Part II
9) Chrysostom (400 AD) in part of a Homily claimed for him by his Benedictine Editors, he points out that Luke alone of the Evangelists describes the Ascension: Matthew and John not speaking of it, Mark recording the event only. Then he quotes verses 19, 20. "This" (he adds) "is the end of the Gospel. Mark makes no extended mention of the Ascension." Elsewhere he has an unmistakable reference to Mark 16v9.
10) Jerome, on a point like this, is entitled to more attention than any other Father of the Church. Living at a very early period, (for he was born in 331 AD and died in 420 AD,) endowed with extraor-dinary Biblical learning, a man of excellent judgment, and a professed Editor of the New Testament, for the execution of which task he enjoyed extraordinary facilities, his testimony is most weighty. It ought to be enough to point out that we should not have met with these last twelve verses in the Vulgate, had Jerome held them to be spurious. He familiarly quotes the 9th verse in one place of his writings; in another place he makes the extraordinary statement that in certain of the copies, (especially the Greek,) was found after ver. 14 the reply of the eleven Apostles, when our Saviour "upbraided them with their unbelief and hardness of heart, because they believed not them which had seen Him after He was risen."
11) Augustine would quote these verses. He brings them forward again and again, discusses them as the work of Mark, remarks that "in diebus Paschalibus," Mark's narrative of the Resurrection was publicly read in the Church. Augustine flourished 395-430 AD.
12) Another very important testimony to the genuineness of the concluding part of Mark's Gospel is furnished by the unhesitating manner in which Nestorius, the heresiarch, quotes v 20; and Cyril of Alexandria accepts his quotation, adding a few words of his own. Let it be borne in mind that this is tantamount to the discovery of two dated codices containing the last twelve verses of Mark, and that date anterior (it is impossible to say by how many years) to 430 AD.
13) Victor of Antioch, flourished about 425 AD, the critical testimony which he bears to the genuineness of these verses is more emphatic than is to be met with in the pages of any other ancient Father. It may be characterized as the most conclusive testimony which it was in his power to render.
14) Hesychius of Jerusalem, towards the close of his "Homily on the Resurrection," (published in the works of Gregory of Nyssa, and erroneously ascribed to that Father,) Hesychius appeals to the 19th verse, and quotes it as Mark's at length. The date of Hesychius is uncertain; but he may, I suppose, be considered to belong to the 6[SUP]th[/SUP] century.
15) The Synopsis Scripturae Sacrae, an ancient work ascribed to Athanasius, but probably not the production of that Father. It is at all events of much older date than any of the later uncials; and it rehearses in detail the contents of Mark 16v9-20.
16) Gregentius in the 6[SUP]th[/SUP] century, and to Gregory the Great, and Modestus, patriarch of Constantinoplein the 7[SUP]th[/SUP] century; to Ven. Bede and John Damascene in the 8[SUP]th[/SUP]. Ambrose, quotes five of these verses no less than fourteen times.
Manuscripts, Fathers, and Versions alike, are only not unanimous in bearing consistent testimony. But the consentient witness of the MSS. is even extraordinary. With the exception of the two uncial MSS. which have just been named (Codex B and Codex (א)), there is not one Codex in existence, uncial or cursive, (and we are acquainted with, at least, eighteen other uncials, and about six hundred cursive Copies of this Gospel,) which leaves out the last twelve verses of Mark!
Reference: Dean J W Burgon - The Last Twelve Verses (of the Gospel according to St Mark)
Part I
Yahweh Shalom
9) Chrysostom (400 AD) in part of a Homily claimed for him by his Benedictine Editors, he points out that Luke alone of the Evangelists describes the Ascension: Matthew and John not speaking of it, Mark recording the event only. Then he quotes verses 19, 20. "This" (he adds) "is the end of the Gospel. Mark makes no extended mention of the Ascension." Elsewhere he has an unmistakable reference to Mark 16v9.
10) Jerome, on a point like this, is entitled to more attention than any other Father of the Church. Living at a very early period, (for he was born in 331 AD and died in 420 AD,) endowed with extraor-dinary Biblical learning, a man of excellent judgment, and a professed Editor of the New Testament, for the execution of which task he enjoyed extraordinary facilities, his testimony is most weighty. It ought to be enough to point out that we should not have met with these last twelve verses in the Vulgate, had Jerome held them to be spurious. He familiarly quotes the 9th verse in one place of his writings; in another place he makes the extraordinary statement that in certain of the copies, (especially the Greek,) was found after ver. 14 the reply of the eleven Apostles, when our Saviour "upbraided them with their unbelief and hardness of heart, because they believed not them which had seen Him after He was risen."
11) Augustine would quote these verses. He brings them forward again and again, discusses them as the work of Mark, remarks that "in diebus Paschalibus," Mark's narrative of the Resurrection was publicly read in the Church. Augustine flourished 395-430 AD.
12) Another very important testimony to the genuineness of the concluding part of Mark's Gospel is furnished by the unhesitating manner in which Nestorius, the heresiarch, quotes v 20; and Cyril of Alexandria accepts his quotation, adding a few words of his own. Let it be borne in mind that this is tantamount to the discovery of two dated codices containing the last twelve verses of Mark, and that date anterior (it is impossible to say by how many years) to 430 AD.
13) Victor of Antioch, flourished about 425 AD, the critical testimony which he bears to the genuineness of these verses is more emphatic than is to be met with in the pages of any other ancient Father. It may be characterized as the most conclusive testimony which it was in his power to render.
14) Hesychius of Jerusalem, towards the close of his "Homily on the Resurrection," (published in the works of Gregory of Nyssa, and erroneously ascribed to that Father,) Hesychius appeals to the 19th verse, and quotes it as Mark's at length. The date of Hesychius is uncertain; but he may, I suppose, be considered to belong to the 6[SUP]th[/SUP] century.
15) The Synopsis Scripturae Sacrae, an ancient work ascribed to Athanasius, but probably not the production of that Father. It is at all events of much older date than any of the later uncials; and it rehearses in detail the contents of Mark 16v9-20.
16) Gregentius in the 6[SUP]th[/SUP] century, and to Gregory the Great, and Modestus, patriarch of Constantinoplein the 7[SUP]th[/SUP] century; to Ven. Bede and John Damascene in the 8[SUP]th[/SUP]. Ambrose, quotes five of these verses no less than fourteen times.
Manuscripts, Fathers, and Versions alike, are only not unanimous in bearing consistent testimony. But the consentient witness of the MSS. is even extraordinary. With the exception of the two uncial MSS. which have just been named (Codex B and Codex (א)), there is not one Codex in existence, uncial or cursive, (and we are acquainted with, at least, eighteen other uncials, and about six hundred cursive Copies of this Gospel,) which leaves out the last twelve verses of Mark!
Reference: Dean J W Burgon - The Last Twelve Verses (of the Gospel according to St Mark)
Part I
Yahweh Shalom