Conscience and Rebuking (The Word of God Encylopedia Book 6)
So, what did Judas experience as soon as Jesus selected him? Nevertheless, Judas was no fool. He observed that Jesus had extraordinary charisma and attracted large crowds, which meant potential political power, influence, and wealth. Judas wanted in on the action. Linking with Jesus seemed to be a fast track to success.
He knew the ins-and-outs of collecting, managing, and spending money better than the others did, including Matthew. We will see what kind of treasurer he was next. It was a wonderful display of love, gratitude, and worship. Why was this fragrant oil not sold for denarii and given to the poor? This he said, not that he cared for the poor, but because he was a thief and had the money box; and he used to take what was put in it John To the poor, Jesus preached the gospel Luke And for the needy, Jesus taught that we should go out of our way to help them so far as we are able parable of the Good Samaritan, Luke Judas did not welcome that message, nor did he want to help the needy.
The man was not regenerated for in a believer God works to will and to do of His good pleasure, which includes ministering to those with pressing needs cp. Philippians with Titus Of course, carnality can quench this work of the Spirit in believers also. Observe the opposite attitude of Paul, a man who was in tune with the Lord Galatians ; cp. The comment of the Evangelist [that Judas was a thief] is intended to stress the avarice of Judas, who saw in the price of the ointment nothing of the beautiful deed which Jesus praised Mark but only a means by which the apostolic fund would be increased, and thereby his own pocket lined.
And even this motive was cloaked under a specious plea that the money could be given away to relieve the poor. Thus to covetousness there is added the trait of deceit. What is clear is that Judas was a self-serving thief. In other words, mind your own business and let her worship Me as she wants; it is a straightforward rebuke. Jesus quoted this verse of Himself at the Last Passover John Shortly after the Transfiguration, while they were in Galilee, Christ predicted:.
The Son of Man is about to be betrayed into the hand of men and they will kill him, and on the third day He will be raised up And they were exceedingly sorrowful Matthew Behold, we are going up to Jerusalem, and the Son of Man will be betrayed to the chief priests and to the scribes; and they will condemn Him to death, and deliver Him to the Gentiles to mock and to scourge and to crucify. And the third day He will rise again Matthew What finally motivated Judas to betray the Lord? The setting is the anointing of Jesus in Bethany.
The trigger was the rebuke that Jesus gave Judas. So from that time he sought opportunity to betray Him Matthew Moreover, the disciples plural were indignant, saying it was a waste and should have been given to the poor, and Jesus rebuked them Jesus knew that ultimately His battle was with the evil one. On an occasion well before His final trip to Jerusalem, He implied that the devil would be involved. You have the words of eternal life. He knew that the devil would possess Judas and use the traitor as a puppet to accomplish satanic objectives.
Then Satan entered Judas, surnamed Iscariot, who was numbered among the twelve. So he went his way and conferred with the chief priests and captains, how he might betray Him to them. And they were glad, and agreed to give him money. So he promised and sought opportunity to betray Him to them in the absence of the multitude Luke The gospels do not state why Judas betrayed Jesus. Yet, we may infer at least two reasons:. Judas sat at the table seething and frustrated about how things looked to be coming down.ghkdg.co.vu/in-everything-give-thanks-the-power-of-gratitude.php
At the same time, the religious leaders were meeting to discuss how they could arrest Jesus and put Him to death, but the multitudes intimidated them. Thus, they needed and discussed a private way to apprehend the Lord Mark This Satan apparently did without possessing Judas because it is not until after Jesus gives bread to him that Satan re-enters Judas. As the Last Supper continues, Jesus proceeds to train His apostles, giving them a huge lesson in humility, servanthood, and forgiveness, which He illustrates by washing their feet John Thus, Peter gets John to ask Jesus who the traitor is.
Jesus answered, It is he to whom I shall give a piece of bread when I have dipped it. And having dipped the bread, He gave it to Judas Iscariot, the son of Simon. Now after the piece of bread, Satan entered him. Then Jesus said to him, What you do, do quickly John This is the second time during the final week that Satan possesses Judas. Now as we compare the other Gospel accounts, we see the devil next motivate Judas to tell the religious leaders that he will find a way to betray Jesus.
- King of the Avenue (Siren Publishing Allure ManLove)?
- One Lonely Mind.
- Investment Cycles (FT Press Delivers Elements).
- The Day of the Beast: American Western Fiction (Illustrated);
- Confronting Eternity (The Open door to Heaven Book 1)?
- ESDRAS, BOOKS OF:.
His plan would avoid confrontation with the crowds gathered in Jerusalem for the Passover Luke The religious leaders promptly paid Judas for his treacherous scheme Mark Because it would be nighttime and not immediately apparent to the soldiers who Christ was among his disciples!
Once the religious leaders called together the Roman soldiers a military unit, or cohort, of , they tagged along themselves, and Judas led them to the place in the Garden where Jesus prayed. And Judas, who betrayed Him, also knew the place; for Jesus often met there with His disciples. Then Judas, hawing received a detachment of troops and officers from the chief priests and Pharisees, Came there with lanterns, torches, and weapons. Jesus therefore. They answered Him, Jesus of Nazareth. This treacherous act by Judas became embedded in the minds of the apostles, so much so that Paul, when explaining the communion service says:.
I received from the Lord that which I also delivered to you: that the Lord Jesus on the same night in which He was betrayed took bread 1 Corinthians The religious leaders, ever scrupulous of keeping the Law at least the parts they liked! Matthew says that Judas hanged himself Matthew It is terrible enough to commit suicide, but to take a fall, have your body burst open, and your inner parts gush out, is horrendous to say the least. The question is: Do we have a contradiction in the Bible, or is it possible to harmonize Matthew and Luke? It is possible to harmonize: 7. Woe to that man by whom the Son of Man is betrayed!
Samuel T. Bloomfield wrote in , "Surely, nothing dubious ought to be admitted into 'the sure word' of 'The Book of Life'. In most instances another verse, elsewhere in the New Testament and remaining in modern versions, is very similar to the verse that was omitted because of its doubtful provenance. These are mentioned to show that the omission of the doubtful verse did not cause the loss of the teaching it expressed. It is, however, found in this place in some Greek mss not quite so ancient — C , D , K, L — as well as some other mss of the ancient versions.
It is believed to have been assimilated from Mark. It is not found in any manuscript before the 5th century. KJV: Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! Reason: This verse is very similar to Mark and Luke It appears before verse 13 in K,W, and several minuscules. The fact that it is absent from the most ancient sources of multiple text types and that the sources that do contain the verse disagree about its placement, as well as the fact that it is a repetition of verses found elsewhere, show "that verse 14 is an interpolation derived from the parallel in Mark or Luke is clear.
Reason: This verse is nearly identical with verses and As it is missing in the very oldest resources and yet is identical to verses that remain, many editors seem confident in omitting its appearance here. KJV: Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched.
conscience and rebuking the word of god encylopedia book 6 Manual
Both verses identical to each other, and to , which is still in the main text. Reason: Both verses 44 and 46 are duplicates of verse 48, which remains in the text. It is possible that verse 48 was repeated by a copyist as an epistrophe, for an oratorical flourish. KJV: But if ye do not forgive, neither will your Father which is in heaven forgive your trespasses.
Reason: This verse is very similar to Matthew This verse appeared in the Complutensian Polyglot and most Textus Receptus editions but Erasmus noted that it was missing from 'most' Greek manuscripts. KJV: And the scripture was fulfilled, which saith, "And he was numbered with the transgressors. Reasons: This verse is similar to Luke It does not appear here in any New Testament ms prior to the end of the 6th century.
Reason: It is possible that this verse is a repetition of Matthew Even the King James Version had doubts about this verse, as it provided in the original edition and still in many high quality editions a sidenote that said, "This 36th verse is wanting in most of the Greek copies. Among major Textus Receptus editions, this verse does not appear in the editions of Erasmus — , Aldus , Colinaeus , Stephanus 1st — 3rd eds — , but it did appear in the Complutensian , and in the margins of Stephanus 4th ed , and all of Elzivir's and Beza's eds — Verse 36 is included by very few Greek manuscripts of the Western text-type and by Old-Latin and Vulgate manuscripts.
KJV: 3. Reason: These words clearly were not in the original text of the Gospel. This verse was omitted from Edward Harwood's Greek NT , marked as doubtful in Griesbach's editions , and thereafter generally relegated to a footnote, enclosed in brackets, or omitted completely. Henry Alford wrote, "The spuriousness of this controverted passage can hardly be questioned.
But the words quoted above complicate this story by asserting that miraculous cures were already taking place at this pool in the absence of Jesus, owing to the unpredictable intervention of an apparently invisible angel. This passage in John 5 is the only mention of this pool — no such miraculous pool is mentioned in Josephus or other histories  The words in question do not appear in the oldest manuscripts, and in those manuscripts that contain them they are sometimes marked as doubtful, and differ from manuscript to manuscript "with that extreme variation in the reading which so often indicates grounds for suspicion".
Verse 4 "For an angel The concluding words of verse 3 but not any of verse 4 appear in D, 33 ninth century , and some Latin manuscripts. Among the manuscripts that contain this sentence-and-a-half, there are many variations and permutations. The Revised Version omitted the italicized words from its main text, making the passage read: " Several modern versions similarly relegate those words to a footnote, and some others such as Moffatt include the words in the main text but enclosed in brackets with an explanation in a footnote.
Modern versions: Either sidelined to a footnote e. This verse appears in E specifically, a portion from a codex consisting of Acts, dated to the 6th century, once owned by Archb. William Laud and therefore called the Codex Laudianus, sometimes designated E 2 or E a and several cursives dating after the 9th century showing many variants , "manuscripts of good character, but quite inadequate to prove the authenticity of the verse," according to F.
Its omission has a USB confidence rating of A. The voice which speaks in Acts is from a later age, with an interest in the detailed justification of the [Ethiopian] treasurerer's desire for baptism. In his notes Erasmus says that he took this reading from the margin of 4ap and incorporated it into the Textus Receptus.
Alexander suggested that this verse, though genuine, was omitted by many scribes, "as unfriendly to the practice of delaying baptism, which had become common, if not prevalent, before the end of the 3rd century. Reason: Although this verse, or something similar to it, is quite old, it does not appear in the oldest manuscripts, and the manuscripts that do contain it are inconsistent about its text. The verse as it appears in the KJV is found in less ancient Greek mss cursives, after the 9th century and some other Italic, Syriac, Coptic, Armenian, Ethiopic, and other versions.
However some other, equally old resources, such as the C codex, and several cursives, change one word to make the verse read, "Notwithstanding it pleased Silas that they should abide there still. Several other sources, such as Codex D Codex Bezae and some Italic mss, extend the verse with the ending, "and Judas traveled alone"; and a couple of Italic and Latin mss add to that, "to Jerusalem.
Scrivener put it, "No doubt this verse is an unauthorised addition, self-condemned indeed by its numerous variations. Silas was at hand in verse 40, conveniently for Saint Paul to choose him as a companion in travel. This verse was omitted from the Revised Version and most modern versions, but many versions include it in a footnote. Note above that not only is verse 7 omitted, but also the end of verse 6 and beginning of verse 8. To clarify, only the emphasized words are omitted, removing all of verse 7, but leaving the beginning of verse 6 and most of verse 8. The resulting text looks like this from the Revised Version :.
RV: 6 Who moreover assayed to profane the temple; on whom we also laid hold; 8 from whom thou wilt be able, by examining him thyself, to take knowledge of all these things, whereof we accuse him. The absence of these words from the earliest resources, and the several variations in the resources in which they appear, made their exclusion probable but not a certainty the UBS assigned the omission a confidence rating of only D.
KJV: And when he had said these words, the Jews departed, and had great reasoning [arguing] among themselves. RV: verse omitted from main text, in footnote with comment, "Some ancient authorities insert verse 29". They appear only in later sources such as P 9th century and several minuscules, and a smattering of Italic mss.. The UBS gave the omission of this verse a confidence rating of B.
Erasmus of Rotterdam, in working up the very first printed Greek New Testament from a multitude of manuscripts, included this note for this verse: "I did not find the words in several old manuscripts. Reason: This verse occurs twice in the KJV in this chapter; once as the conclusion to verse 20 and again as verse 24, which is the occurrence omitted from modern versions. However, its recurrence as verse 24 is not so well supported. Westcott and Hort said of the recurrence as verse 24, "This last combination, which rests on hardly any authority, and is due to late conflation, was adopted by Erasmus from the Latin and is preserved in the 'Received Text'.
An abbreviated history of the passage is that the conclusion of the Epistle to the Romans was known in several different versions: About the year , Marcion made radical changes in the ending of the Epistle to the Romans, breaking it off with chapter At about the same time someone else made in other manuscripts the addition of verses and — This resulted in a proliferation of readings at least 15 different permutations among the surviving resources.
KJV: 7 For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the holy Ghost, and these three are one. John, considerations new and old by Henry T. Armfield , London ; and many more. Scrivener, usually regarded as a defender of the KJV text, said of this verse, "The authenticity of [this verse] will, perhaps, no longer be maintained by anyone whose judgment ought to have weight; but this result has been arrived at after a long and memorable controversy, which helped keep alive, especially in England, some interest in Biblical studies.
Early Church Fathers did not mention this verse, even when eagerly scraping together verses to support the Doctrine of the Trinity. Most critical editions relegated the Comma to a footnote or otherwise marked it as doubtful. The Roman Catholic Church was a bit more resistant about yielding up this verse; an decision of the Holy Inquisition forbade a Catholic "to deny or even express doubt about the authenticity of" the Johannine Comma, but this was effectively reversed by a declaration of the Holy Office on June 2, , which allows scholars to express doubts and even denials of the genuineness of the Comma, tempered by the fact that the Vatican would have the final authority.
The spurious nature of this verse is so notorious  that even the Revised Version of did not bother to include nor provide a footnote for this verse, and many other modern versions do likewise. Ezra Abbot wrote, "It may be said that the question [of excluding this verse] is obsolete; that the spuriousness of the disputed passage had long been conceded by all intelligent and fair-minded scholars. This is true, but a little investigation will show that great ignorance still exists on the subject among the less-informed in the Christian community.
Apparently Tischendorff's Greek NT was the first printed edition to omit this clause. The same words appear in Matthew Reason: Many perhaps most modern versions emulate the Revised Version and simply omit the sentence in question, without any explanatory comment. This is a complete sentence and yet it did not receive, in the Textus Receptus editions, a verse number of its own.
It was already doubted even before the KJV; this sentence does not appear in Wycliff , the Bishops' Bible , and the Rheims Henry Alford's edition of the New Testament includes this sentence in the main text, but bracketed and italicized, with the brief footnote: "omitted in most ancient authorities: probably inserted here from Matthew In any case, its omission from Mark does not effect its unchallenged presence in Matthew Reason: The emphasized words, although by now a very familiar quotation, are omitted from the RV and most other modern versions; it was also omitted by the Wycliffe and Rheims versions.
It is believed probable that the clause was inserted here by assimilation because the corresponding version of this narrative, in Matthew, contains a somewhat similar rebuke to the Devil in the KJV, "Get thee hence, Satan,"; Matthew , which is the way this rebuke reads in Luke in the Tyndale , Great Bible also called the Cranmer Bible , and Geneva  versions , whose authenticity is not disputed, and because the very same words are used in a different situation in Matthew and Mark KJV: 55 "But he turned, and rebuked them, and said, Ye know not what manner of spirit ye are of.
And they went to another village. Reasons: The shorter version is found in very early manuscripts, although the longer version is used by most Latin manuscripts, which is why it is also present in early English translations. KJV: For of necessity he must release one unto them at the feast. Reasons: The same verse or a very similar verse appears and is preserved as Matthew and as Mark This verse is suspected of having been assimilated into Luke at a very early date. However, D, the Ethiopic version, and some Italic and Syriac mss put this verse after what is called verse 18, which may further indicate that it was an insertion rather than part of the authorial text.
It is hard for thee to kick against the pricks. RV: Reason: The passage in question is omitted from virtually all modern versions including both Majority Text editions , frequently without even a footnote. The reason for its omission is quite persuasive. As Bruce M. Metzger puts it, "So far as is known, no Greek witness reads these words at this place; they have been taken from [Acts] and , and are found here in codices of the Vulgate.
The spurious passage came into the Textus Receptus when Erasmus translated it from the Latin Vulgate and inserted it in his first edition of the Greek New Testament Basel, It is likewise wanting in the Complutensian edition; but it was inserted by Erasmus [translating it from the Latin Vulgate], and upon his authority it has been adopted by the other editors of the Greek Testament This passage then, which later editors have copied from Erasmus, and which is contained in our common editions, is not only spurious, but was not even taken from a Greek manuscript.
KJV: And when the Jews were gone out of the Synagogue, the Gentiles besought that these words might be preached to them the next Sabbath. RV: And as they went out, they besought that these words might be spoken to them the next sabbath. Reasons: The KJV passage, with its explicit mention of Gentiles interested in the events of the next Sabbath, is a sort of proof text for those denominations that adhere to Seventh Day worship. For example, Benjamin G. By this distinction it reveals that a number of the Gentiles were present All this is lost in the Revised Version by failing to mention the Jews and the Gentiles.
- 1. The Biblical Account:.
- Silence Her.
- Chapter 5. Rightly Dividing the Word - Dispensational Truth - Study Resources.
- Scratchs Story.
- Did the Ancient Gentiles Have the Hope of Salvation? : Christian Courier!
- The Inward Law.
- 2. Critical Theories:?
Does not this affect fundamental doctrine? A possible reason for the rewriting of this verse is that the original is awkward and ambiguous—the Greek text says "they went out Bishops Westcott and Hort describe the original RV reading as "the obscure and improbable language of the text as it stands. The ambiguity of the original reading has motivated some modern interpretations to attempt to identify "they"—e. Latin, Syriac, and others - and does not appear until H,L, and P all 9th century.
As the original verse ended with a question, it is suspected that this phrase was taken from to serve as an answer. It was omitted from editions of the Greek New Testament at least as far back as , in Daniel Mace's edition. There are two passages both 12 verses long that continue to appear in the main text of most of the modern versions, but distinguished in some way from the rest of the text, such as being enclosed in brackets or printed in different typeface or relegated to a footnote.
These are passages which are well supported by a wide variety of sources of great antiquity and yet there is strong reason to doubt that the words were part of the original text of the Gospels. In the words of Philip Schaff , "According to the judgment of the best critics, these two important sections are additions to the original text from apostolic tradition. KJV: 9 Now when Jesus was risen early the first day of the week, he appeared first to Mary Magdalene, out of whom he had cast seven devils.
Reasons : Entire volumes have been written about these twelve verses,  and considerable attention is paid to these verses in many or most texts on textual criticism of the New Testament, and many articles in learned journals. According to Reuss, the Greek New Testament of Tischendorf was the first to remove these verses from the main text.
The twelve verses shown in the KJV, called the "longer ending" of Mark, usually are retained  in modern versions, although sometimes separated from verse 8 by an extra space, or enclosed in brackets, or relegated to a footnote, and accompanied by a note to the effect that this ending is not found in the very oldest Greek mss but it is found in sources almost as old.
The RV of put an extra space between verse 8 and this verse 9 and included a marginal note to that effect, a practice followed by many subsequent English versions. The RSV edition of ends its main text at verse 8 and then in a footnote provides this ending with the note that "other texts and versions" include it; but the revised RSV of and the NRSV reverted to the practice of the RV. The preceding portion of chapter 16 tells how Mary Magdalene and two other women came to the tomb, found it opened and Jesus's body missing, and were told by an angel to convey a message to Peter and the other disciples, but the women fled and said nothing to anyone because they were frightened.
It is nowadays widely accepted that these are the last remaining verses written by St. Mark ends somewhat abruptly at end of verse 8 "for they were afraid. No papyrus contains any portion of the 12 verses. Although this Longer Ending is of great antiquity, some early Church Fathers were familiar with mss that lacked it. Eusebius , in the first half of the fourth century, wrote, in response to a query from a man named Marinus, about how Matthew conflicts with the Longer Ending on which day Jesus rose from the dead, with the comment, "He who is for getting rid of the entire passage [at the end of Mark] will say that it is not met with in all the copies of Mark's Gospel; the accurate copies, at all events, making the end of Mark's narrative come after the words What follows, which is met with seldom, [and only] in some copies, certainly not in all, might be dispensed with; especially if it should prove to contradict the record of the other Evangelists.
This, then, is what a person will say who is for evading and entirely getting rid of a gratuitous problem. Jerome , in the first half of the fifth century, received a very similar query from a lady named Hedibia and responded, "Either we should reject the testimony of Mark, which is met with in scarcely any copies of the Gospel, — almost all the Greek codices being without this passage, — especially since it seems to narrate what contradicts the other Gospels; — or else, we shall reply that both Evangelists state what is true.
Burgon also found a patristic comment previously attributed to Gregory of Nyssa of the late fourth century , but which he suspected was more likely written by Hesychius of Jerusalem middle of the fifth century or Severus of Antioch middle sixth century , again answering the same sort of query, and saying, "In the more accurate copies, the Gospel according to Mark has its end at 'for they were afraid.
Actually, Greek codex W also known as the Freer Gospels or the Codex Washingtonianus , dating from the fourth or fifth century, is the oldest known Greek ms that sets forth the Longer Ending  and it contains a lengthy addition which appears nowhere else , known as the Freer Logion, between the familiar verses 14 and The addition, as translated by Moffatt:.
But they excused themselves saying, "This age of lawlessness and unbelief lies under the sway of Satan, who will not allow what lies under the unclean spirits to understand the truth and power of God; therefore," they said to Christ, "reveal your righteousness now. I was delivered to death on behalf of sinners, that they might return to the truth and sin no more, that they might inherit that glory of righteousness which is spiritual and imperishable in heaven.
Then a space of two lines is left, after which, in the same uncial hand, only in red, is written "Ariston Eritzou. They begin near the bottom of the second column of a verse, and are continued on the recto of the next folio. Conybeare theorized that Ariston was the Armenian version of the Greek name Aristion. Of a number of Aristions known to history, Conybeare favored the Aristion who had traveled with the original Disciples and was known to Papias , a famous Bishop of the early 2nd century; a quotation from Papias, mentioning Aristion as a Disciple, is found in the Historia Ecclesiastica of Eusebius , But this situation is a bit more complicated.
Some other ancient sources have an entirely different ending to Mark, after verse 8, known as the "Shorter Ending". The RV of contained a footnote attesting to the existence of this Shorter Ending but its text did not appear in a popular edition of the Bible until somewhat later. After this, Jesus himself sent out by means of them, from east to west, the sacred and imperishable proclamation of eternal salvation. This Shorter Ending appears, by itself, after verse 8, in only one ms, an Italic ms Codex Bobbiensis, "k" , of the 4th or 5th century. But there are a handful of other sources that contain the Shorter Ending then add the longer ending after it.
As a result, there are five possible endings to the Gospel of Mark: 1 An abrupt ending at end of verse 8; 2 the Longer Ending following verse 8; 3 the Longer Ending including the "Freer Logion"; 4 the Shorter Ending following verse 8; and 5 the Shorter and Longer endings combined and we could add as a sixth possible ending, anything after verse 8 enclosed in brackets or otherwise distinguished with indicia of doubt. It would appear that the longer ending does not fit precisely with the preceding portion of chapter For example, verse 9 says Jesus appeared to Mary Magdalene on "the first day of the week", yet verse 2 said that same day Mary Magdalene did not see Jesus.
Perhaps more significantly, verse 9 finds it necessary to identify Mary Magdalene as the woman who had been freed of seven demons, as if she had not been named before, yet she was mentioned without that detail being mentioned in and The Greek text used by the KJV translators is words long, using a vocabulary of very approximately words. Metzger speaks of the "inconcinnities" [ sic ] between the first 8 verses of chapter 16 and the longer ending, and suggests, "all these features indicate that the section was added by someone who knew a form of Mark that ended abruptly with verse 8 and who wished to supply a more appropriate conclusion.
While Mark has no proper ending, these verses have no proper beginning. Not only does verse 9 not fit onto verse 8, but the texture of what follows is quite different from the texture of what precedes. A piece torn from a bit of satin is appended to the torn end of roll of homespun.
The preceding verse, verse Although the KJV and most English translations render this as the end of a complete sentence "for they were afraid. The Shorter Ending does not contradict this, but the Longer Ending, in verse 9, immediately contradicts this by having Jesus appear to Mary Magdalene while in Jerusalem, and in verse 12 to two disciples apparently not yet in Galilee.
This inconsistency has been considered significant by some. Although the Longer Ending was included, without any indication of doubt, as part of chapter 16 of the Gospel of St. Mark in the various Textus Receptus editions, the editor of the first published Textus Receptus edition, namely Erasmus of Rotterdam , discovered evidently after his fifth and final edition of that the Codex Vaticanus ended the Gospel at verse 8, whereupon he mentioned doubts about the Longer Ending in a manuscript which lay unpublished until modern times.
A commonly accepted theory for the condition of the last chapter of the Gospel of Mark is that the words actually written by St.