For anyone who actually read the Bible....

[intaglio]

79. What have I said that is not fact?

I did not say that Siniaticus was the original version just that it is the earliest copy and that, like Alexandrinus, this earliest copy does not have the last verses. I could also have added that, stylistically, the last verses are out of place, i.e. not running on from the text they follow.

What you are saying is that the earliest copyists did not copy all of the book which was meant to be Holy Writ.

Essentially what you are claiming is that what you believe is evidence for what you believe. Where, for example, is your proof that a person called Mark wrote the book? Please remember that hearsay from Eusebius claiming to quote hearsay from Papias who would have been quoting hearsay from another, unnamed, person is not proof. Tradition is not proof for if it was then Robin Hood and Johny Appleseed would have been real.

What I am doing is citing the earliest known texts of a work, latterly the stylistic reasons why the ending you know does not belong. I am citing the known fact that no-where within the sacred texts are the names of the Gospel writers given. If you have proof they are give me chapter and verse but do not claim proof because to do so abuses the word.