Steven Avery
Administrator
"the sinking pericope theories of James Snapp that are contra Markan ending authenticity"
Yes, James talks of a floating pericope, but it is the theories that are sinking. And yes, James pretends that he is defending Markan authenticity. However, his position is easily refuted by the contras and is a faux authenticity.
Also to be added here. Information about the books by Hester and Lunn, and their positions.
What is not included here is the discussions of particular evidences, that is planned for a separate thread. And there is lots of fine material easily available about the massive evidences.
===============================
Specifically on the Snapp Sinking Pericope Theories
Here are some of the discussions to date. The plan is to make them into an article here:
Facebook - Pure Bible
ending of Mark - twelve verses with the resurrection appearances of the Lord Jesus - the James Snapp straddle - floating pericopes
Steven Avery - Sept 11, 2015
https://www.facebook.com/groups/purebible/permalink/860452200713337/
This has the url to the amazing 2010 discussion with Josh Walker, who properly saw the position of James Snapp as non-authentic.
The Ending of Mark - Feb 22, 2010
Josh Walker
http://www.bringthebooks.org/2010/02/ending-of-mark.html
And here is a position that James craftily changed later, simply because it was too embarrassing:
See the 2021 discussion here:
https://www.facebook.com/groups/467...KUKzycTz6X7dLX-_Koq5xdsbPfL2aJW3g&__tn__=R]-R
Now he says it was written by Mark.
Facebook - Pure Bible
Steven Avery - December 15, 2015
https://www.facebook.com/groups/purebible/permalink/901955826562974/
2 new books on the Ending of Mark, one by David Wayne Hester, one by . Nicholas P. Lunn, both have lots of strengths (e.g. on ECW references) and some weaknesses.
Facebook - King James Bible Debate - May, 2016
https://www.facebook.com/groups/21209666692/permalink/10153636956921693/
===============================
Other significant writing related to the Mark ending
[textualcriticism] ending of Mark - celebrating 125 years of an a fortiori fallacy
Steven Avery - Feb 18, 2012
https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/textualcriticism/conversations/topics/7026
also
https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/textualcriticism/conversations/topics/7036
===============================
Resources
the sinking pericope theories of James Snapp that are contra Markan ending authenticity (this thread) - April, 2016
https://www.purebibleforum.com/index.php/threads/c.33.a/post-59
The Last Twelve Verses of the Gospel According to S. Mark Vindicated Against Recent Critical Objectors and Established (1871)
John William Burgon
https://books.google.com/books?id=LtpJAAAAMAAJ
Perspectives on the Ending of Mark (2008)
http://www.amazon.com/Perspectives-Ending-Mark-Daniel-Wallace-ebook/dp/B004OR17WK
Only .99 on kindle, and includes excellent Maurice Robinson material.
https://books.google.com/books?id=fA65AwAAQBAJ
The Original Ending of Mark: A New Case for the Authenticity of Mark 16:9-20 (2014)
Nicholas P. Lunn
http://www.amazon.com/Original-Ending-Mark-Case-Authenticity-ebook/dp/B00OU6OB78- Kindle Edition
https://books.google.com/books?id=D1UNBQAAQBAJ
https://books.google.com/books?id=bM0SBQAAQBAJ
https://books.google.com/books?id=MtDwCAAAQBAJ
Does Mark 16:9-20 Belong in the New Testament? -
David W. Hester
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00VL7AA9W/
https://books.google.com/books?id=vzb6CQAAQBAJ
The Earliest Evidence for the Longer Ending of Mark (Nov, 2015)
Justin D. Atkins
http://www.wordmp3.com/details.aspx?id=20837
Apologetics Press - Dave Miller
Is Mark 16:9-20 Inspired? (2005)
http://apologeticspress.org/apPubPage.aspx?pub=1&issue=572&article=433
The Strongest Argument Against Mark 16:9-20
http://www.apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=13&article=5151
CARM
Mark 16:9-20 - Authentic or Not? - Snapp and Wallack - (2010)
http://forums.carm.org/vbb/showthread.php?4700-Mark-16-9-20-Authentic-or-Not-Snapp-and-Wallack
First of many uses of the Snapp confusion concession position working effectively used contra authenticity.
Evangelical Textual Criticism
Lunn on the End of Mark - July, 2015
http://evangelicaltextualcriticism.blogspot.com/2015/07/lunn-on-end-of-mark.html
http://evangelicaltextualcriticism.blogspot.com/2015/07/lunn-on-end-of-mark-part-2.html
In part 1 comments, similar to CARM above, except that I could correct the Snapp error.
Others like Stephen Carlson have also caught the Snapp conceptual problem.
Facebook - New Testament Textual Criticism - Oct 20, 2014
Maurice Robinson in Perspectives - Steven Avery Review
https://www.facebook.com/groups/NTTextualCriticism/permalink/741986362555033/
James Snapp
The Authenticity of Mark 16:9-20 (2012)
James E. Snapp, Jr.
http://www.textexcavation.com/snapp/AuthEndingMkTextEx2012.doc
Authentic: The Case for Mark 16:9-20 - Kindle (2016)
James E. Snapp, Jr.
http://www.amazon.com/dp/B01EU1OR9O
$5 most current
James Snapp - HTML friendly
The Authenticity of Mark 16:9-20
http://www.curtisvillechristianchurch.org/MarkOne.htm
The Authenticity of Mark 16:9-20 - (Part Two)
External Evidence for the Inclusion
http://www.curtisvillechristianchurch.org/MarkTwo.htm
The Authenticity of Mark 16:9-20 - (Part Three)
http://www.curtisvillechristianchurch.org/MarkThree.htm
Early Evidence for Mark 16:9-20
http://www.curtisvillechristianchurch.org/Evidence.htm
Resources to Assist the Study of Mark 16:9-20
http://www.curtisvillechristianchurch.org/AuthSuppl.htm
Twenty-eight Pictures to Assist the Study of Mark 16:9-20
http://www.curtisvillechristianchurch.org/AuthSuppl.html
".. video-lectures about Mark 16:9-20 are available to watch at YouTube"
The NET and the Ending of Mark (Updated!) - April 19, 2013
http://www.thetextofthegospels.com/2013/04/the-net-and-ending-of-mark.html
There are many "correction of textual critics" and popular misinformation articles like this one. Since NETBible is Daniel Wallace, this gives the basic picture.
===============================
Lesser interest - Carlson review
Facebook - Steven Avery wall - Nov 16, 2015
... we note a reference to the Stephen Carlson review of the Nicholas Lunn book on the Mark ending.
Carlson review - http://www.fbs.org.au/reviews/lunn63.html
Facebook - NT Textual Criticism
James E. Snapp, Jr. - Nov 17, 2015
https://www.facebook.com/groups/NTTextualCriticism/permalink/1004706499616350/
James Snapp reviews the grossly deficient review of the Nicholas Lunn book by Stephen Carlson
===============================
Early History in Reformation era of Ending considerations
[TC-Alternate-list] EoM - Cajetan and Catharinus
Steven Avery - Nov 2, 2008
https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/TC-Alternate-list/conversations/messages/2215
Facebook - NT Textual Criticism - Steven Avery - June, 2015
https://www.facebook.com/groups/NTTextualCriticism/permalink/877714438982224/?comment_id=891290610957940&offset=0&total_comments=37&comment_tracking={tn:R4}
.
Miracle and Mission: The Authentication of Missionaries and Their Message in the Longer Ending of Mark (2000)
James A. Kelhoffer
https://books.google.com/books?id=3z9hz6VrD_8C&pg=PA5
.
“Hoe ‘Want ze waren bang’ het slot van Markus werd” - Dec, 2013
(“How ‘For they were afraid’ became Mark’s ending”),
Bart Kamphuis
https://www.kokboekencentrum.nl/tij...Zmdy2FleZqGoKNUyv2wK_ViMlTzUKIY2BYExcOvBAyWzM
PDF
https://www.kokboekencentrum.nl/tij...SRQpqs5UN2MAkQx4eEvDA-xZvDWXtGKLLVngvlf9ltrDc
p. 173-177
.
The Turning Point for Mark 16:9-20 - Dec, 2013
Jan Krans
https://vuntblog.blogspot.com/2013/...yoOqnTd7R4JShe2fuIbpsreLE45RMMSolriXVSYSxYVRA
.
=============================
.
Steven Avery
Along with the Jan Krans blog with the comments:
The Turning Point for Mark 16:9-20
http://vuntblog.blogspot.com/2013/12/the-turning-point-for-mark-169-20.html
Two of the only online posts on the earlier discussions about the section's authenticity.
===============================
To Review
Facebook - NT Textual Criticism - Jan, 2015
https://www.facebook.com/groups/NTTextualCriticism/permalink/790420971044905/?comment_id=796635580423444&comment_tracking={tn:R3}
Facebook - NT Textual Criticism - July, 2015
https://www.facebook.com/groups/NTTextualCriticism/915065778580423/?comment_id=915240841896250&ref=notif¬if_t=like
Facebook - NT Textual Criticism - Nov, 2015
https://www.facebook.com/groups/NTTextualCriticism/permalink/1004706499616350/?comment_id=1005463349540665&comment_tracking={tn:R0}
early sinking pericopes - to be made into one article
Facebook - NT Textual Criticism -
https://www.facebook.com/groups/NTTextualCriticism/862070457213289/ April, 2015
https://www.facebook.com/groups/NTTextualCriticism/permalink/790420971044905/ - Jan, 2015
Facebook - King James Bible Debate - May, 2015
https://www.facebook.com/groups/21209666692/permalink/10152918258471693/?comment_id=10152919543301693&offset=0&total_comments=13&comment_tracking={tn:R}
Facebook - King James Bible Debate - April, 2014
https://www.facebook.com/groups/212...=10152058527911693&offset=0&total_comments=55
===============================
My bookmarks reviewed from April 1, 2014 to May 1, 2016
Yes, James talks of a floating pericope, but it is the theories that are sinking. And yes, James pretends that he is defending Markan authenticity. However, his position is easily refuted by the contras and is a faux authenticity.
Also to be added here. Information about the books by Hester and Lunn, and their positions.
What is not included here is the discussions of particular evidences, that is planned for a separate thread. And there is lots of fine material easily available about the massive evidences.
===============================
Specifically on the Snapp Sinking Pericope Theories
Here are some of the discussions to date. The plan is to make them into an article here:
Facebook - Pure Bible
ending of Mark - twelve verses with the resurrection appearances of the Lord Jesus - the James Snapp straddle - floating pericopes
Steven Avery - Sept 11, 2015
https://www.facebook.com/groups/purebible/permalink/860452200713337/
This has the url to the amazing 2010 discussion with Josh Walker, who properly saw the position of James Snapp as non-authentic.
The Ending of Mark - Feb 22, 2010
Josh Walker
http://www.bringthebooks.org/2010/02/ending-of-mark.html
"Thanks for the great comments and insightful work. I would agree with you that the longer ending of Mark is not original."
And here is a position that James craftily changed later, simply because it was too embarrassing:
My view is that Mark 16:9-20 *is* an original part of the Gospel of Mark, in the sense that it was part of the text before it was first disseminated in the church. I think it was added by someone other than Mark himself, but that does not make it non-original.
See the 2021 discussion here:
https://www.facebook.com/groups/467...KUKzycTz6X7dLX-_Koq5xdsbPfL2aJW3g&__tn__=R]-R
Now he says it was written by Mark.
Facebook - Pure Bible
Steven Avery - December 15, 2015
https://www.facebook.com/groups/purebible/permalink/901955826562974/
2 new books on the Ending of Mark, one by David Wayne Hester, one by . Nicholas P. Lunn, both have lots of strengths (e.g. on ECW references) and some weaknesses.
Facebook - King James Bible Debate - May, 2016
https://www.facebook.com/groups/21209666692/permalink/10153636956921693/
===============================
Other significant writing related to the Mark ending
[textualcriticism] ending of Mark - celebrating 125 years of an a fortiori fallacy
Steven Avery - Feb 18, 2012
https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/textualcriticism/conversations/topics/7026
also
https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/textualcriticism/conversations/topics/7036
===============================
Resources
the sinking pericope theories of James Snapp that are contra Markan ending authenticity (this thread) - April, 2016
https://www.purebibleforum.com/index.php/threads/c.33.a/post-59
The Last Twelve Verses of the Gospel According to S. Mark Vindicated Against Recent Critical Objectors and Established (1871)
John William Burgon
https://books.google.com/books?id=LtpJAAAAMAAJ
Perspectives on the Ending of Mark (2008)
http://www.amazon.com/Perspectives-Ending-Mark-Daniel-Wallace-ebook/dp/B004OR17WK
Only .99 on kindle, and includes excellent Maurice Robinson material.
https://books.google.com/books?id=fA65AwAAQBAJ
The Original Ending of Mark: A New Case for the Authenticity of Mark 16:9-20 (2014)
Nicholas P. Lunn
http://www.amazon.com/Original-Ending-Mark-Case-Authenticity-ebook/dp/B00OU6OB78- Kindle Edition
https://books.google.com/books?id=D1UNBQAAQBAJ
https://books.google.com/books?id=bM0SBQAAQBAJ
https://books.google.com/books?id=MtDwCAAAQBAJ
Does Mark 16:9-20 Belong in the New Testament? -
David W. Hester
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00VL7AA9W/
https://books.google.com/books?id=vzb6CQAAQBAJ
The Earliest Evidence for the Longer Ending of Mark (Nov, 2015)
Justin D. Atkins
http://www.wordmp3.com/details.aspx?id=20837
Apologetics Press - Dave Miller
Is Mark 16:9-20 Inspired? (2005)
http://apologeticspress.org/apPubPage.aspx?pub=1&issue=572&article=433
The Strongest Argument Against Mark 16:9-20
http://www.apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=13&article=5151
CARM
Mark 16:9-20 - Authentic or Not? - Snapp and Wallack - (2010)
http://forums.carm.org/vbb/showthread.php?4700-Mark-16-9-20-Authentic-or-Not-Snapp-and-Wallack
First of many uses of the Snapp confusion concession position working effectively used contra authenticity.
Evangelical Textual Criticism
Lunn on the End of Mark - July, 2015
http://evangelicaltextualcriticism.blogspot.com/2015/07/lunn-on-end-of-mark.html
http://evangelicaltextualcriticism.blogspot.com/2015/07/lunn-on-end-of-mark-part-2.html
In part 1 comments, similar to CARM above, except that I could correct the Snapp error.
Others like Stephen Carlson have also caught the Snapp conceptual problem.
Facebook - New Testament Textual Criticism - Oct 20, 2014
Maurice Robinson in Perspectives - Steven Avery Review
https://www.facebook.com/groups/NTTextualCriticism/permalink/741986362555033/
James Snapp
The Authenticity of Mark 16:9-20 (2012)
James E. Snapp, Jr.
http://www.textexcavation.com/snapp/AuthEndingMkTextEx2012.doc
Authentic: The Case for Mark 16:9-20 - Kindle (2016)
James E. Snapp, Jr.
http://www.amazon.com/dp/B01EU1OR9O
$5 most current
James Snapp - HTML friendly
The Authenticity of Mark 16:9-20
http://www.curtisvillechristianchurch.org/MarkOne.htm
The Authenticity of Mark 16:9-20 - (Part Two)
External Evidence for the Inclusion
http://www.curtisvillechristianchurch.org/MarkTwo.htm
The Authenticity of Mark 16:9-20 - (Part Three)
http://www.curtisvillechristianchurch.org/MarkThree.htm
Early Evidence for Mark 16:9-20
http://www.curtisvillechristianchurch.org/Evidence.htm
Resources to Assist the Study of Mark 16:9-20
http://www.curtisvillechristianchurch.org/AuthSuppl.htm
Twenty-eight Pictures to Assist the Study of Mark 16:9-20
http://www.curtisvillechristianchurch.org/AuthSuppl.html
".. video-lectures about Mark 16:9-20 are available to watch at YouTube"
The NET and the Ending of Mark (Updated!) - April 19, 2013
http://www.thetextofthegospels.com/2013/04/the-net-and-ending-of-mark.html
There are many "correction of textual critics" and popular misinformation articles like this one. Since NETBible is Daniel Wallace, this gives the basic picture.
===============================
Lesser interest - Carlson review
Facebook - Steven Avery wall - Nov 16, 2015
... we note a reference to the Stephen Carlson review of the Nicholas Lunn book on the Mark ending.
Carlson review - http://www.fbs.org.au/reviews/lunn63.html
Facebook - NT Textual Criticism
James E. Snapp, Jr. - Nov 17, 2015
https://www.facebook.com/groups/NTTextualCriticism/permalink/1004706499616350/
James Snapp reviews the grossly deficient review of the Nicholas Lunn book by Stephen Carlson
===============================
Early History in Reformation era of Ending considerations
[TC-Alternate-list] EoM - Cajetan and Catharinus
Steven Avery - Nov 2, 2008
https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/TC-Alternate-list/conversations/messages/2215
Facebook - NT Textual Criticism - Steven Avery - June, 2015
https://www.facebook.com/groups/NTTextualCriticism/permalink/877714438982224/?comment_id=891290610957940&offset=0&total_comments=37&comment_tracking={tn:R4}
=============================Steven Avery
> Steven Estes
> I take it that before Vaticanus and Siniaticus were discovered there was really no opposition to Mk.16:9-20?
Generally true, although before Sinaiticus you had some cautious opposition, such as Granville Penn. Tischendorf before Sinaiticus (hmmm...) in 1840 per Letis. And see below, such as Cajetan.
Overall, it misses the vibrancy of discussion, which often covers the points made today and on a higher level of analysis.
.
==================
.
The must read text about the issue historically is the section from Richard Simon, covering up to about 1700:
.
A Critical History of the Text of the New Testament (1689)
Richard Simon
https://books.google.com/books?id=nYzPAAAAMAAJ&pg=PA94
Andrew Hunwick translation (2013) (adds some Hunwick notes)
https://books.google.com/books?id=Ia01_pLxGr8C&pg=PA99
.
Euthymius Zigabenus (early 12th c.)
Thomas Cajetan (1469-1534)
Sixtus Senensis (1520-1569)
Juan Maldonado (1533-1583)
Theodore Beza (1519-1605)
Caesar Baronius (1538-1607)
Hugo Grotius (1583-1645) (others unnamed with a Grotius position)
Richard Simon (1638-1712)
.
The apologetic aspects are definitely in the mix, almost center stage. Erasmus should be added for that period, also Catherinus, perhaps Johann Gerhard. And finding and then reading, or skimming, the articles in Latin would lead to more.
.
From the ECW some issues covered in Richard
Simon
:
.
Irenaeus, versional evidences, Jerome to Hedibia and to the Pelagians, and the Manichean possible contribution, Julian the apostate use in contra-apologetics and Greek responses.
.
And there are versional and ms. elements as well.
.
Eusebius before Jerome, the source of Jerome is missed. The large number of ECW references is not mentioned, Irenaeus is mentioned twice but no other Ante-Nicene ref.
.
=============================
.
1700s before Griesbach
.
John Mill (1645-1707)
Johann Bengel (1687-1752)
Johann Wettstein (1693-1754)
Johann Adam Osiander (1701-1756)
Andreas Birch (Vaticanus collation) (1758-1829) .. overlaps Griesbach
.
The period from Griesbach to Hort is another including Burgon. James Morison (1816-1893) and Jean Pierre Martin (1840-1890) should not be missed, although after Hort.
.
.
Miracle and Mission: The Authentication of Missionaries and Their Message in the Longer Ending of Mark (2000)
James A. Kelhoffer
https://books.google.com/books?id=3z9hz6VrD_8C&pg=PA5
.
“Hoe ‘Want ze waren bang’ het slot van Markus werd” - Dec, 2013
(“How ‘For they were afraid’ became Mark’s ending”),
Bart Kamphuis
https://www.kokboekencentrum.nl/tij...Zmdy2FleZqGoKNUyv2wK_ViMlTzUKIY2BYExcOvBAyWzM
https://www.kokboekencentrum.nl/tij...SRQpqs5UN2MAkQx4eEvDA-xZvDWXtGKLLVngvlf9ltrDc
p. 173-177
.
The Turning Point for Mark 16:9-20 - Dec, 2013
Jan Krans
https://vuntblog.blogspot.com/2013/...yoOqnTd7R4JShe2fuIbpsreLE45RMMSolriXVSYSxYVRA
.
=============================
.
Steven Avery
Along with the Jan Krans blog with the comments:
The Turning Point for Mark 16:9-20
http://vuntblog.blogspot.com/2013/12/the-turning-point-for-mark-169-20.html
Two of the only online posts on the earlier discussions about the section's authenticity.
===============================
To Review
Facebook - NT Textual Criticism - Jan, 2015
https://www.facebook.com/groups/NTTextualCriticism/permalink/790420971044905/?comment_id=796635580423444&comment_tracking={tn:R3}
Facebook - NT Textual Criticism - July, 2015
https://www.facebook.com/groups/NTTextualCriticism/915065778580423/?comment_id=915240841896250&ref=notif¬if_t=like
Facebook - NT Textual Criticism - Nov, 2015
https://www.facebook.com/groups/NTTextualCriticism/permalink/1004706499616350/?comment_id=1005463349540665&comment_tracking={tn:R0}
early sinking pericopes - to be made into one article
Facebook - NT Textual Criticism -
https://www.facebook.com/groups/NTTextualCriticism/862070457213289/ April, 2015
https://www.facebook.com/groups/NTTextualCriticism/permalink/790420971044905/ - Jan, 2015
Facebook - King James Bible Debate - May, 2015
https://www.facebook.com/groups/21209666692/permalink/10152918258471693/?comment_id=10152919543301693&offset=0&total_comments=13&comment_tracking={tn:R}
Facebook - King James Bible Debate - April, 2014
https://www.facebook.com/groups/212...=10152058527911693&offset=0&total_comments=55
===============================
My bookmarks reviewed from April 1, 2014 to May 1, 2016
Last edited: