Gospel Problems and Solutions, Quaestiones ad Stephanum et Marinum
Announcing a new upload for you to download. This PDF contains Eusebius’ Quaestiones ad Stephanum et Marinum. Edited by Roger Pearse, Greek and Latin translated by David J. D. Miller. This document contains the famous passage by Eusebius which indicates that in his day, almost all copies of the Gospel of Mark did not contain 16:9-20. For that section of the text, right-click Eusebius- Gospel Problems and Solutions, Quaestiones ad Marinum, and choose “save as,” and tell your computer where to save the pdf, then open it and go to page 113 of the pdf, (p. 97 of the printed document.) There you will find the section entitled “To Marinus.”
Please share this post about Eusebius’ Quaestiones ad Marinum:
I just uploaded an update of my translation of the Gospel of Mark. What I updated was the critical footnote apparatus for chapter 1 verse 41, ORGISQEIS vs. SPlAGCNISQEIS. Jeff Cate has pointed out that the apparatuses out there were in error regarding MSS 783 and 1358.
This Greek variant in Codex D and some old Latin texts has Jesus becoming angry, as opposed to being filled with compassion as it is read in all other Greek manuscripts.
Walton’s Polyglot Part 9 is now available for download on the bottom of my translations page.