بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

نتكلم اليوم عن تحريف نهاية انجيل مرقس في النص المستلم و المقصود بها الاعداد 9-20 من الاصحاح 16 من انجيل مرقس حيث ان هذه الاعداد لا وجود لها في اقدم المخطوطات و البرديات و بالاخص (السينائية و الفاتيكانية) وكذلك في اقتباسات الاباء حيث انها لم تعرف عندهم الا في نهاية القرن الثاني فهي بالتالي مضافة على اصل النص.

1. الدليل على الاضافة من المخطوطات .

نقرا من المدخل الى العهد الجديد لفهيم عزيز الصفحة 230 -231:
(( هل هذه الاعداد 9-20 اصيلة في الانجيل، بمعنى هل كتبها مرقس في نهاية انجيله ليختتمه؟ ظهر هذا السؤال نتيجة لعاملين مهمين جدا : الاول هو ان اهم مخطوطتين قديمتين و هما الفاتيكانية و السينائية لا توجد بهما هذه الاعداد. وكذلك مخطوطات اخرى اقل اهمية منهما الى جانب ذلك عدد كبير من الترجمات القديمة المعتمدة مثل السريانية و الارامية.
و يتصل بذلك ان بعض المخطوطات و الترجمات تتضمن نهايتين احداهما كبيرة 9-20 و الاخرى صغيرة، و منها الترجمة القبطية الصعيدية و البحيرية و في مخطوطة واحدة لاتينية قديمة لا توجد سوى النهاية في الصغيرة و لكنها لا تحتوي على الاعداد 9-20 .
و الى جانب هذه النهايات المختلفة يظهر -و خاصة في اللغة اليونانية - اختلاف واضح في الاسلوب بين الاعداد 9-20 و بقية الانجيل و الكلمات المستعملة فيه. وكذلك فان من يدقق الدراسة فانه يدهش لما بيديه (ع 9) بخصوص مريم المجدلية كانها ذكرت للمرة الاولى في الاصحاح لانه يحاول التعريف بها في نفس الوقت الذي يذكرها في العدد الاول على انها شخصية معروفة و لا تقل في ذلك عن مريم ام يعقوب و سالومة.
على اساس هذين الاعتبارين فقد اعتقدت الغالبية العظمى من الدارسين ان هذه النهاية ليست من وضع البشير نفسه و انها اضيفت الى الانجيل بعد ذلك.
2. و هنا يواجهنا الامر الثاني و هو ان العدد 8 الذي يظن العلماء انه نهاية الانجيل لا يصلح ان يكون نهاية، فالترجمة الحرفية له تنتهي بكلمة ((لانه)) و لا يعقل ان ينتهي كتاب هكذا و ليس ذلك فقط بل كيف يمكن لمرقس و هو الانجيلي الذي يظهر رسالة الانجيل في اول كتابه و ان ملكوت قد جاء بنهى هذا الكتاب نفسه بوصف حالة النساء بانهن كن خائفات - ان المنطق لا يقبل ذلك.
و على هذا الاساس ينتهي الدارسون الى النتيجة المنطقية ان مرقس لم يترك انجيله هكذا ، لا بد و انه كتب له نهاية و لكنها فقدت لسبب ما، كان قطعت الورقة او تشوهت الكتابة، و الا فان مرقس عندما وصل الى العدد 8 حدثت له حادثة منعته عن التكملة.
ان كل شيء جائز الا ان ينتهي الانجيل بالعدد 8.
هذه هي مشكلة النهاية، و يلوح ان احد الكتبة الاقدمين اضاف النهاية الصغيرة التي ذكرت من قبل لكي يتفادى النقص الموجود في النسخة التي بيده. ثم اضيفت النهاية الكبرى لاعلان ظهور المسيح لتلاميذه و ارساله لهم وذلك في اسلوب مختصر يحتوي على ظهورات كثيرة في اعداد قليلة بخلاف الاناجيل الاخرى.
هذا ما يؤكده الغالبية العظمى للدارسين ))




و نقرا من الترجمة الرهبانية اليسوعية الصفحة 124 :
(( و هناك سؤال لم يلق جوابا: كيف كانت خاتمة الكتاب ؟ من المسلم به على العموم ان الخاتمة كما هي الان (16: 9-20) قد اضيفت لتخفيف ما في نهاية كتاب من توقف فجائي في الاية 8. و لكننا لن نعرف ابدا هل فقدت خاتمة الكتاب الاصلية ام راى مرقس ان الاشارة الى تقليد الترائيات في الجليل في الاية لا تكفي لاختتام روايته.))

و نقرا من نفس المصدر الصفحة 177 في الهامش عن ما قبل الاعداد 9-20 :
(( المخطوطات غير ثابتة فيما يتعلق بخاتمة انجيل مرقس هذه ( الايات 9-20) ))


نقرا من تفسير ادم كلارك :
(( Now when Jesus was risen, etc. - This, to the conclusion of the Gospel, is wanting in the famous Codex Vaticanus, and has anciently been wanting in many others. See Wetstein and Griesbach. In the margin of the later Syriac version, there is a remarkable addition after this verse; it is as follows: - And they declared briefly all that was commanded, to them that were with Peter. Afterward Jesus himself published by them, from east to west, the holy and incorruptible preaching of eternal salvation.............
Amen.This is added here by many MSS. and versions; but is supposed not to have made a part of the text originally. Griesbach, Bengel, and others, leave it out.
St. Jerome mentions certain Greek copies, which have the following remarkable addition to Mar 16:14, after these words - and reproached them for their unbelief and hardness of heart, because they did not believe those who had seen him after he was raised up: Et illi satisfaciebant dicentes: seculum istud iniquitatis et incredulitatis substantia est, quae non sinit per immundos spiritus verem Dei apprehendi virtutem. Idcirco, jam nunc revela justitiam tuam. "And they confessed the charge, saying: This age is the substance of iniquity and unbelief, which, through the influence of impure spirits, does not permit the true influence of God to be apprehended. Therefore, even now, reveal thy righteousness."))
https://www.sacred-texts.com/bib/cmt/clarke/mar016.htm

ونقرا موسوعة The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia :
((The most important textual problem is that of Mr 16:9-20. Burgon and Miller and Salmon believe it to be genuine. Miller supposes that up to that point Mark had been giving practically Peter's words, that for some reason those then failed him and that Mr 16:9-20 are drawn from his own stores. The majority of scholars regard them as non-Markan; they think Mr 16:8 is not the intended conclusion; that if Mark ever wrote a conclusion, it has been lost, and that Mr 16:9-20, embodying traditions of the Apostolic Age, were supplied later. Conybeare has found in an Armenian manuscript a note referring these verses to the presbyter Ariston, whom he identifies with that Aristion, a disciple of John, of whom Papias speaks. Many therefore would regard them as authentic, and some accept them as clothed with John's authority. They are certainly very early, perhaps as early as 100 AD, and have the support of Codices Alexandrinus, Ephraemi, Bezae, Xi, Gamma, Delta, Zeta all late uncials, all cursives, most versions and Fathers, and were known to the scribes of Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Vaticanus, who, however, do not accept them.
It is just possible that the Gospel did end at verse 8. The very abruptness would argue an early date when Christians lived in the atmosphere of the Resurrection and would form an even appropriate closing for the Gospel of the Servant (see below). A Servant comes, fulfills his task, and departs--we do not ask about his lineage, nor follow his subsequent history.))
https://www.internationalstandardbib...ding-to-1.html

و نقرا من كتاب الاجيل حسب القديس مرقس للاب متى مسكين الصفحة 690 :
(( اما الايات الاثنتا عشر الباقية (16: 9- 20) فقد اثبتت ابحاث العلماء المدققين انها فقدت من الانجيل وقد اعيد كتابتها بواسطة احد التلاميذ السبعين المسمى باريستون. و هذا التلميذ عاش في القرن الاول . و هذه الايات الاثنتا عشرة جمعها اريستون من ق. يوحنا و انجيل ق. لوقا ليكمل بها القيامة. هذه الايات لم نتعرض لها و لم نشرحها و لكن اعطينا عوضا عنها شرحا مفصلا لمعني القيامة و حقيقتها الروحية بل وسرها ايضا))


و نقرا منEllicott's Commentary for English Readers:
(((9-20) Now when Jesus was risen early.--See Notes on Matthew 28:16-20. The history of the verses that follow is in every way remarkable. They are not found in two of the oldest MSS.--the Sinaitic and the Vatican--are marked as doubtful in many others, and are wanting in some versions. In some of these (e.g., in the Vatican MS.) there is a blank space left between Mark 16:8 and the beginning of St. Luke, as though the writer had suspended his work and waited for materials. The absence was noticed by Jerome, who says that "nearly all the Greek texts omit them." Eusebius states the same fact as true of "the correct MSS.;" and no reference is made to them in the tables of parallel passages which were constructed for reference by Eusebius and Ammonius. On the other hand, they are referred to by Irenaeus (about A.D. 170), and are found in the Alexandrian and Cambridge MSS., and in twelve other uncials which are nearly (some say, quite) as old as the two which omit them. ))

https://biblehub.com/mark/16-9.htm.

2. الدليل على الاضافة من اقتباسات الاباء .

اول اقتباس للنهاية الطويلة لمرقس كانت في نهاية القرن الثاني على يد ايريناوس و لم يذكرها احد قبله، حتى يوستينوس فانه لم يصرح باقتباس مباشر من مرقس و على هذا فالاعداد 9-16 لم تعرف الا في نهاية القرن الثاني وهي بداية نشاتها .


يقول كارل بريدج في The canonical status of the longer ending of mark الصفحة 253 -254
((The terminus ante quem (the latest possible date) of the composition of the LE can be located with some confidence c. AD 165 with the death of Justin Martyr. In his first Apology (1.45) he echoes the language of the LE: ¿SENOÓvTES taVTaXON EKnUEaV ( exelthontes pantachou ekeruxan, "they went out and preached everywhere"), identical with Mark 16:20 except for its word order (the LE has ¿gEnOóvTES EnpUEav navraxoû, exelthontes ekēruxan pantachou). It Irenaeus provides a slightly later date but a clearer reference when c. 180 he quotes Mark 16:19 explicitly as from the Gospel of Mark (Against Heresies 3.10.5).
Similarly, Tatian's Diatessaron 55.8-9 shows clear knowledge c. AD 170 of Mark 16:16-18.15 Thus the LE appeared sometime before the last quarter of the second century; how much earlier, we do not know.
As for when the four Gospels were collected, Against Heresies 3.11.8 includes Irenaeus's famous discussion of the fourfold Gospel, where he argues that four is the necessary number of Gospels, comparable to the four winds, the four faces of the cherubim, and other groups of four. Irenacus's hermeneutic does not have to be endorsed to recognize him as a witness to the fourfold Gospel and to place the collection of the Gospels well before c. 180 when he wrote. As Graham Stanton puts it, "By the time Irenaeus wrote in about AD 180, the four- fold Gospel was very well established. Irenaeus is not defending an innovation.»17 Irenaeus's argument for the fourfold nature of the Gospel provides only indirect evidence for the collection of the four Gospels into a single codex. Direct evidence comes from the work of T.C. Skeat, who makes a persuasive case that three Gospel fragments from the late second century (p*, p°*, and p) all come from the same codex originally containing the four Gospels. • Stanton summarizes Skeat's work:
Skeat has shown beyond reasonable doubt that pot + poT + pt are from the same single-quire codex, probably our earliest four-Gospel codex which may date from the late second century. ... This codex does not look at all like an experiment by a scribe working out ways to include four gospels in one codex: it certainly had predecessors much earlier in the second centu-ry. ... So well before the end of the second century there was a very well established tradition of four-Gospel codices. 19
Sometime before the last quarter of the second century, then, the Longer Ending of Mark's Gospel was composed and the four Gospels were collected into a single volume. The dates might be refined further, but this essay will work with dating that stands beyond serious dispute.
If the LE and the four-Gospel codex both appeared some time in the second century, the temporal proximity of the two events proves lit-tle. It is much like placing an accused murderer and his victim in the same state but not in the same house on the night of the crime.
However, the conjunction in time does leave open the possibility that the two events might have some further connection. Specifically, whoever composed the LE may have done so to prepare the Gospel of Mark for inclusion in the new collection of four Gospels into one codex. ))


ومع اضافتها في نهاية القرن الثاني الا انها ظلت حتى نهاية القرن الثالث و بداية الرابع نادرة الظهور في مخطوطات و برديات العهد الجديد بشهادة جيروم .

THE MAJORITY!TEXT THEORY: HISTORY, METHODS AND CRITIQUE
DANIEL B. WALLACE
الصفحة 209
(3) The patristic evidence is also valuable in another way. On several occasions patristic writers do more than quote the text. They also discuss textual variants. Holmes points out that final proof that the manuscripts known today do not accurately represent the state of affairs in earlier centuries comes from patristic references to variants once widely known but found today in only a few or even no witnesses.
The "longer ending" of Mark, 16:9-20, today is found in a large majority of Greek manuscripts; yet according to Jerome, it "is met with in only a few copies of the Gospel-almost all the codices of Greece being without this pas-sage." Similarly, at Matthew 5:22 he notes that "most of the ancient copies" do not contain the qualification "without cause" .. which, however, is found in the great majority today. 140

هذا وصلى الله على سيدنا محمد و على اله وصحبه وسلم