Should the Long Ending of Mark 16 be in the Bible? Majority Text Proponent Challenges Me

[@jamessheffield4173]

The tradition is that Mark recorded Peter's sermon. We have all been in a sermon when the preacher realizes that he has gone on to long and finishes up fast which fits Mark 16:9 -20. Blessings.

[@unripetheberrby6283]

What a nice guy :) I hope his videos and books are successful for the future

[@joecoolmccall]

I've followed this guy on Facebook a number of years. Never heard him speak before.

[@thebible3368]

I agree with Snapp. Nearly all manuscripts of Mark include 16:9-20

[@ryangoss6213]

But that’s not a primary determination for why textual critics accept or reject variants within the text. Numerous variants of the New Testament are in the majority of manuscripts, mainly because the majority of manuscripts are from the medieval period or later. Variants would have been well ingrained into the text at that point. It’s much more multifaceted approach to determine if the variants were original or not

[@thebible3368]

@ yes.Textual criticism is very complex. I’m just saying, according to my research I agree with the majority text as opposed to the critical text.

[@thebible3368]

Besides, most of the critical text, family comes from Egypt, and a lot of Harris season early church came out of Egypt unfortunately

[@ryangoss6213]

@@thebible3368 Given the construction of your sentence, I’m not really sure what you’re trying to say. I’m not sure what “Harris season” is. With that being said, the majority text method doesn’t concern itself with the region the manuscript is derived from. It is more of a democratic mathematical approach.

[@thebible3368]

@ apologize for dictation on the phone

[@rjc9537]

5 minutes in and I’m calling 🧢 on this guy! 🤣🤣🤣

[@milkydud]

Oh my 😮😮😮😮😮

[@williamstdog9]

I’m with Dr. James White on this issue, and he would clean the floor with this guy.

[@rjc9537]

This guy preaches with a 🐍 wrapped around his neck! 🤣🤣🤣

[@rjc9537]

If it wasn’t in the original text then it should be taken out. 🥴🤷🏽🥴🤷🏽

[@jamessheffield4173]

Pagans making fun of Mark 16:9-20 may have caused some to drop it. Macarius, Apocriticus III: 16: Again, consider in detail that other passage, where He says, "Such signs shall follow them that believe: they shall lay hands upon sick folk, and they shall recover, and if they drink any deadly drug, it shall in no wise hurt them." So the right thing would be for those selected for the priesthood, and particularly those who lay claim to the episcopate or presidency, to make use of this form of test. The deadly drug should be set before them in order that the man who received no harm from the drinking of it might be given precedence of the rest. And if they are not bold enough to accept this sort of test, they ought to confess that they do not believe in the things Jesus said. For if it is a peculiarity of the faith to overcome the evil of a poison and to remove the pain of a sick man, the believer who does not do these things either has not become a genuine |86 believer, or else, though his belief is genuine, the thing that he believes in is not potent but feeble. Porphyry Against the Christians Bing search