1699Re: The Longer Ending of Mark 16:9-20
- Mar 6, 2006"As far as "tongues" not being mentioned elsewhere, this is quite
true, but there is no reason that we have to restrict ourselves to
only a Pauline scribe."
But a Pauline scribe would have the most motivation to add the Pauline
doctrine of 'tongues' to one of the gospels in order to alieve some
of the 'disconnect' that exists between the books of Paul/Luke and
the rest of the NT. As I have said, Paul and Luke and their
exclusive doctrines are entirely ignored in all of the other books of
the NT outside of the Paul/Luke collection. And Luke's name is never
mentioned by anybody other than Paul, and Paul is only mentioned once
in 2 Peter, a book that is widely considered to be pseudoanonymous.
--- In email@example.com, Tony Zbaraschuk <tonyz@...>
> On Sun, Mar 05, 2006 at 03:48:01AM -0000, john1524wagner wrote:
> > Hello,
> > I am new to this list.
> > I just finished "Misquoting Jesus" by Bart Ehrman and wish to
> > study "textual criticism" of the bible.opinion on
> > Perhaps a good place to start a dialogue is by asking your
> > the motivation of scribes to add the longer ending of Mark 16:9-20.
> > It seems to me that a Pauline oriented scribe would have the most
> > reason to add this insertion as a means of gaining some support
> > one of the gospels for the doctrine of 'speaking in tongues',since
> > aside from the longer ending of Mark, the gospels are silentaccount
> > on 'tongues' imagery.
> It seems to me that you are going into too much depth here. The
> simplest explanation is that someone felt that a Resurrection
> was necessary since it was obviously missing from their copy.this
> As far as "tongues" not being mentioned elsewhere, this is quite
> true, but there is no reason that we have to restrict ourselves to
> only a Pauline scribe.
> Tony Z
> Much of what are called "social problems" consists of the fact that
> intellectuals have theories that do not fit the real world. From
> they conclude that it is the real world which is wrong and needschanging.
> --Thomas Sowell
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>