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.
Tag Archives: Mark
Mark 15 verse 30 variant
As I am making a Robinson-Pierpont edition of Mark’s gospel, I am adding many more textual variant footnotes to all my Mark documents. Some of the data you will not find anywhere else, such as the readings for some variants not footnoted in the NA28 or others, and for manuscripts not collated yet for those variants. For example, the majuscules / uncials 059, 083, 0233 and 0250.
Here is a new footnote on a variant in Mark 15:30. It is not a big difference in meaning, but I am footnoting most of the meaningful differences between the NA28 and the Byzantine text stream. In Mark 15:30, the NA28 text says “Save yourself by coming down from the cross.” The Byzantine says “Save yourself and come down from the cross.”
txt καταβας ℵ B D L 059vid 083 it-k,l,n vg cop-bo SBL TH NA28 {\} ‖ και καταβα A C Σ it-d,ff² TR RP ‖ και και καταβα E ‖ και καταβηθι P 0233vid ‖ lac N W 0184 0250. The papyrus 059 is damaged here, but it looks like there is not room enough for the longer Byzantine reading, and it looks like there is a C (sigma) before the visible ΑΠΟ. Below is an image of 059, with the variant being in the middle of the second line. You can download my latest edition of Mark here.

Typos in Mark?
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.
Dad
Longer Ending of Mark
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.
Simon the Zealot or Canaanite?
In Mark 3:18 and Matthew 10:4, the the King James Bible has Simon as a Canaanite. However, in Luke 6:15 and Acts 1:13, the KJV has Simon as a Zealot. These are not really compatible to be mutually co-existent, since Jesus would not have appointed a Gentile to be one of the Twelve, or one of the names on the twelve foundations of the New Jerusalem in Revelation 21:14. In teh Matthew passage, in the very next verse, Matt. 10:5, Jesus tells the twelve not to go down any Gentile road, but to go “only to the lost sheep of Israel.” Jesus surely would not tell a Gentile that. Moreover, since the KJV admits that Simon was a zealot, this is also unlikely, that a Gentile would be a Zealot, one of the factions of Judaism. The earliest manuscripts of Matthew and Mark say Simon was a καναναῖος, which word was derived from the Aramaic word for Zealot. And the Textus Receptus and the Byzantine text have Simon a Κανανίτης. Strong’s Concordance for this word, G2581, says this word also is derived from קנּא kan-naw’, “Jealous.” Canaan in Greek consistently starts with the letter Χ :
Canaan (ie., Genesis 13:12) Χανααν; Canaanite: Χαναναίων (Genesis 10:18) Χαναναίους (Genesis 15:21) And in the NT, for the Canaanite woman, Matt 15:22, Χαναναία
BDAG Lexicon: “Κανανίτης, ου, ὁ man from Cana, Cananite. Acc. to Strabo 14, 5, 14 one of the two Stoics named Athenodorus received this name to distinguish him fr. the other Ath.; ἀπὸ κώμης τινός (Cana near Tarsus) was added. Numerous mss. replace the apparently unintelligible Καναναῖος with this term.” Under Κανά it says the home of, “according to many, also of Simon, Mt 10:4 (s. Καναναῖος). – Heinz Noetzel, Christus und Dionysus ’60. – EDNT.BBHW II 926. M-M.”
The bottom line is that both variants apparently mean the same thing: someone from Cana. The KJV saying Canaanite is simply rendered incorrectly in English.
I have updated my footnotes on the pertinent passages in Matthew and Mark. They are linked for downloading.
Most Important Greek Textual Variant
Is This the Most Important Greek Textual Variant?
Revelation 14:9-11 says that if anyone takes the mark of the beast, that person will be tortured in fire and sulphur for ever and ever.
So it is very important not to get the mark. But how will it happen that people take the mark? Will it be forced on them by the beast, or will they give it to themselves / get it for themselves? Because of this question, I think that the textual variant below from Revelation 13:16 is the most important textual variant in the Bible.
In the first set of manuscripts, “they” are giving the mark. In the second set, with the Textus Receptus alone among the editions, “he,” that is, the beast, is giving the mark.
“they” Aleph A C P 046 82 94 141 172 175 181 241 256 367 424 459 469 616 627 792 920 922 986 2059 1611 1678 1732 1778 1828 1854 1862 1888 2019 2020 2026 2028 2048 2067 2070 2080 2081 2138 2256 2349 2351 2436 sahidic WH VS TG RC AT PK NA27 HF RP SBL
“he” 051 2053 2065 2302 2329 2814 TR
Download this chart in the Swanson style for the variant in 78 manuscripts and 11 editions.
Rev. 13:16
KJV: “And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads:”
NIV: He also forced everyone, small and great, rich and poor, free and slave, to receive a mark on his right hand or on his forehead,
NASB: And he causes all, the small and the great, and the rich and the poor, and the free men and the slaves, to be given a mark on their right hand or on their forehead,
DRP:
DRP: And he causes all, the small and the great, and the rich and the poor, and the free and the slave, to provide themselves a mark on their right upper limb or on their forehead,
Rev. 14:9-11: And another angel, a third one, followed those, saying with a loud voice, “If anyone worships the beast and his image, and takes the mark on his forehead or on his hand, he shall himself also drink of the wine of the wrath of God, mixed undiluted in the cup of his anger, and he shall be tormented with fire and sulfur before the holy angels and before the Lamb. And the smoke of their torture goes up for ever and ever, and they have no relief day or night, those who worship the beast and the image of him, and anyone who takes the mark of his name.”
I have received criticism of my rendering of this verse. Here is a copy of some of that discussion, from a discussion board:
Critic: “Surely the unmentioned subject of the plural verb δωσιν does not refer to those included in παντας, but rather is generic, namely, ‘He makes it so that they (generic) should give all a mark on their right hand or forehead,’ hence why most translations simply say ‘receive’ instead of the unnecessarily wooden-literal translation.”
My response:
Rev. 13:16 καὶ ποιεῖ πάντας, τοὺς μικροὺς καὶ τοὺς μεγάλους, καὶ τοὺς πλουσίους καὶ τοὺς πτωχούς, καὶ τοὺς ἐλευθέρους καὶ τοὺς δούλους, ἵνα δῶσιν αὐτοῖς χάραγμα ἐπὶ τῆς χειρὸς αὐτῶν τῆς δεξιᾶς ἢ ἐπὶ τὸ μέτωπον αὐτῶν,
Let me get this straight. You are saying that ποιεῖ, 3rd person singular, should be rendered “He makes it,” where there is no Greek word present for “it.” So you supply an object for the verb. And you are saying that δῶσιν, 3rd person plural, which means “they give,” agrees in grammatical concord with an un-named subject you supply, rather than agrees with the 3rd person plural πάντας, which immediately and naturally follows our verb ποιεῖ.
So, you are supplying both an unwritten object, and an unwritten subject. All in one sentence!
Call me unreasonable, but how is this “surely”? I don’t see anything sure about it.
If you truly honestly believe that that is what the Greek means, then you should write that in your translation, like this, “And he makes it so that they give everyone a mark…” That isn’t so wooden. But literal it certainly is not. That would be very far from literal.
And I want to state, in case some readers don’t know, that the pronoun αὐτοῖς can and often does mean “themselves” as in ἑαυτοῖς. There is a contraction in the Greek of that time for ἑαυτοῖς as follows : αὑτοῖς. Notice the difference between αὐτοῖς and αὑτοῖς? There is a huge difference. The first has a smooth breathing mark, so it means “them,” and the second has a rough breathing mark, so it means “themselves.” Reflexive meaning. But the earliest Greek manuscripts did not necessarily always have breathing marks and punctuation. One of the most common Greek textual variants in Revelation, about which I am very knowledgeable by the way, and won’t apologize for it, is this confusion between αὐτός and αὑτός in the minuscules.
I thus find it easy to defend my rendering of this verse in my translation of Revelation. Your defense on the other hand of “most translations” is a great example of why I do not trust “most translations,” and am doing my own.
To download my translation of the Revelation of John, use this link.
Please share this post about the most important Greek textual variant:
ORGISQEIS vs. SPLAGCNISQEIS
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.