MARK 11:3 auvto.n avposte,llei pa,lin {B} The interpretation of this passage is obscure. Are the words kai. euvqu.j auvto.n avposte,llei pa,lin w-de part of the message, or a statement of what will happen? Matthew ( Matthew 21:3) evidently took the words in the latter sense. The presence, however,... [ Continue Reading ]
MARK 11:19 evxeporeu,onto e;xw th/j po,lewj {C} Although it is possible that the singular verb (evxeporeu,eto) was altered to the plural in order to suit the next verse, the weight of the evidence tends to support the plural. The omission of the verb in L is the result of an accident in transcript... [ Continue Reading ]
MARK 11:22 :Ecete {B} Inasmuch as elsewhere the solemn expression avmh.n le,gw u`mi/n is always introductory and is never preceded by a protasis, 17 it appears that the original reading is the exhortation :Ecete pi,stin qeou/, and that the reading introduced by eiv (a D Q ¦13 28 _al_) arose by ass... [ Continue Reading ]
MARK 11:24 evla,bete {A} The aorist tense, representing the Semitic usage of the prophetic perfect (which expresses the certainty of a future action), seemed too bold and was altered either to the present tense (lamba,nete) or, under the influence of the parallel in Matthew 21:22, to the future te... [ Continue Reading ]
MARK 11:26 _omit verse_ {A} Although it might be thought that the sentence was accidentally omitted because of homoeoteleuton, its absence from early witnesses that represent all text-types makes it highly probable that the words were inserted by copyists in imitation of Matthew 6:15.... [ Continue Reading ]