Mark 16:9

The long ending of Mark Larry Overton LGO at larryoverton.com
Fri Jun 15 23:01:31 EDT 2001

Which Greek NT should we use? The long ending of Mark Dear ~I have a question that I know is not appropriate for discussion on ,but I don’t know where else to turn. I’m hoping for some off-listdirection. I am researching the long ending of the Gospel of Mark, and inso doing, I’ve found an online article favoring the long ending (Mark16:9-20). In this article, the author claims that the writings of the earlyChurch provide “positive confirmation as to the authenticity of Mark16:9-20.”However, I’m finding claims, but no quotes or citations of sources. Thisarticle cites Burgon and Pulpit Commentary in referring to the writings ofearly Christian leaders. I want to read for myself what these early leaderswrote, and not some commentator’s assessment of the evidence of the earlywriters.Can anyone help me? Here are the ancient authors alluded to theabove-mentioned article.(1) “There are some expressions in ‘Shepherd of Hermas,’ written in allprobability not later than the middle of the 2nd century (i.e., not laterthan 150 A.D.), which are evidently taken from Mark 16:16.” Does anyoneknow where to find the information alluded to in this reference? Where inthe ‘Shepherd of Hermas’ is there a phrase that is evidently taken from Mark16:16?(2) “‘These words are alluded to in several passages by Justin Martyr (A.D.160) ..’ – Pulpit Commentary, page 349, on Mark 16:20.” Where are the”several passages by Justin Martyr” that allude to Mark 16:20?(3) “‘Hippolytus, Bishop of Portus, near Rome (190 to 227), a contemporaryof Irenaeus, quotes the 17th and 18th verses …’ – Page 24, J. W. Burgon,B.D., in his book on the last 12 verses of Mark’s Gospel.” In which of hiswritings does Hippolytus quote Mark 16:17-18?(4) “Vincentius Bishop of Thibari, near Carthage, at the seventh council ofCarthage, held in the year A.D. 256 quoted Mark 16:17-18, in the presence of87 African Bishops. This information is given on page 25 of Burgon’s book.”And what is the source for this Vincentius at the seventh council ofCarthage quoting Mark 16:17-18?Thanks in advance for any help you might be able to give.Sincerely,Larry G. Overton

Which Greek NT should we use?The long ending of Mark

The long ending of Mark Clwinbery at aol.com Clwinbery at aol.com
Sat Jun 16 07:54:34 EDT 2001

The long ending of Mark The long ending of Mark In a message dated 6/16/01 3:07:46 AM, LGO at larryoverton.com writes:>I have a question that I know is not appropriate for discussion on ,> >but I don’t know where else to turn. I’m hoping for some off-list> >direction. I am researching the long ending of the Gospel of Mark, and>in> >so doing, I’ve found an online article favoring the long ending (Mark> >16:9-20). In this article, the author claims that the writings of the>early> >Church provide “positive confirmation as to the authenticity of Mark> >16:9-20.”Again, textual critical matters are appropriate on when directed toward a specific text. I would recommend that you join the tc-list and journal at the following address.http://www.ntgateway.com/resource/tc.htmYou should read also what Metzger says of this passage in “A Textual Commentary on the GNT.” You should also read one or more of the more modern discussions of the history and introduction to TC. There is no doubt that the ending appeared in the second century (Tatian, Diatessaron), but that does not prove the case either way. Also any good commentary on Mark will have detailed discussion of all three endings of Mark.This is a most important subject and should be on tc-list.Thanks,Carlton WinberyLouisiana College

The long ending of MarkThe long ending of Mark

[] Question Regarding Mark’s Ending chuckles77 at juno.com chuckles77 at juno.com
Wed Oct 20 22:08:29 EDT 2004

[] (no subject) [] Mark’s Ending (I’m so sorry, I forgot to include a subject for my post. My bad.)Dear list members,Hi! My name’s Chuck Wynn. I am new to the list (joined about a week ago). I am not a Greek scholar (but read quite a bit of scholarly work due to my interest in textual, canonical, and translation studies) and have learned quite a bit through the dialogue that occurres on lists such as these.I was wondering if you could help me with two questions I have regarding the end of the Gospel of Mark:1) My understanding is that the commonly held view is that the original ending of Mark has been lost after 16:8. This view espouses the idea that 16:9-20 is not the original ending, nor did the writer intend to end it at verse 8. I’m fine with accepting this position, and accepting the Critical Text’s reading.My question is, what theories have been put forth to explain this missing ending? And what are their merits in relation with each other?(Please understand that there is a theological reason for me to ask this that ties into my understanding of the nature of the Old & New Testament.)2) I have also read about the relationships between the Synoptic Gospels, and how Mark is believed to have been used in the writing of Matthew and Luke.My second question is, has anyone ever studied the endings of Matthew and Luke to see if there might be a Markan “reading” that was lost in Mark’s Gospel itself but preserved in the final chapters of those two Gospels?Thank you for your assistance!Chuck WynnCampus Staff, Riverview ChurchHolt, MI

[] (no subject)[] Mark’s Ending

[] Mark 16:9 and the comma Anthony Buzzard anthonybuzzard at mindspring.com
Fri Apr 6 12:41:45 EDT 2007

[] Heb. xi.1 Gk vs. Syr [] Mark 16:9 and the comma Could anyone comment on the validity or otherwise of placing a comma after a past participle as an opening word in a Greek sentence. I am referring to Mark 16:9 ANASTAS DE PROI PROTE SABBATOU. This is normally translated “having risen on the first day of the week.” Some want to put the comma after the participle ANASTAS DE. Is this a natural way to read the Greek? Can one begin with a participle by itself and have a comma after it?Anthony Buzzard.Anthony Buzzardwww.restorationfellowship.org

[] Heb. xi.1 Gk vs. Syr[] Mark 16:9 and the comma

[] Mark 16:9 and the comma Carl W. Conrad cwconrad2 at mac.com
Fri Apr 6 12:59:50 EDT 2007

[] Mark 16:9 and the comma [] Mark 16:9 and the comma In which Greek text of Mk 16:9 do you find a comma immediately following ANASTAS? I do think a comma is perfectly appropriate after SABBATOU, since the participial phrase functions much as an adverbial clause (it is a circumstantial participle).Carl W. Conrad On Friday, April 06, 2007, at 12:42PM, “Anthony Buzzard” <anthonybuzzard at mindspring.com> wrote:>Could anyone comment on the validity or otherwise of placing a comma >after a past participle as an opening word in a Greek sentence. I am >referring to Mark 16:9 ANASTAS DE PROI PROTE SABBATOU. This is >normally translated “having risen on the first day of the >week.” Some want to put the comma after the participle ANASTAS >DE. Is this a natural way to read the Greek? Can one begin with a >participle by itself and have a comma after it?>Anthony Buzzard.> >Anthony Buzzard>www.restorationfellowship.org > >—> home page: http://www.ibiblio.org/> mailing list> at lists.ibiblio.org>http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/> >

[] Mark 16:9 and the comma[] Mark 16:9 and the comma

[] Mark 16:9 and the comma Anthony Buzzard anthonybuzzard at mindspring.com
Fri Apr 6 13:08:48 EDT 2007

[] Mark 16:9 and the comma [] Mark 16:9 and the comma Carl, My apologies for not being clearer. I am referring to commas in the translations, granting that the MSS do not have commas here. I wondered if it is natural or even possible at all to start a sentence simply with an aorist participle — ANASTAS– and separate it from “early on the first day of the week”I agree that the comma is perfectly appropriate after SABBATOU, but could a single aorist participle stand alone as an adverbial phrase, ie “having risen, early on the first day he appeared first…..”Could we say that placing a comma in English after the aorist participle is just impossible?Anthony.At 12:59 PM 4/6/2007, Carl W. Conrad wrote:>In which Greek text of Mk 16:9 do you find a comma immediately>following ANASTAS? I do think a comma is perfectly appropriate>after SABBATOU, since the participial phrase functions much as>an adverbial clause (it is a circumstantial participle).> >Carl W. Conrad> > > >On Friday, April 06, 2007, at 12:42PM, “Anthony Buzzard” ><anthonybuzzard at mindspring.com> wrote:> >Could anyone comment on the validity or otherwise of placing a comma> >after a past participle as an opening word in a Greek sentence. I am> >referring to Mark 16:9 ANASTAS DE PROI PROTE SABBATOU. This is> >normally translated “having risen on the first day of the> >week.” Some want to put the comma after the participle ANASTAS> >DE. Is this a natural way to read the Greek? Can one begin with a> >participle by itself and have a comma after it?> >Anthony Buzzard.> >> >Anthony Buzzard> >www.restorationfellowship.org> >> >—> > home page: http://www.ibiblio.org/> > mailing list> > at lists.ibiblio.org> >http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/> >> >Anthony Buzzardwww.restorationfellowship.org

[] Mark 16:9 and the comma[] Mark 16:9 and the comma

[] Mark 16:9 and the comma Carl W. Conrad cwconrad2 at mac.com
Fri Apr 6 14:01:23 EDT 2007

[] Mark 16:9 and the comma [] Mark 16:9 and the comma I would suggest that if the concern is about proper Englishusage in translation, the discussion be taken to the B-TranslationList. Our focus here is on understanding the Greek text, not onEnglish usage. Doesn’t it seem a little odd to be asking aboutthe legitimacy of placing a comma in English after a GREEKaorist participle?Carl W. Conrad On Friday, April 06, 2007, at 01:09PM, “Anthony Buzzard” <anthonybuzzard at mindspring.com> wrote:>Carl, My apologies for not being clearer. I am referring to commas in >the translations, granting that the MSS do not have commas here. I >wondered if it is natural or even possible at all to start a sentence >simply with an aorist participle — ANASTAS– and separate it from >“early on the first day of the week”>I agree that the comma is perfectly appropriate after SABBATOU, but >could a single aorist participle stand alone as an adverbial phrase, >ie “having risen, early on the first day he appeared first…..”>Could we say that placing a comma in English after the aorist >participle is just impossible?>Anthony.> > > >At 12:59 PM 4/6/2007, Carl W. Conrad wrote:>>In which Greek text of Mk 16:9 do you find a comma immediately>>following ANASTAS? I do think a comma is perfectly appropriate>>after SABBATOU, since the participial phrase functions much as>>an adverbial clause (it is a circumstantial participle).>> >>Carl W. Conrad>> >> >> >>On Friday, April 06, 2007, at 12:42PM, “Anthony Buzzard” >><anthonybuzzard at mindspring.com> wrote:>> >Could anyone comment on the validity or otherwise of placing a comma>> >after a past participle as an opening word in a Greek sentence. I am>> >referring to Mark 16:9 ANASTAS DE PROI PROTE SABBATOU. This is>> >normally translated “having risen on the first day of the>> >week.” Some want to put the comma after the participle ANASTAS>> >DE. Is this a natural way to read the Greek? Can one begin with a>> >participle by itself and have a comma after it?>> >Anthony Buzzard.>> >>> >Anthony Buzzard>> >www.restorationfellowship.org>> >>> >—>> > home page: http://www.ibiblio.org/>> > mailing list>> > at lists.ibiblio.org>> >http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/>> >>> >> >Anthony Buzzard>www.restorationfellowship.org

[] Mark 16:9 and the comma[] Mark 16:9 and the comma

[] Mark 16:9 and the comma Anthony Buzzard anthonybuzzard at mindspring.com
Fri Apr 6 16:36:35 EDT 2007

[] Mark 16:9 and the comma [] Mark 16:9 and the comma Carl, My question is about Greek syntax. Is it possible to begin a sentence with ANASTAS, as an adverbial phrase standing alone. Or does the ANASTAS belong with PROI PROTE….?Anthony BuzzardAt 02:01 PM 4/6/2007, you wrote:>I would suggest that if the concern is about proper English>usage in translation, the discussion be taken to the B-Translation>List. Our focus here is on understanding the Greek text, not on>English usage. Doesn’t it seem a little odd to be asking about>the legitimacy of placing a comma in English after a GREEK>aorist participle?> >Carl W. Conrad> >On Friday, April 06, 2007, at 01:09PM, “Anthony Buzzard” ><anthonybuzzard at mindspring.com> wrote:> >Carl, My apologies for not being clearer. I am referring to commas in> >the translations, granting that the MSS do not have commas here. I> >wondered if it is natural or even possible at all to start a sentence> >simply with an aorist participle — ANASTAS– and separate it from> >”early on the first day of the week”> >I agree that the comma is perfectly appropriate after SABBATOU, but> >could a single aorist participle stand alone as an adverbial phrase,> >ie “having risen, early on the first day he appeared first…..”> >Could we say that placing a comma in English after the aorist> >participle is just impossible?> >Anthony.> >> >> >> >At 12:59 PM 4/6/2007, Carl W. Conrad wrote:> >>In which Greek text of Mk 16:9 do you find a comma immediately> >>following ANASTAS? I do think a comma is perfectly appropriate> >>after SABBATOU, since the participial phrase functions much as> >>an adverbial clause (it is a circumstantial participle).> >>> >>Carl W. Conrad> >>> >>> >>> >>On Friday, April 06, 2007, at 12:42PM, “Anthony Buzzard”> >><anthonybuzzard at mindspring.com> wrote:> >> >Could anyone comment on the validity or otherwise of placing a comma> >> >after a past participle as an opening word in a Greek sentence. I am> >> >referring to Mark 16:9 ANASTAS DE PROI PROTE SABBATOU. This is> >> >normally translated “having risen on the first day of the> >> >week.” Some want to put the comma after the participle ANASTAS> >> >DE. Is this a natural way to read the Greek? Can one begin with a> >> >participle by itself and have a comma after it?> >> >Anthony Buzzard.> >> >> >> >Anthony Buzzard> >> >www.restorationfellowship.org> >> >> >> >—> >> > home page: http://www.ibiblio.org/> >> > mailing list> >> > at lists.ibiblio.org> >> >http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/> >> >> >> >> >> >Anthony Buzzard> >www.restorationfellowship.orgAnthony Buzzardwww.restorationfellowship.org

[] Mark 16:9 and the comma[] Mark 16:9 and the comma

[] Mark 16:9 and the comma Carl W. Conrad cwconrad2 at mac.com
Fri Apr 6 17:00:56 EDT 2007

[] Mark 16:9 and the comma [] Compliment pattern(s) of LOGIZOMAI PRWi PRWTHi SABBATOU are clearly part of a phrase qualifying ANASTAS adverbially. And note that the participle ANASTAS is followed by the DE,indicating its connection with preceding narrative. ANASTAS is not in anyway independent.My problem with your earlier query was that it seemed to be based uponreading with an interlinear and asking how the English equivalent partsrelated to the syntax of the Greek sentence. But our concern in isstrictly with understanding the Greek in its own sequence and structure(our FAQ states that it is assumed that participants have a basic under-standing of Biblical Greek.Carl W. ConradDepartment of Classics, Washington University (ret)1989 Grindstaff Road/Burnsville, NC 28714/(828) 675-4243cwconrad at artsci.wustl.eduWWW: http://www.ioa.com/~cwconrad/ On Friday, April 06, 2007, at 04:36PM, “Anthony Buzzard” <anthonybuzzard at mindspring.com> wrote:>Carl, My question is about Greek syntax. Is it possible to begin a >sentence with ANASTAS, as an adverbial phrase standing alone. Or does >the ANASTAS belong with PROI PROTE….?> >Anthony Buzzard> >At 02:01 PM 4/6/2007, you wrote:>>I would suggest that if the concern is about proper English>>usage in translation, the discussion be taken to the B-Translation>>List. Our focus here is on understanding the Greek text, not on>>English usage. Doesn’t it seem a little odd to be asking about>>the legitimacy of placing a comma in English after a GREEK>>aorist participle?>> >>Carl W. Conrad>> >>On Friday, April 06, 2007, at 01:09PM, “Anthony Buzzard” >><anthonybuzzard at mindspring.com> wrote:>> >Carl, My apologies for not being clearer. I am referring to commas in>> >the translations, granting that the MSS do not have commas here. I>> >wondered if it is natural or even possible at all to start a sentence>> >simply with an aorist participle — ANASTAS– and separate it from>> >”early on the first day of the week”>> >I agree that the comma is perfectly appropriate after SABBATOU, but>> >could a single aorist participle stand alone as an adverbial phrase,>> >ie “having risen, early on the first day he appeared first…..”>> >Could we say that placing a comma in English after the aorist>> >participle is just impossible?>> >Anthony.>> >>> >>> >>> >At 12:59 PM 4/6/2007, Carl W. Conrad wrote:>> >>In which Greek text of Mk 16:9 do you find a comma immediately>> >>following ANASTAS? I do think a comma is perfectly appropriate>> >>after SABBATOU, since the participial phrase functions much as>> >>an adverbial clause (it is a circumstantial participle).>> >>>> >>Carl W. Conrad>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>On Friday, April 06, 2007, at 12:42PM, “Anthony Buzzard”>> >><anthonybuzzard at mindspring.com> wrote:>> >> >Could anyone comment on the validity or otherwise of placing a comma>> >> >after a past participle as an opening word in a Greek sentence. I am>> >> >referring to Mark 16:9 ANASTAS DE PROI PROTE SABBATOU. This is>> >> >normally translated “having risen on the first day of the>> >> >week.” Some want to put the comma after the participle ANASTAS>> >> >DE. Is this a natural way to read the Greek? Can one begin with a>> >> >participle by itself and have a comma after it?>> >> >Anthony Buzzard.>> >> >>> >> >Anthony Buzzard>> >> >www.restorationfellowship.org>> >> >>> >> >—>> >> > home page: http://www.ibiblio.org/>> >> > mailing list>> >> > at lists.ibiblio.org>> >> >http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/>> >> >>> >> >>> >>> >Anthony Buzzard>> >www.restorationfellowship.org> >Anthony Buzzard>www.restorationfellowship.org > > >

[] Mark 16:9 and the comma[] Compliment pattern(s) of LOGIZOMAI

[] Mark 16.9ff. Chris Weimer christopher.m.weimer at gmail.com
Fri Feb 8 14:42:44 EST 2008

[] Matthew 1:20 EK PNEUMATOS ESTIN hAGIOU / EK PNEUMATOShAGIOU ESTIN [] EMBRIMAOMAI Greetings, .I’ve often heard (and even discerned) about some of the stylisticdifferences between Mark 16.9-20 and the rest of Mark. Does anyone know ofan actual full study conducted on the stylistic differences?Many thanks for any information,Chris WeimerU. MemphisThoughts on Antiquity <http://neonostalgia.com/weblog/>Ancient Mediterranean Cultures <http://neonostalgia.com/forum/>

[] Matthew 1:20 EK PNEUMATOS ESTIN hAGIOU / EK PNEUMATOShAGIOU ESTIN[] EMBRIMAOMAI

ers:

I rejected the following message originally on grounds that it was a translation question posed by a poster who doesn’t read Biblical Greek. After giving it some thought, however, I think that the question itself is worthy of some discussion by you ers. Here’s the text:

Ἀναστὰς δὲ πρωῒ πρώτῃ σαββάτου ἐφάνη πρῶτον Μαρίᾳ τῇ Μαγδαληνῇ …
[ANASTAS DE PRWI PRWTHi SABBATOU EFANH PRWTON MARIAi THi MAGDALHNHi … ]

While it seems most likely to me that the two adverbial elements here, PRWI PRWTHi SABBATOU and PRWTON, must construe respectively: PRWI PRWTHi SABBATOU with the initial participle ANASTAS, PRWTON with the finite verb EFANH, A. T. Robertson has argued (“Word Pictures”) that PRWI PRWTHi SABBATOU could conceivably be construed with EFANH, and I note that at least a couple versions either convert the Greek text as ambiguous (NET) or do in fact read PRWI PRWTHi SABBATOU with EFANH (Peterson’s Message). If list-members take that possibility seriously, what reasons might be offered in defense of its probability?

Carl W. Conrad
Co-Chair, List
Department of Classics, Washington University (Retired)
==========
From: Boele Gerkes
Date: February 3, 2011 5:11:37 AM EST
To: href=”mailto:@lists.ibiblio.org”>@lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Newbie: question about Mark 16:9

Hi all,

(Boele Gerkes, 47, from the Netherlands)

Just joined the list and did that to try to find the answer to a question I have about the mentioned passage in Mark 16:9 which I can not find an answer for in all the commentaries I have (they all focus on the question if Mark wrote verse 9-20 or not… :-))
I also have to say that I have no knowledge to Greek at all, but that’s why I ask here 🙂

My question is this: the translation of this 9th verse is in most Bibles like this:
ASV: Now when Jesus was risen early the first day of the week, he appeared first to Mary Magdalene, out of whom he had cast seven devils.
King James: Now when he was risen early on the first day of the week, he appeared first to Mary Magdalene, from whom he had cast out seven demons.
And also various Dutch translations give the same idea, i.e. that the time-part of this verse (early the first day of the week) is linked to Jesus’ ressurection rather then the appearence to Mary.

My question is: is there a possibility that the “early on the first day of the week” can be attached to the first appearence to Mary, instead of the ressurection of Christ? Are there any Greek language related objections for that?

In other words: why is the comma placed after “week” and not after “risen”? Is there a definite reason for that? If not, is it legitimate to place the comma after “risen”? It’s not a theological question but a pure Greek grammar/style question.

I have a lot of bible commentaries and no one says anything about it, except one: the Robertson’s Word Pictures. This one writes about it, and actually even about my specific question:

“When he had risen early on the first day of the week (anastas proi protei sabbatou). It is probable that this note of time goes with “risen” (anastas), though it makes good sense with “appeared” (ephane)…” Italic from me.

Well, I hope to get some insight on this question here.

Thanks in advance!!

Boele

—