The Longer Ending of Mark
The “Longer Ending” of the gospel of Mark was not the majority text, as late as the 5th century. Victor of Antioch said that the majority of copies of Mark in Antioch in the 5th century lacked Mark 16:9-20. It is deceptive to indicate that the absence of the Mark Longer Ending has scant MS evidence. It would also be deceptive to state that the omission of Mark 16:9-20 is an Egyptian or Alexandrian one. Again, Severus, in Antioch, Syria, and Victor, in Antioch, Syria acknowledged that in the 5th century, the best copies, and even the majority of copies, omitted Mark 16:9-20. This is why I do not care what the number of copies made in the 12th, 13th, 14th, 15th, 16th centuries, do include it. Isn’t that reasonable? See my notes in my translation of the Gospel of Mark.
Please share this post about the longer ending of Mark.
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: