MARK 2:1 evn oi;kw| Although part of the Committee preferred eivj oi=kon (A C G D P F 090 ¦1 ¦13 22 28 157 330 543 565 579 _al_) as less literary and in the Markan style, a majority was impressed by the widespread and diversified attestation supporting evn oi;kw| (a B D L W Q S 33 571 892 1071 _al... [ Continue Reading ]
MARK 2:4 prosene,gkai {B} The absence of a direct object (auvto,n) may have led to the substitution of proseggi,sai (“to come near”) or proselqei/n (“to come to”) for prosene,gkai (“to bring to”).... [ Continue Reading ]
MARK 2:5 avfi,entai {B} Although strongly supported in the manuscripts, the perfect tense (avfe,wntai) appears to be secondary, having been introduced by copyists from Luke’s account ( Luke 5:20). Mark’s use of the present tense (avfi,entai) was followed by Matthew ( Matthew 9:2).... [ Continue Reading ]
MARK 2:9 avfi,entai {B} See the comment on ver. 5.... [ Continue Reading ]
MARK 2:14 Leui,n {A} The reading VIa,kwbon in Western witnesses shows the influence of Mark 3:18, where VIa,kwbon to.n tou/ ~Alfai,ou is included among the twelve.... [ Continue Reading ]
MARK 2:15-16 auvtw|/. (16) kai. oi` grammatei/j tw/n Farisai,wn ivdo,ntej {C} The more unusual expression oi` grammatei/j tw/n Farisai,wn is to be preferred, since the tendency of scribes would have been to insert kai, after o`i grammatei/j under the influence of the common expression “the scribes... [ Continue Reading ]
MARK 2:16 evsqi,ei {B} The addition of kai. pi,nei is a natural accretion inserted by copyists, perhaps under the influence of the parallel passage in Luke 5:30. The shorter reading, which is strongly supported by B D W _al,_ was followed by Matthew, who added o` dida,skaloj u`mw/n ( Matthew 9:11)... [ Continue Reading ]
MARK 2:22 avpo,llutai kai. oi` avskoi, {C} The reading which best explains the origin of the others is that preserved in B 892 copbo. Since the pendant kai. oi` avskoi, seems to require a verb, most witnesses moved avpo,llutai (making it plural) after oi` avskoi,. Furthermore, under the influence... [ Continue Reading ]
MARK 2:26 evpi. VAbiaqa.r avrciere,wj According to 1 Samuel 21:1 it was Ahimelech, not Abiathar, who was high priest when David ate the bread of the Presence. In order to avoid the historical difficulty, D W _al_ omit evpi. VAbiaqa.r avrciere,wj, thereby conforming the text to Matthew 12:4 and Luke... [ Continue Reading ]