Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

2594RE: [lxx] Are they spurious?

Expand Messages
  • jmurphy@usit.net
    Nov 1, 2007
    • 0 Attachment
      I would disagree with the comments made regarding the "spurious"ness of Mark 16:9-20, but this is the "LXX" group and this is not the place for these kinds of things to be discussed.

      James B. Murphy

      -----Original Message-----
      >From: Tony Costa <tmcos@...>
      >Sent: Nov 1, 2007 4:12 PM
      >To: lxx@yahoogroups.com
      >Subject: RE: [lxx] Are they spurious?
      >
      >Actually it is all of Mark 16:9-20 which is spurious as well as 1 John 5:7.
      >There are others in the NT. For a very helpful resource on this question see
      >Bruce M. Metzger. The New Testament: Its Background, Growth and Content (3rd
      >edition; Abingdon Press).
      >
      >
      >
      >Tony Costa
      >
      > _____
      >
      >From: lxx@yahoogroups.com [mailto:lxx@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of kwabena
      >Sapei
      >Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2007 7:03 PM
      >To: lxx@yahoogroups.com
      >Subject: [lxx] Are they spurious?
      >
      >
      >
      >I have read that Mark 16:16-17 and also 1 John 5:7 are spurios. Could
      >someone help me about them. And could they let me know if there are more?
      >
      >
      >---------------------------------
      >Be smarter than spam. See how smart SpamGuard is at giving junk email the
      >boot with the All-new Yahoo! Mail
      >
      >[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >Yahoo! Groups Links
      >
      >
      >
    • Show all 9 messages in this topic