tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2202450505238732541.post8710137604995446591..comments2022-11-22T00:24:46.351-08:00Comments on Andy Talks: Easter: Tuesday, March 25, 2008Andyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05230697136018943045noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2202450505238732541.post-30286678582929513942008-03-31T07:35:00.000-07:002008-03-31T07:35:00.000-07:00Hi Andy,I just wanted to send this note to encoura...Hi Andy,<br><br>I just wanted to send this note to encourage you to have no fear about preaching and teaching from Mark 16:9-20. Well, no more fear than preaching and teaching from other passages of Scripture, I mean.<br><br>As one who has looked into the background of Mark 16:9-20 in detail, I can say that those sub-headings and footnotes in some Bibles should not be taken altogether at face value. Mark 16:9-20 is not in the two earliest existing manuscripts of Mark 16 -- both of which are from the 300's -- but the earliest manuscripts and not always the earliest *evidence.* This passage was used in the 100's by Justin, Tatian, and Irenaeus. Irenaeus, writing c. 184, explicitly quoted Mark 16:19 and stated that he was quoting from near the end of Mark's Gospel. Plus, Mark 16:9-20 is present in something like 99.9% of the Greek copies of Mark 16. Plus, in one of those two early Greek copies that does not contain Mark 16:9-20, there's a prolonged blank space after Mark 16:8. Plus, in the other early Greek copy, the original pages of the manuscript are missing; all the text from Mark 14:54 to Luke 1:56 is on a replacement-page.<br><br>Mark 16:17-18 does indeed have some unusual stuff, but it's not much more striking than Luke 10:19. Sensible and Spirit-led exegesis is as essential here as it is elsewhere.<br><br>For more info I welcome you to visit an online multi-part presentation I have made about this passage and its early and widespread support. It begins at <br><br>www.curtisvillechristian.org/MarkOne.html .<br><br>Yours in Christ,<br><br>James Snapp, Jr.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com