List of New Testament verses not included in modern English translations

[5][better source needed] The citations of manuscript authority use the designations popularized in the catalog of Caspar René Gregory, and used in such resources (which are also used in the remainder of this article) as Souter,[6] Nestle-Aland,[7] and the UBS Greek New Testament[8] (which gives particular attention to "problem" verses such as these).

These are passages which are well supported by a wide variety of sources of great antiquity and yet there is strong reason to doubt that the words were part of the original text of the Gospels.

In the words of Philip Schaff, "According to the judgment of the best critics, these two important sections are additions to the original text from apostolic tradition.

The twelve verses shown in the KJV, called the "longer ending" of Mark, usually are retained[83] in modern versions, although sometimes separated from verse 8 by an extra space, or enclosed in brackets, or relegated to a footnote, and accompanied by a note to the effect that this ending is not found in the very oldest Greek manuscripts but it is found in sources almost as old.

Although the longer ending appears in 99% of the surviving Greek manuscripts and most ancient versions,[84] there is strong evidence, both external and internal, for concluding that it was not part of the original text of the Gospel.

in א and B (both 4th century) and some much later Greek manuscripts, a few mss of the ancient versions (Syriac, Coptic, Armenian), and is specifically mentioned in the writings of such Church Fathers as Eusebius and Jerome explicitly doubted the authenticity of the verses after verse 8 ("Almost all the Greek copies do not contain this concluding portion.

Yet other ancient sources include this longer ending – but mark it with asterisks or other signs or notations indicating the copyists had doubts about its authenticity, most notably ƒ1 and several minuscules (all 12th century or later), according to the UBS notes and Bruce Metzger.

[89] Jerome, in the first half of the 5th century, received a very similar query from a lady named Hedibia and responded, "Either we should reject the testimony of Mark, which is met with in scarcely any copies of the Gospel, – almost all the Greek codices being without this passage, – especially since it seems to narrate what contradicts the other Gospels; – or else, we shall reply that both Evangelists state what is true.

"[90] This might be thought an authoritative statement but Jerome compromised it by including the Longer Ending, without any apparent notation about doubting it, in his Latin Vulgate, and Burgon (among others) thinks this inclusion is an endorsement of its authenticity.

In this instance Gregory of Nyssa (or Hesychius or Severus) goes on to eliminate the problem by suggesting the imposition of punctuation different from that used in any of the Greek manuscripts (the earliest had no punctuation at all, the later manuscripts had little more than commas and periods) or in the KJV, to make the first verse of the Longer Ending appear to be "Now when He was risen: Early on the first day of the week He appeared first to Mary Magdalene ..." In other words, that Jesus had risen presumably at the end of the Sabbath, as suggested in the other gospels, but he did not appear to Mary Magdalene until the next day.

[96] The addition in Codex W is included (in brackets) in James Moffatt's 1935 translation, with a note indicating Moffatt's belief, a belief apparently shared also by Henry Barclay Swete, but not by many others,[97] that it was part of the original text of the longer ending "but was excised for some reason at an early date.

"[98] It was not included in the RSV, but is set forth in a footnote to verse 14 in the NRSV with the comment that "other ancient authorities [sic plural] add, in whole or part".

I was delivered to death on behalf of sinners, that they might return to the truth and sin no more, that they might inherit that glory of righteousness which is spiritual and imperishable in heaven."

In 1891, Frederick Cornwallis Conybeare, while collating several ancient Armenian manuscripts in the library of the monastery at Ećmiadzin, at the foot of Mount Ararat, in what is now Turkey, found a uncial codex written in the year 986, bound with ivory front and back covers.

This title occupies one whole line (the book is written in double columns) and then follow the last twelve verses [i.e., the longer ending] still in the same hand.

[102] Other candidates includes an Aristo of Pella, who flourished around the year 140, also mentioned by Eusebius in the Historia Ecclesiastica, 4:6:3, favored by Alfred Resch,[103] but Conybeare considered him too late to have written the longer ending in time for it to have achieved its widespread acceptance.

The RV of 1881 contained a footnote attesting to the existence of this shorter ending but its text did not appear in a popular edition of the Bible until somewhat later.

[109] It appeared in the footnote at this place in the RSV and then in brackets in the main text of the NRSV:But they reported briefly to Peter and those with him all that they had been told.

[126] Although the longer ending was included, without any indication of doubt, as part of chapter 16 of the Gospel of Mark in the various Textus Receptus editions, the editor of the first published Textus Receptus edition, namely Erasmus of Rotterdam, discovered (evidently after his fifth and final edition of 1535) that the Codex Vaticanus ended the Gospel at verse 8, whereupon he mentioned doubts about the longer ending in a manuscript which lay unpublished until modern times.

[127] The omission of the longer ending in the Codex Vaticanus apparently was not realized again until rediscovered in 1801 by the Danish scholar Andreas Birch (whose discovery got very little publicity owing to a fire that destroyed his newly published book before it could be much distributed).

[130] No matter how or why the original and genuine conclusion to the gospel disappeared, the consensus is that neither the longer nor shorter endings provide an authentic continuation to verse 8.

[136] The pericope does not appear in the oldest Codexes – א, A,B,C,L,N,T,W,X,Δ,θ,Ψ – nor in papyri p66 or p75, nor in minuscules 33, 157, 565, 892, 1241, or ƒ1424 nor in the Peshitta.

The earliest Greek Codex showing this pericope at all is D (Codex Bezae), of the 5th or 6th century – but the text in D has conspicuous variants from the Textus Receptus/KJV version,[137] and some Old Latin manuscripts no older than the 5th century, and many subsequent Greek and Latin manuscripts all at the familiar location following John 7:52.

Westcott and Hort summarize the evidence as follows:Not only is [the section on the Woman taken in Adultery] passed over in silence in every Greek commentary of which we have any knowledge, down to that of Theophylact inclusive (11th–12th centuries); but with the exception of a reference in the Apostolic Constitutions (?

[141] A theory shared by several scholars is that this pericope represents some very early tradition or folktale about Jesus, not originally found in any of the canonical gospels, which was so popular or compelling that it was deliberately inserted into a gospel;[142] a variant on this theory is that this anecdote was written down as a note for a sermon, perhaps in the margin of a codex or on a scrap inserted between the pages of a codex, and a subsequent copyist mistakenly incorporated it in the main text when working up a new copy.

[144] The evidence that the pericope, although a much-beloved story, does not belong in the place assigned it by many late manuscripts, and, further, that it might not be part of the original text of any of the gospels, caused the Revised Version (1881) to enclose it within brackets, in its familiar place after John 7:52, with the sidenote, "Most of the ancient authorities omit John 7:53–8:11.

As it forms an independent narrative, it seems to stand best alone at the end of the Gospels with double brackets to show its inferior authority ..." Some English translations based on Westcott & Hort imitate this practice of appending the pericope at the end of the gospel (e.g., The Twentieth Century New Testament), while others simply omit it altogether (e.g., Goodspeed, Ferrar Fenton, the 2013 revision of The New World Version).

James, in his Apocryphal New Testament (p. 34), "It is hardly necessary, perhaps, to observe that the Last Twelve Verses of St. Mark and the story of the woman taken in adultery form no part of the original text of the Gospels."

The KJV ends the Epistle to the Romans with these verses as 16:25–27: 25Now to him that is of power to establish you according to my Gospel, and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery, which was kept secret since the world began:26But now is made manifest, and by the Scriptures of the Prophets, according to the commandment of the everlasting God, made known to all nations for the obedience of faith,27To God, only wise, be glory through Jesus Christ, for ever.

Note that in relation to 2 Corinthians 13:14, another end of chapter anomaly (as opposed to mid-chapter), the ESV and KJV agree.