Let the reader understand

[plmarquette]

only those who believe will see the words....nonsense to those not born again

only those who believe will give authority and creedence to the warning

let those who read, their bible..."hello?", see, understand, and act accordingly

when the antichrist, says worship me, not God, the temple is defiled, and the battle of armegeddon is at hand...take measures, get away from where the vengence of God will come...

 

[Mose]

I believe that these words were indeed Jesus'. There are at least two verses in Zechariah which gives a reason why the believers would have cause to be concerned about their lives.

Zech.11:4 and Zech. 11:7 Thus saith the LORD my God; Feed the flock of the slaughter; and And I will feed the flock of slaughter, even you, O poor of the flock. And I took unto me two staves; the one I called Beauty, and the other I called Bands; and I fed the flock.

The staff Beauty must be Jesus and the staff called Bands must be those who believed that Jesus was the Messiah.

 

[Jesus is YHWH]

Most likely Marks words which he added for emphasis.

Mark 13:14

"Let the reader understand"

Are these Jesus's words or are they Mark's words?

 

[Watchman on the Wall]

I have noticed that in some red-letter Bibles, in both Mark 13:14 and Matthew 24:15, "let him who readeth understand" is in red, and in some others it is black while the surrounding text is red. In one red-letter Bible I owned, I took the liberty of penciling over the words in parentheses in these two verses so as to make them appear black like the surrounding text. That was because common sense tells me that because Jesus was not writing a book as he was speaking to his disciples, it must have been the author of the gospel or a later scribe who added the part in parentheses.

 

[OzSpen]

Mark 13:14

"Let the reader understand"

Are these Jesus's words or are they Mark's words?

What criteria would you use to discern whether they are from Jesus or from Mark?

Oz

 

[Timothew]

What criteria would you use to discern whether they are from Jesus or from Mark?

Oz

I don't know.

Do you have any suggestions?

 

[Timothew]

I have noticed that in some red-letter Bibles, in both Mark 13:14 and Matthew 24:15, "let him who readeth understand" is in red, and in some others it is black while the surrounding text is red. In one red-letter Bible I owned, I took the liberty of penciling over the words in parentheses in these two verses so as to make them appear black like the surrounding text. That was because common sense tells me that because Jesus was not writing a book as he was speaking to his disciples, it must have been the author of the gospel or a later scribe who added the part in parentheses.

I don't just accept anything based on the color of the font used in my bibles. Actually, I don't have a lot of red letter editions of the bible. I find the red font difficult to read.

 

[dana b]

I believe that these words were indeed Jesus'. There are at least two verses in Zechariah which gives a reason why the believers would have cause to be concerned about their lives.

Zech.11:4 and Zech. 11:7 Thus saith the LORD my God; Feed the flock of the slaughter; and And I will feed the flock of slaughter, even you, O poor of the flock. And I took unto me two staves; the one I called Beauty, and the other I called Bands; and I fed the flock.

The staff Beauty must be Jesus and the staff called Bands must be those who believed that Jesus was the Messiah.

Or "beauty" is Christianity's law of conscience from within the heart and mind(Jer.31;31 Heb.8;10), and "Bands" is the Old strict law of Moses's Justice. It is a band. These two go together as God's two covenants with Mankind.

 

[josephearl]

The words in Matthew and Mark are prayers from the authors. They are addressing them to God on behalf of future readers who will need to understand the Olivet Discourse and have assurance when they see the abomination of desolation that this is the event which was foretold.When it occurs we will know. God will answer these 2 faithful servants cries from their hearts and we will be blessed because of them

Love ya, JE

 

[Silvanus1]

I believe they are Mark's words.

 

[Deegie]

Late to the party here, but Mark is the overwhelming consensus.

Edited to add: I figure a little scholarly support couldn't hurt. Here's a snippet from Robert Stein's commentary on Mark (in the Baker Exegetical series). He directly addresses the issue in a footnote. His point about the other insertions that Mark has made is a good one.

The attempt to interpret this as a comment by the historical Jesus for his audience as they read the book of Daniel has few supporters. Most commentators see this as a Markan comment to his readers (W. Lane 1974: 467; Hooker 1991: 314; A. Collins 1996: 22, 25; J. Edwards 2002: 496; et al.). By now the readers of Mark are quite accustomed to seeing Markan editorial comments inserted into the tradition (see 1:16–18 for the many Markan "for" clauses; cf. also 1:34d; 2:10; 3:30; 7:11, 19d, etc.)

 

[Heterodoxus]

Red letter editions based on the KJV appear to attribute to Jesus the parenthetical remark ο αναγινωσκων νοειτω (the reader take note, OR the reader he "must try to understand! [CEV]"). Yet other red letter Bible versions apparently attribute that remark to Mark since they print the words in black ink (e.g., ASV, ISV). But most Bible versions since the KJV apparently leave it to the reader to decide who said or wrote those words.

It's seems unlikely to me that Jesus would have urged future readers 30+ years in the future to pay careful attention to what someone might write in Mark 13:14 .

 

[PrincetonGuy]

Mark 13:14

"Let the reader understand"

Are these Jesus's words or are they Mark's words?

Late to the party here, but Mark is the overwhelming consensus.

Edited to add: I figure a little scholarly support couldn't hurt. Here's a snippet from Robert Stein's commentary on Mark (in the Baker Exegetical series). He directly addresses the issue in a footnote. His point about the other insertions that Mark has made is a good one.

The attempt to interpret this as a comment by the historical Jesus for his audience as they read the book of Daniel has few supporters. Most commentators see this as a Markan comment to his readers (W. Lane 1974: 467; Hooker 1991: 314; A. Collins 1996: 22, 25; J. Edwards 2002: 496; et al.). By now the readers of Mark are quite accustomed to seeing Markan editorial comments inserted into the tradition (see 1:16–18 for the many Markan "for" clauses; cf. also 1:34d; 2:10; 3:30; 7:11, 19d, etc.)

Matthew 24:3. When he was sitting on the Mount of Olives, the disciples came to him privately, saying, “Tell us, when will this be, and what will be the sign of your coming and of the end of the age?”
4. Jesus answered them, “Beware that no one leads you astray….
15. “So when you see the desolating sacrilege standing in the holy place, as was spoken of by the prophet Daniel (let the reader understand),
16. then those in Judea must flee to the mountains;” (NRSV)

Mark 13:3. When he was sitting on the Mount of Olives opposite the temple, Peter, James, John, and Andrew asked him privately,
4. “Tell us, when will this be, and what will be the sign that all these things are about to be accomplished?”
5. Then Jesus began to say to them, "Beware that no one leads you astray….
14. “But when you see the desolating sacrilege set up where it ought not to be (let the reader understand), then those in Judea must flee to the mountains; (NRSV)

In both of these accounts, Jesus was speaking to His disciples rather than to readers. Therefore, the parenthetical aside, (let the reader understand) could not possibly have been the words of Jesus unless we have the unlikely event of Jesus referring to his hearers as readers of the book of Daniel. This leaves us with the question, “Whose words are they?” Perhaps they are the words of Matthew or one his redactors copied by Mark. If that is the case, however, why then does Mark’s account of the conversation differ as much as it does from the account given in Matthew’s gospel? To me, it does not seem likely that the parenthetical aside was part of an oral tradition that found its way into both of these two gospels—unless the words were attributed to Jesus. If the parenthetical aside were found only in Mark’s gospel, it would be easy to attribute it to Mark or one of his redactors, but the fact that it is also found in Matthew’s gospel makes that much less easy.

We find just one other* parenthetical aside in which the words of Jesus appear to have been interrupted by the author of a canonical gospel or one of his redactors,

Matthew 9:5. For which is easier, to say, “Your sins are forgiven,’ or to say, “Stand up and walk’?
6. But so that you may know that the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins”—he then said to the paralytic—“Stand up, take your bed and go to your home.” (NRSV)

Mark 2: 9. Which is easier, to say to the paralytic, ‘Your sins are forgiven,’ or to say, ‘Stand up and take your mat and walk’?
10. But so that you may know that the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins”—he said to the paralytic—
11. “I say to you, stand up, take your mat and go to your home.” (NRSV)


Compare the 2002 Commentary on Mark by R. T. France in The New International Greek Commentary series with the 2005 Commentary on Matthew by John Noland in the same series. See also the 2006 commentary on Mark by M. Eugene Boring in The New Testament Library.

*Some scholars believe that we find another instance in Mark 7:11,

Mark 7:11. But you say that if anyone tells father or mother, ‘Whatever support you might have had from me is Corban’ (that is, an offering to God)—
12. then you no longer permit doing anything for a father or mother, (NRSV)

but,

Mark 7:11. but you say, ‘If a man says to his father or his mother, whatever I have that would help you is Corban (that is to say, given to God,}’
12. you no longer permit him to do anything for his father or his mother; (NASB, 1995)