On the Longer Ending

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
User avatar
arnoldo
Posts: 969
Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2013 6:10 pm
Location: Latin America

Re: On the Longer Ending

Post by arnoldo »

Kunigunde Kreuzerin wrote: Wed Oct 11, 2017 12:24 pm
Ben C. Smith wrote: Thu Sep 21, 2017 11:34 am A few random potential parallels to the longer ending:
...
Philip of Side: The aforesaid Papias reported as having received it from the daughters of Philip that Barsabas who is Justus, tested by the unbelievers, drank the venom of a viper in the name of the Christ and was protected unharmed.
...
Justin Martyr, Dialogue 76.6: And again in other words he said: I give you authority to tread down upon snakes and scorpions and scolopendras, and upon all the power of the enemy.

Luke 10.19: Behold, I have given you authority to tread upon snakes and scorpions, and over all the power of the enemy, and nothing will injure you.[/box]
Back from a holiday trip to Crete. Not sure whether it should be called a similarity but I found it remarkable.

The younger snake goddess, from the palace of Knossos. Heraklion Archaeological Museum

Image
According to Lamsa, aramaic idioms weren't meant to be taken literally and instead be taken with a pinch of salt.
Lamsa.PNG
Lamsa.PNG (59.41 KiB) Viewed 8749 times
Attachments
aramaicIdioms.pdf
(174.5 KiB) Downloaded 338 times
Kunigunde Kreuzerin
Posts: 2110
Joined: Sat Nov 16, 2013 2:19 pm
Location: Leipzig, Germany
Contact:

Re: On the Longer Ending

Post by Kunigunde Kreuzerin »

arnoldo wrote: Fri Oct 13, 2017 5:24 pm According to Lamsa, aramaic idioms weren't meant to be taken literally and instead be taken with a pinch of salt.
Lamsa.PNG
It seems to me it's rather an unusual idea that the longer ending had an aramaic Vorlage. Furthermore, the literal understanding of snake handling could be rather a "sign" (PsMark 16:17 "And these signs will accompany those who believe ...") than the "handling of enemies". The next sign ("and if they drink any deadly poison, it will not hurt them ...") seems to point in the same direction.

Personally, I tend to think that there is no argument in favor of Lamsa's view. To me the author of the L.E. was more or less a literalist.
User avatar
arnoldo
Posts: 969
Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2013 6:10 pm
Location: Latin America

Re: On the Longer Ending

Post by arnoldo »

Kunigunde Kreuzerin wrote: Sat Oct 14, 2017 10:50 am
arnoldo wrote: Fri Oct 13, 2017 5:24 pm According to Lamsa, aramaic idioms weren't meant to be taken literally and instead be taken with a pinch of salt.
Lamsa.PNG
It seems to me it's rather an unusual idea that the longer ending had an aramaic Vorlage. Furthermore, the literal understanding of snake handling could be rather a "sign" (PsMark 16:17 "And these signs will accompany those who believe ...") than the "handling of enemies". The next sign ("and if they drink any deadly poison, it will not hurt them ...") seems to point in the same direction.

Personally, I tend to think that there is no argument in favor of Lamsa's view. To me the author of the L.E. was more or less a literalist.
You gave me a lot to chew on. Asclepius was often depicted with a snake entwined staff . . .and the Emperor Julian sets Christ against Aslepius. Food for thought. . .
Asclepius heals our bodies, and the Muses with the aid of Asclepius and Apollo and Hermes, the god of eloquence, train our souls; Ares fights for us in war and Enyo also; Hephaistus apportions and administers the crafts, and Athene the Motherless Maiden with the aid of Zeus presides over them all. Consider therefore whether we are not superior to you in every single one of these things, I mean in the arts and in wisdom and intelligence; and this is true, whether you consider the useful arts or the imitative arts whose end is beauty, such as the statuary's art, |389 painting, or household management, and the art of healing derived from Asclepius whose oracles are found everywhere on earth, and the god grants to us a share in them perpetually. At any rate, when I have been sick, Asclepius has often cured me by prescribing remedies; and of this Zeus is witness. Therefore, if we who have not given ourselves over to the spirit of apostasy, fare better than you in soul and body and external affairs, why do you abandon these teachings of ours and go over to those others?

61. 1 See Vol. 1, Introduction to Oration 4, p. 349; and for Asclepius, Oration 4. 144b, where Julian, as here, opposes Asclepius to Christ; and 153b for Asclepius the saviour.
http://www.tertullian.org/fathers/julia ... 1_text.htm

gmx
Posts: 317
Joined: Mon Jul 27, 2015 4:35 am

Re: On the Longer Ending

Post by gmx »

Kunigunde Kreuzerin wrote: Wed Sep 20, 2017 2:09 pm .
I have two questions about the L.E. As a little introduction I will start with some observations of Richard Carrier.
In the LE (a mere 12 verses), the demonstrative pronoun ekeinos is used five times as a simple substantive ("she," "they," "them"). But Mark never uses ekeinos that way (not once in 666 verses), he always uses it adjectively, or with a definite article, or as a simple demonstrative (altogether 22 times), always using autos as his simple substantive pronoun instead (hundreds of times)
It seems interesting to me that (per Eusebius) it is primarily Greek manuscripts which are purported to have been missing the LE and ended at 16:8. If the previous sentence is factual (that in the 4th century most Greek MSS were missing the LE), there is a conundrum as to how the LE ended up in the majority of extant Greek manuscripts. As such, the Greek wording of the LE in our extant manuscripts must be considered to be of questionable heritage. That is, it may be a translation from Latin. Consequently, I think issues of Greek style of the LE vs the rest of Mark's Gospel are diminished.
I saw a Naked girl ,Slowly emerge in front of me,Greek hairstyle,Very beautiful,She has a beautiful [fine] profile.; She is fine in profile. the view of profile,hard to tell.
Kunigunde Kreuzerin
Posts: 2110
Joined: Sat Nov 16, 2013 2:19 pm
Location: Leipzig, Germany
Contact:

Re: On the Longer Ending

Post by Kunigunde Kreuzerin »

gmx wrote: Wed May 23, 2018 3:50 am
Kunigunde Kreuzerin wrote: Wed Sep 20, 2017 2:09 pm .
I have two questions about the L.E. As a little introduction I will start with some observations of Richard Carrier.
In the LE (a mere 12 verses), the demonstrative pronoun ekeinos is used five times as a simple substantive ("she," "they," "them"). But Mark never uses ekeinos that way (not once in 666 verses), he always uses it adjectively, or with a definite article, or as a simple demonstrative (altogether 22 times), always using autos as his simple substantive pronoun instead (hundreds of times)
It seems interesting to me that (per Eusebius) it is primarily Greek manuscripts which are purported to have been missing the LE and ended at 16:8. If the previous sentence is factual (that in the 4th century most Greek MSS were missing the LE), there is a conundrum as to how the LE ended up in the majority of extant Greek manuscripts. As such, the Greek wording of the LE in our extant manuscripts must be considered to be of questionable heritage. That is, it may be a translation from Latin. Consequently, I think issues of Greek style of the LE vs the rest of Mark's Gospel are diminished.
It seems to me that Carrier's argument is still valid and that Jerome's reference (not Eusebius) to Greek manuscripts means something different.

It would make a difference if both GMark and the LE would have been written originally in Latin. But the question of whether the LE is a translation from Latin or originally in Greek is rather irrelevant, because one can show a break in style in both cases. In one case a Greek text was added, in the other case a translated text was added. But in both cases it's an addition.

My impression is that Jerome did not mean that especially the Greek mss lacked the LE while it was rather present – for example - in Latin, Syriac or Armenian mss. I think Jerome mentioned the Greek mss as the authoritative writings which reflect the original Greek GMark.

Jerome, Letter To Hedibia
This problem has a twofold solution. Either we do not accept the testimony of Mark, because this final portion is not contained in most of the Gospels that bear his name – almost all the Greek codices lacking it – or else must affirm that Matthew and Mark have both told the truth, ...
Secret Alias
Posts: 18362
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: On the Longer Ending

Post by Secret Alias »

I agree with you KK on your interpretation of the passage. What remains unclear to me is whether Jerome is acknowledging that the ending of Mark is false. That's what he seems to be saying.
“Finally, from so little sleeping and so much reading, his brain dried up and he went completely out of his mind.”
― Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, Don Quixote
gmx
Posts: 317
Joined: Mon Jul 27, 2015 4:35 am

Re: On the Longer Ending

Post by gmx »

Kunigunde Kreuzerin wrote: Wed May 23, 2018 11:27 am
gmx wrote: Wed May 23, 2018 3:50 am
Kunigunde Kreuzerin wrote: Wed Sep 20, 2017 2:09 pm .
I have two questions about the L.E. As a little introduction I will start with some observations of Richard Carrier.
In the LE (a mere 12 verses), the demonstrative pronoun ekeinos is used five times as a simple substantive ("she," "they," "them"). But Mark never uses ekeinos that way (not once in 666 verses), he always uses it adjectively, or with a definite article, or as a simple demonstrative (altogether 22 times), always using autos as his simple substantive pronoun instead (hundreds of times)
It seems interesting to me that (per Eusebius) it is primarily Greek manuscripts which are purported to have been missing the LE and ended at 16:8. If the previous sentence is factual (that in the 4th century most Greek MSS were missing the LE), there is a conundrum as to how the LE ended up in the majority of extant Greek manuscripts. As such, the Greek wording of the LE in our extant manuscripts must be considered to be of questionable heritage. That is, it may be a translation from Latin. Consequently, I think issues of Greek style of the LE vs the rest of Mark's Gospel are diminished.
It seems to me that Carrier's argument is still valid and that Jerome's reference (not Eusebius) to Greek manuscripts means something different.

It would make a difference if both GMark and the LE would have been written originally in Latin. But the question of whether the LE is a translation from Latin or originally in Greek is rather irrelevant, because one can show a break in style in both cases. In one case a Greek text was added, in the other case a translated text was added. But in both cases it's an addition.

My impression is that Jerome did not mean that especially the Greek mss lacked the LE while it was rather present – for example - in Latin, Syriac or Armenian mss. I think Jerome mentioned the Greek mss as the authoritative writings which reflect the original Greek GMark.

Jerome, Letter To Hedibia
This problem has a twofold solution. Either we do not accept the testimony of Mark, because this final portion is not contained in most of the Gospels that bear his name – almost all the Greek codices lacking it – or else must affirm that Matthew and Mark have both told the truth, ...
And I just want to repeat an argument (not my own), that the letter to hebidia is not a genuine letter of Jerome, but for whatever reason, an abridged reworking and translation into Latin of Eusebius to Marinon. For example, the next two questions posed by hebidia, following the one about the disagreement of the LE with Matthew, being identical to the next two questions posed by Marinon.

That it represents Jerome's personal opinion on the various matters should possibly be discounted.
I saw a Naked girl ,Slowly emerge in front of me,Greek hairstyle,Very beautiful,She has a beautiful [fine] profile.; She is fine in profile. the view of profile,hard to tell.
Kunigunde Kreuzerin
Posts: 2110
Joined: Sat Nov 16, 2013 2:19 pm
Location: Leipzig, Germany
Contact:

Re: On the Longer Ending

Post by Kunigunde Kreuzerin »

gmx wrote: Wed May 23, 2018 1:12 pm And I just want to repeat an argument (not my own), that the letter to hebidia is not a genuine letter of Jerome, but for whatever reason, an abridged reworking and translation into Latin of Eusebius to Marinon. For example, the next two questions posed by hebidia, following the one about the disagreement of the LE with Matthew, being identical to the next two questions posed by Marinon.

That it represents Jerome's personal opinion on the various matters should possibly be discounted.
I agree that the letter to Hebidia has a literary relationship to Eusebius' "To Marinus", but I would not go so far to say, that the letter is not a genuine letter of Jerome. Jerome mentioned Hedibia also in his first letter to Rusticus.

Regardless, I still do not understand what argument can be drawn from it against Carrier's point.
gmx
Posts: 317
Joined: Mon Jul 27, 2015 4:35 am

Re: On the Longer Ending

Post by gmx »

Kunigunde Kreuzerin wrote: Thu May 24, 2018 4:35 am
gmx wrote: Wed May 23, 2018 1:12 pm And I just want to repeat an argument (not my own), that the letter to hebidia is not a genuine letter of Jerome, but for whatever reason, an abridged reworking and translation into Latin of Eusebius to Marinon. For example, the next two questions posed by hebidia, following the one about the disagreement of the LE with Matthew, being identical to the next two questions posed by Marinon.

That it represents Jerome's personal opinion on the various matters should possibly be discounted.
I agree that the letter to Hebidia has a literary relationship to Eusebius' "To Marinus", but I would not go so far to say, that the letter is not a genuine letter of Jerome. Jerome mentioned Hedibia also in his first letter to Rusticus.

Regardless, I still do not understand what argument can be drawn from it against Carrier's point.
I guess my simplistic point is this. If we accept that the LE was missing from the majority of Gk MSS in the 4th Century, it has somehow found its way back into the vast majority of the extant Gk MSS available today. My point is, by what process has it been repatriated into our extant copies? Is it possible that it has been re-translated from Latin (eg Vulgate) into Greek? If so, what value can you place on the Gk style of the final product of a passage that has been translated from Gk into Latin, and Latin back into Gk, three to four hundred years apart? That is what I am contending could have occurred, if one assumes that most Gk manuscripts lacked the LE in the 4th Century, in order to arrive at the current extant manuscript evidence for the LE.

As always, I accept my arguments are naive, and happy to be corrected on any points.
I saw a Naked girl ,Slowly emerge in front of me,Greek hairstyle,Very beautiful,She has a beautiful [fine] profile.; She is fine in profile. the view of profile,hard to tell.
User avatar
Ben C. Smith
Posts: 8994
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: On the Longer Ending

Post by Ben C. Smith »

gmx wrote: Thu May 24, 2018 5:23 amI guess my simplistic point is this. If we accept that the LE was missing from the majority of Gk MSS in the 4th Century, it has somehow found its way back into the vast majority of the extant Gk MSS available today. My point is, by what process has it been repatriated into our extant copies?
By your own words, it was not missing from all Greek manuscripts: just from most of them. So scribes and scholars simply copied the Longer Ending from one of the few manuscripts which contained it over to those manuscripts which lacked it. Easy peasy.

Victor of Antioch even tells us that this is exactly what he did. He accepted the Longer Ending as authoritative, apparently because it was contained in a revered manuscript of Mark extant in Palestine (κατὰ τὸ Παλαιστιναῖον εὐαγγέλιον Μάρκου); so in Victor's judgment the Greek manuscripts which contained the Longer Ending were the more accurate ones. But he agreed with Eusebius that most (not all) of the Greek manuscripts lacked it. His reaction was to append (συντεθείκαμεν) the Longer Ending, as gleaned from what he deemed to be the more accurate copies (ἐξ ἀκριβῶν ἀντιγράφων), to those copies which lacked it:

Victor of Antioch, from Cramer's Catena, volume 1: Εἰ δὲ καὶ τὸ ”αναστὰς δὲ πρωῒ” μετὰ τὰ ἐπιφερόμενα παρὰ πλείστοις ἀντιγράφοις οὐ κεῖνται ἐν τῷ παρόντι Εὐαγγελίῳ, ὡς νόθα νομίσαντες αὐτὰ εἶναι, ἀλλ’ ἡμεις ἐξ ἀκριβῶν ἀντιγράφων ἐν πλείστοις εὑρόντες αὐτὰ, καὶ κατὰ τὸ Παλαιστιναῖον Εὐαγγέλιον, ὡς ἔχει ἡ ἀλήθεια Μάρκου, συντεθείκαμεν καὶ τὴν ἐν αὐτῷ ἐπιφερομένην δεσποτικὴν ἀνάστασιν, μετὰ τὸ “ἐφοβοῦντο γὰρ,” τουτέστιν ἀπὸ τοῦ “αναστὰς δὲ πρωῒ πρώτῃ σαββάτου” καὶ καθ’ ἑξῆς, μέχρι τοῦ “διὰ τῶν ἐπακολουθούντων σημείων, ἀμήν.” / But even if the words "And having risen early" along with the words following, do not appear in the existing Gospel with most copies, as they are considered spurious, we however, having found them in most of the accurate copies, and in accordance with the Palestinian Gospel, exactly as the truth of Mark is, we have added together also that in it, that follows the Master's resurrection, after the words "for they were afraid," that is, from "and having risen early on the first day of the week" and so on, up to the words "by the signs accompanying, amen."

ΤΙ ΕΣΤΙΝ ΑΛΗΘΕΙΑ
Post Reply