tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6346409181794331060.post896947630781316711..comments2024-03-20T12:35:12.828-04:00Comments on The Text of the Gospels: Nick Lunn's Book about Mark 16:9-20 - Reviewing a ReviewJames Snapp Jrhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09493891380752272603noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6346409181794331060.post-52211402450088965012018-05-23T23:28:41.295-04:002018-05-23T23:28:41.295-04:00This usually refers to the amount of time it takes...This usually refers to the amount of time it takes for the company to collect its accounts receivable or the number of times it has to procure new inventory to replace that which it has <a href="https://www.minitool.com/data-recovery/zip-file-recovery.html" rel="nofollow">zip file software</a>. Army body composition program19 seconds agoWhich regulation covers army body composition.editorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16854096742020071257noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6346409181794331060.post-18732711624696544082015-11-28T17:33:09.731-05:002015-11-28T17:33:09.731-05:00Thanks for your response Mr. Snapp. I've respo...Thanks for your response Mr. Snapp. I've responded to the above here:<br /><br />http://thenewporphyry.blogspot.com/2015/11/the-original-ending-of-gospel-of-mark.html?showComment=1448640103026#c139847884136366901<br /><br />and here:<br /><br />http://thenewporphyry.blogspot.com/2015/11/the-original-ending-of-gospel-of-mark.html?showComment=1448728196069#c2032731039868315486JoeWallackhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10666074795187377455noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6346409181794331060.post-88861887616404475762015-11-21T20:16:59.644-05:002015-11-21T20:16:59.644-05:00JoeWallack,
I addressed such a view in the course...JoeWallack, <br />I addressed such a view in the course of the summarized presentation that begins at www.curtisvillechristianchurch.org/MarkOne.htm . See, especially, the paragraph above the "Concluding Thoughts" at http://www.curtisvillechristianchurch.org/MarkThree.htm . Basically, (a) it puts vv. 9-20 in a heads-I-win (because close parallels would show that the author of verses 9-20 used Matthew and Luke) and tails-you-lose (because a lack of close parallels shows that Matthew and Luke didn't use vv. 9-20) scenario. And (b) Luke doesn't use Mark 6:45-8:26 but nobody (or almost nobody -- there are probably still a few folks who like Streeter's theory about this) is saying that this means that Luke used a copy of Mark that lacked those verses. James Snapp Jrhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09493891380752272603noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6346409181794331060.post-71535310863128377462015-11-19T10:34:16.962-05:002015-11-19T10:34:16.962-05:00Grace to you James Snapp. Carlson has his own solu...Grace to you James Snapp. Carlson has his own solution to the problem of 16:8 which goes the other way (so to speak). The qualitative part of the LE argument is the claimed 2nd century Patristic support. At my blog:<br /><br />http://thenewporphyry.blogspot.com/<br /><br />I am currently reviewing this evidence and you are welcome to comment. I have faith that you approve of the name of the blog.<br /><br /><br />JosephJoeWallackhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10666074795187377455noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6346409181794331060.post-345900648024900862015-11-18T09:31:58.831-05:002015-11-18T09:31:58.831-05:00 Thanks for sharing this information, James. It ma... Thanks for sharing this information, James. It makes me want to read this book and to read your material on it. Waynehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00310372386939711273noreply@blogger.com