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

2787Re: [textualcriticism] Jesus Dynasty and the Ending of Mark

Expand Messages
  • Marion Fox
    Jan 2, 2007
      Marion Fox here,
      With regard to the question of Mark 16:9-20, I have a couple of questions.
      First, what are good sources of materials that give arguments pro and con on this passage.
      Second, is there not a blank space in one of the manuscripts (Codex B) where there is enough space to insert the text of the disputed verses?
      Yours in His service,
      Marion R. Fox
      On 12/30/06, David Robert Palmer <watutman@...> wrote:

      Since you charge that Dr. Tabor's material is deceptive, it is up to you, I think, to demonstrate how he is being deceptive.

      It would be deception if he was presenting data that he knew to be false, as true.  But, that is probably not the case.  I'm assuming he is presenting claims he believes to be true.

      Furthermore, many people agree generally with what you say he said, including myself.  I believe "Mark" 16:9-20 is a concocted ending.  I don't agree with him, however, that it was made 400 years after Christ; it clearly was composed much earlier than that.  Is this the fact which you are saying he must surely know better about, and is being deceptive about?

      David Robert Palmer

      James Snapp, Jr. wrote:

      Any thoughts? My thought is that
      Dr. Tabor, the Chair of Religious Studies at UNC-Charlotte, doesn't
      know what he's talking about. I don't mean to sound belligerent, but
      at some point, the writers of deceptive material should be treated as
      deceivers, and they should be held accountable for the false and
      misleading statements that they write.

      Marion Fox

    • Show all 26 messages in this topic