Kentucky snake handling preacher, reality TV star dead from snake bite
http://www.wate.com/story/24737348/kentucky-snake-handling-preacher-dead-from-snake-biteMIDDLESBORO, KY (WATE) - Jamie Coots, a preacher known for snake handling, as well as being the focus of a reality TV show, died Saturday after being bitten by a snake.
According to the Middlesboro Police Department, emergency crews responded to reports of a possible snakebite victim at a church on Evans Drive around 8:30 p.m., but say the victim had already left the scene by the time they arrived.
---
Coots was the pastor of Full Gospel Tabernacle in Jesus Name church in Middlesboro. He is also the subject of the National Geographic Channel series "Snake Salvation".
------
= new reply since forum marked as read
The existing texts do not all agree, and other ancient documents indicate that several versions of "Mark," with different endings, were in circulation long ago
I'm not expert on this and so limit myself to illustrating the methods from a few examples familiar to me
How does "Mark" begin? Some ancient sources have in Mark 1:2 something like "as is written in the prophet Isaiah" while others have something like "as is in the prophets", but the "quote," that follows, seems a mixture of texts from Exodus, Malachi, and Isaiah. An applicable principle of scholarship is that the more difficult reading is preferred: that is, it seems more likely that some copyist deliberately "corrected" the text, to eliminate the embarrassing error than that, than that a copyist deliberately introduced the erroneous attribution to Isaiah -- and therefore "as is written in the prophet Isaiah" is probably closer to the original
One can also carefully compare multiple manuscripts for points of similarity and difference, and so can get some idea about sources the authors used. Applied to the gospels, for example, this method leads to the conclusion that "Mark" is the earliest of the gospels, that "Matthew" and "Luke" were both written by people who had access to copies of "Mark" and some other now-lost source ("Q"
, while "John" comes from a different tradition. But the method can also be used to compare (say) different versions of "Mark"
Beyond this, one has other ancient evidence. There is, for example, the early fourth century letter of Eusebius to Marinus (who seems to have been concerned that the resurrection stories, in "Mark" and "Matthew," do not completely agree); Eusebius says most of the copies of "Mark," and that in his opinion the most accurate copies, end at "they were afraid." Then, of course, the proper scholarly question is whether Eusebius is simply making excuses to avoid the scandal Marinus sees. But various manuscripts of "Mark" are known with different endings: some end as Eusebius indicates; some have a short sequel beyond that; and some have the better-known verses 9-20; and a few even have the short sequel, followed by verses 9-20. So folk stare hard at those texts and texts that seems to mention the corresponding traditions; see (say) The Endings of the Gospel of Mark. It is my understanding that general scholarly consensus supports the notion "Mark" originally ended at verse 8: here, again, perhaps the more difficult reading is preferred -- for the diverse endings to "Mark" render the text more comfortable, while the abrupt and uncomfortable end at verse 8 found in some manuscripts since ancient times can only leave the reader wondering
...the problem is you made an absolute claim ("The original ended at 16:8" you can't back up. The Gospel of Mark probably ended at 16:8 (as you've noted, our earliest complete gospels seem to indicate the longer ending was added later) but without the original, you can't know for sure.
Not that it matters anyway. Forgery or not, the long ending is still in everyone's book. Even the NSRV, the most "academic" translation (as I understand it), includes both.
In other words, the lack of certainty on the issue is so much as that no one has yet been willing to disinclude the long ending from the Gospel of Mark.
And, on a somewhat unrelated note, I wouldn't advise putting so much stock in the words of Eusebius.
This should be an exciting discussion.
1. Moses does not handle snakes.
In Exodus 7
-12, Aaron's staff turns into a snake when he throws it down before Pharaoh as per Yahweh's instructions. The Egyptian priests do likewise, and Aaron's snake swallows them.
In Numbers 21:5-9, Yahweh sends a plague of poisonous snakes to punish disobedient Israelites as they are making their way along the Red Sea. He instructs Moses to make a snake of brass or bronze to hold up before the people to cure those who have been bitten. Presumably it is this same icon, now referred to as Nehushtan, that Hezekiah evicts from the Temple in 2d. Kings to comply with the "Yahweh alone" doctrine.
