MARK 10:1 @kai.# pe,ran {C} The reading dia. tou/ pe,ran (A K X P most minuscules, followed by the Textus Receptus; cf. the AV rendering “into the coast of Judaea by the farther side of Jordan”) is manifestly an explanatory correction introduced by copyists who were perplexed by the geographical di... [ Continue Reading ]
MARK 10:2 kai. proselqo,ntej Farisai/oi {B} The chief problem presented by the variant readings involves the presence or absence of the words proselqo,ntej $oi`% Farisai/oi. Did the original text read merely evphrw,twn, an impersonal plural (“people asked him” or “he was asked”), and has the refere... [ Continue Reading ]
MARK 10:6 auvtou,j {B} The insertion of o` qeo,j as the subject of evpoi,hsen must have seemed to copyists to be necessary lest the uninstructed reader imagine that the previously mentioned subject (Moses) should be carried on. Several witnesses (D W itb, d, ff2, k, r1 _al_) omit auvtou,j as super... [ Continue Reading ]
MARK 10:7 mhte,ra @kai. proskollhqh,setai pro.j th.n gunai/ka auvtou/# {C} Have the words kai. proskollhqh,setai pro.j th.n gunai/ka (or th|/ gunai/ki) auvtou/ been added in most copies in order to assimilate the quotation to the fuller form of text found in Matthew 19:5 (and Genesis 2:24), or were... [ Continue Reading ]
MARK 10:13 evpeti,mhsan auvtoi/j {A} In order to avoid possible ambiguity as to who it was that the disciples were rebuking, the scribes of A D W Q ¦1 ¦13 _al_ replaced auvtoi/j with toi/j prosfe,rousin or toi/j fe,rousin. The shorter reading is strongly supported by a B C L D Y 579 892 1342 _al_.... [ Continue Reading ]
MARK 10:19 mh. avposterh,sh|j {A} Since the command, “Do not defraud” (a reminiscence of Exodus 20:17 or Deuteronomy 24:14 [Septuagint mss. A F] or Sir 4.1), may have seemed to be inappropriate in a list of several of the Ten Commandments, many copyists — as well as Matthew ( Matthew 19:18) and Lu... [ Continue Reading ]
MARK 10:21 deu/ro avkolou,qei moi {A} The Textus Receptus, following A and many minuscules, adds a gloss from Mark 8:34, a;raj to.n stauro,n. The shorter text is strongly supported by a B C D D Q Y _al_.... [ Continue Reading ]
MARK 10:23 eivseleu,sontai The Western text (D ita, b, d, ff2) has moved ver. Mark 10:25 so as to follow eivseleu,sontai (reading verses Mark 10:23, Mark 10:25, Mark 10:24, Mark 10:26). The transposition appears to be the work of the Western redactor who sought... [ Continue Reading ]
MARK 10:24 evstin {B} The rigor of Jesus’ saying was softened by the insertion of one or another qualification that limited its generality and brought it into closer connection with the context. Thus, A C D Q ¦1 ¦13 _al_ read evstin tou.j pepoiqo,taj evpi. crh,masin (“for those who trust in riches... [ Continue Reading ]
MARK 10:25 ka,mhlon {A} See the comment on Mt 19.24.... [ Continue Reading ]
MARK 10:26 pro.j e`autou,j {B} The reading pro.j auvto,n appears to be an Alexandrian correction, taking the place of pro.j e`autou,j, which is preserved in A D W Q ¦1 ¦13 it vg goth arm eth _al,_ and refined in M* itk syrp geo (pro.j avllh,louj).... [ Continue Reading ]
MARK 10:31 @oi`# {C} On the one hand, the weight of evidence supporting the presence of oi` is not impressive, but, on the other hand, scribes, recollecting the parallel in Matthew 19:30 (which lacks the article), may have omitted it here. In order to reflect the balance of considerations, the Com... [ Continue Reading ]
MARK 10:34 meta. trei/j h`me,raj {A} The typically Markan reading, meta. trei/j h`me,raj (which occurs also in Mark 8:31 and Mark 9:31; elsewhere of Jesus’ resurrection, only Matthew 27:63), has been conformed by copyists to the much more frequently used expression, th|/ tri,th| h`me,ra| (compare t... [ Continue Reading ]
MARK 10:36 ti, qe,lete, @me# poih,sw {C} The reading that seems best to account for the emergence of the other readings is that of a1 B Y, where the accusative me is followed, not, as one would expect, by the infinitive (poih/sai, as in many of the later manuscripts), but by the deliberative subju... [ Continue Reading ]
MARK 10:40 avllV oi-j {A} Several early versions (ita, b. d, ff2, k syrs cposa eth) read the Greek alloic as a;lloij, despite the lack of syntactical concord with the preceding part of the sentence.... [ Continue Reading ]
MARK 10:43 evstin {A} The future tense, which is supported by A C3 K X P and most minuscules (followed by the Textus Receptus), appears to be a scribal amelioration designed to soften the peremptory tone of the present e;stin. It is also possible that the future may have arisen from assimilation t... [ Continue Reading ]