I am studying the comparisons between the two main sources of biblical texts (received vs critical texts)
There is something about the longer ending included in the Received Text for Mark 16 that doesn't quite add up. Note verse 19...
Mark 16:19 (KJV) 19 So then after the Lord had spoken unto them, he was received up into heaven and sat on the right hand of God
Another example I note between the two texts (if I understand correctly) is found in 1 John 5 where:
- received text includes verse 7
" 7 For there are three that bear record in heaven,the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one."
- the critical text does not contain vs 8
I am a trinitarian, and I believe that one of the reasons why Trinitarians are so passionate about the KJV translation is (apart from its poetry type language), that it is a good version for Trinitarians due partially because of the inclusion of Johannine comma in 1 John 5:7,8 in the KJV version in that it promotes the idea of the Godhead being 3 in 1.
note...My point is not about Johannine comma as evidence for the pro Trinity debate...please do not go on about the Trinity in your answer. The debate about the Trinity is not relevant to my question, it is merely an observation included to help illustrate my pathway in studying the debate on Critical vs Received Texts)
In looking at the authenticity of Mark 16 in the Received Text, if I cross-reference terms used in the Lord's prayer in Mathew 6:9 (KJV)
9 After this manner therefore pray ye: Our Father which art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name.
10 Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done in earth, as it is in heaven.
11 Give us this day our daily bread.
12 And forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors.
13 And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil: For thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, for ever. Amen.
14 For if ye forgive men their trespasses, your heavenly Father will also forgive you:
15 But if ye forgive not men their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses.
If I am to logically look at the two passages I have quoted in this question, what does not make sense to me in weighing the authenticity of the Received Text, if there is accuracy in the inclusion of the longer ending in 1 John 5, and one also reads Mark 16...
"19 So then after the Lord had spoken unto them, he was received up into heaven, and sat on the right hand of God
from the perspective of a Trinitarian attempting to validate the authenticity of the Received Text, would not this passage have been written as the "right hand of the FATHER"? Trinitarians view the term God as three individuals (father, son, and holy spirit) and logic tells me that if Jesus is the son in the Trinitarian Godhead, he cannot sit at the right hand of himself as one of the 3 members that make up the Godhead! Therefore, since it does not read "sat down at the right hand of the father" seemingly inconsistent with the Trinitarian view of the Godhead, perhaps the Received Text falls short in the debate?