Mark 1:10

From Errancy Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search

Previous Verse < Mark 1 > Next Verse

And straightway coming up out of the water, he saw the heavens rent asunder, and the Spirit as a dove descending upon him: (ASV)

Contents

Pro

Edit this section if you suspect error.


You Took The Words Right Out Of My Mouth

Continued from Mark 1:1 Inventory of Significant Editing in the First Gospel: Significant Variant #5:

Mark 1:10

??? ????? ????????? ?? ??? ?????? ????? ??????????? ???? ???????? ??? ?? ?????? ?? ?????????? ?????????? ??? ?????

"And straightway coming up out of the water, he saw the heavens rent asunder, and the Spirit as a dove descending upon him" (ASV)


And Metzger commentary: " "


JW: Thank God again for Bet Ehranncyman who alerts me to this one and forces me to Edit my own Editing thread (I Am as bad as Eusebius!). The Key word here is "???" translated above as "upon". However, the common meaning of "???" is "unto" or "into". Earlier witness tends to have "???". Later witness tends to have "???", "upon".

"Into" supports the Separationist view that Jesus was not Jesus until God's Spirit went into him at the Baptism. Ehrrancyman gives the Background/Setting here of "Orthodox" arguing around this time that Jesus was God and other Christian sects arguing that Jesus was not God such as the "Separationists", who could use 1:10 as Ammanition that Jesus was just a man before the Baptism and it was the Spirit of God received at the baptism which gave Jesus power.

Again this helps Illustrate that there is far more Textual Variation than indicated by Standard Textual Critical Commentary and some of this concerns Significant Christian Doctrine. The standard Metzger "critical" commentary is seriously flawed as it has already been Edited to remove Textual Variation not considered significant by mainstream Christianity. There should be a comprehensive Textual Critical Commentary that includes ALL Potentially Significant variation. Bart?

The NIGTC, probably the best available Critical commentary on "Mark", identifies the unto/upon variation but labels "unto" "nonsense" because it's unsupported by the rest of the Text. Nonsense! "Mark":

1) Has no special birth.

2) No Jesus' stories before the Baptism.

3) God declares at Baptism that Jesus is his son.

4) Is full of exorcisms of spirits.

5) Jesus loses his spirit at the end.

All supporting the Separationist view that God's Spirit went into Jesus at baptism. Meanwhile we continue to have Dishonest Christian Bible scholarship 2,000 years after the fiction, such as Daniel Wallace, claiming that for the most part, Ehranncyman's book, does not identify Textual variation affecting Significant Christian Doctrine.

--JoeWallack 08:47, 30 Nov 2006 (CST)

Con

Edit this section if you doubt error.

Neutral

Edit this section to note miscellaneous facts.

External links

Personal tools