The ending of Mark

ByTheSpirit · May 5, 2022

So fairly straight forward question. Legitimately curious about the ending of Mark, talking vv9-20. It seems modern translations have no issue with leaving whole verses out of the Bible if there's poor support for them in older manuscripts. I'm fine with that, which brings me to the ending of Mark.

From my understanding there are three different endings, none of which are in older manuscripts. So why is it included in these modern translations? Should we treat it as legitimate scripture?

Soyeong · May 5, 2022

ByTheSpirit said:
So fairly straight forward question. Legitimately curious about the ending of Mark, talking vv9-20. It seems modern translations have no issue with leaving whole verses out of the Bible if there's poor support for them in older manuscripts. I'm fine with that, which brings me to the ending of Mark.

From my understanding there are three different endings, none of which are in older manuscripts. So why is it included in these modern translations? Should we treat it as legitimate scripture?

Many of the books of the bible form complex chiastic patterns, such as the whole book of Genesis being one giant chiasm that is composed of 81 smaller chiasms that can be divided into halves, thirds, fourths, fifths, sixths, eighths, ninths, tenths, or eighteenths, and each part of each of those fractions also forms its own chiasm. Chiasms allow the author to add commentary by placing emphasis and its center, and with the parts that mirror each other expressing the same thought in two different ways helping to better understand what was being said. This pattern also serves as the author's signature because adding to or subtracting from what they wrote would disrupt this pattern or would stick out as not being part of it. All of the books of Moses and all of the gospels use this sort of chiastic pattern, and in regard to the book of Mark, it's ending is separate from the pattern of the rest of the book, which strongly indicates to me that it was added by someone other than its original author, however, this does not necessarily mean that what it says is false.

Leaf473 · May 5, 2022

ByTheSpirit said:
So fairly straight forward question. Legitimately curious about the ending of Mark, talking vv9-20. It seems modern translations have no issue with leaving whole verses out of the Bible if there's poor support for them in older manuscripts. I'm fine with that, which brings me to the ending of Mark.

From my understanding there are three different endings, none of which are in older manuscripts. So why is it included in these modern translations? Should we treat it as legitimate scripture?

That's a great question.

I think it's in modern English versions because it was in the King James, and people expect it. Most modern translations have notes about this and other questionable passages.

Should it be treated as scripture? That kind of depends on how a person goes about deciding what is scripture.

For Catholics, the Church has already decided that it is.

For Protestants, the most common approach is to read what the scholars say and decide who makes a better case.

Myself, I don't know.

Gregory Thompson · May 5, 2022

ByTheSpirit said:
Should we treat it as legitimate scripture?

So long as you treat all of the other passages under the same scrutiny as scripture also.

ozso · May 5, 2022

In the case with that verse at least it's not controversial compared to 1 John 5:7 having "these three are one" added in later manuscripts.

ewq1938 · May 5, 2022

ByTheSpirit said:
So fairly straight forward question. Legitimately curious about the ending of Mark, talking vv9-20. It seems modern translations have no issue with leaving whole verses out of the Bible if there's poor support for them in older manuscripts. I'm fine with that, which brings me to the ending of Mark.

From my understanding there are three different endings, none of which are in older manuscripts. So why is it included in these modern translations? Should we treat it as legitimate scripture?

Most of it matches what is found in the other gospels.

Mar 16:1 And when the sabbath was past, Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James, and Salome, had bought sweet spices, that they might come and anoint him.
Mar 16:2 And very early in the morning the first day of the week, they came unto the sepulchre at the rising of the sun.
Mar 16:3 And they said among themselves, Who shall roll us away the stone from the door of the sepulchre?
Mar 16:4 And when they looked, they saw that the stone was rolled away: for it was very great.
Mar 16:5 And entering into the sepulchre, they saw a young man sitting on the right side, clothed in a long white garment; and they were affrighted.
Mar 16:6 And he saith unto them, Be not affrighted: Ye seek Jesus of Nazareth, which was crucified: he is risen; he is not here: behold the place where they laid him.
Mar 16:7 But go your way, tell his disciples and Peter that he goeth before you into Galilee: there shall ye see him, as he said unto you.
Mar 16:8 And they went out quickly, and fled from the sepulchre; for they trembled and were amazed: neither said they any thing to any man; for they were afraid.
Jesus Appears to Mary Magdalene
Mar 16:9 Now when Jesus was risen early the first day of the week, he appeared first to Mary Magdalene, out of whom he had cast seven devils.
Mar 16:10 And she went and told them that had been with him, as they mourned and wept.
Mar 16:11 And they, when they had heard that he was alive, and had been seen of her, believed not.

Would a gospel just end like that? Nothing about what happened when they found him?

ByTheSpirit · May 5, 2022

ewq1938 said:
Most of it matches what is found in the other gospels.

Mar 16:1 And when the sabbath was past, Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James, and Salome, had bought sweet spices, that they might come and anoint him.
Mar 16:2 And very early in the morning the first day of the week, they came unto the sepulchre at the rising of the sun.
Mar 16:3 And they said among themselves, Who shall roll us away the stone from the door of the sepulchre?
Mar 16:4 And when they looked, they saw that the stone was rolled away: for it was very great.
Mar 16:5 And entering into the sepulchre, they saw a young man sitting on the right side, clothed in a long white garment; and they were affrighted.
Mar 16:6 And he saith unto them, Be not affrighted: Ye seek Jesus of Nazareth, which was crucified: he is risen; he is not here: behold the place where they laid him.
Mar 16:7 But go your way, tell his disciples and Peter that he goeth before you into Galilee: there shall ye see him, as he said unto you.
Mar 16:8 And they went out quickly, and fled from the sepulchre; for they trembled and were amazed: neither said they any thing to any man; for they were afraid.
Jesus Appears to Mary Magdalene
Mar 16:9 Now when Jesus was risen early the first day of the week, he appeared first to Mary Magdalene, out of whom he had cast seven devils.
Mar 16:10 And she went and told them that had been with him, as they mourned and wept.
Mar 16:11 And they, when they had heard that he was alive, and had been seen of her, believed not.

Would a gospel just end like that? Nothing about what happened when they found him?

It could, or maybe not I dunno honestly. It just doesn't match with the rest of the gospel it's contained in. Nowhere else in the gospels or even in the New Testament are teachings on snake bitings or drinking poison, those to me are clear after additions from when Paul was bit by the snake at the end of Acts and the poison bit is probably from John being forced to drink poison but surviving. So it was (to me) clearly not original as Mark is said to have written the gospel in the 50s AD I think. It also seems unlikely Jesus would actually say something like that, but it's possible.

I just feel since the passage wasn't in the oldest manuscripts it should probably be treated like numerous other passages that weren't in the older manuscripts, like 1 John 5:7-8 and Acts 8:37.

ewq1938 · May 5, 2022

ByTheSpirit said:
It could, or maybe not I dunno honestly. It just doesn't match with the rest of the gospel it's contained in.

But the gospel would have no valid ending if verse 9 onward was removed. All gospels contain things no other does. Also, older manuscripts don't equal more valid manuscripts. Old errant ones would be less accurate than newer ones without errors.

I'd rather trust that God made sure it was correct.

com7fy8 · May 5, 2022

ByTheSpirit said:
the ending of Mark, talking vv9-20

Well, let me check this > yes, this is the passage which talks about Jesus rising from the dead and appearing to His disciples, and telling them to preach the gospel and heal people, and signs will follow them, and Jesus ascended then to the right hand of God, and then the disciples preached God's word.

So . . . this is basically what the Bible says in other parts of God's word. One only issue might be with how this scripture says we will drink poisonous something and not be harmed by it. And we will pick up snakes. Well, Jesus did not say every single Christian will do these things. So, I am open about this.

And ones claim that the Greek passage of this is found not in all manuscripts which have been translated. Ones now say that older manuscripts which have been found have not had this passage. And the idea is that what is older must be more reliable, including it has not been altered like more recent manuscripts could have been. The logic is that if older works do not have the passage, but only newer ones of later years do, then somebody likely added that Mark passage later, after the earlier manuscripts were done.

But . . . why did those older ones last until now? Maybe because they were not well-used by the true church, and so they got to lying around unused so they would last until today. But for all I know, the real documents got worn out so they with the Mark passage could not last until today, but only copies could last until now.

So, I say you can't go only by age. I find it interesting how certain people can say older is better and more reliable, but they do not listen to older and more mature people! Ones can pick and choose what their rules will be, depending on what they want . . . can't we all, somehow??

ByTheSpirit said:
From my understanding there are three different endings, none of which are in older manuscripts.

But being older can mean the manuscript was not being used by the true church, and so it was not worn out with use and therefore can continue to this day.

ByTheSpirit said:
So why is it included in these modern translations? Should we treat it as legitimate scripture?

I do not know why people have done what they do. They can give reasons, and it has nothing to do with reality, for all I know.

Mark 16:9-20 says what other scripture says, plus it indicates what is possible with God. So, this is basic to the meaning of God's word. King James has had Mark 16:9-20, all along. Then came an issue about it, and ones either left it out or they put in notes about how not all translated manuscripts are the same. But if modern translators knew the manuscripts are different, they might have kept Mark 16:9-20 so it would be available, or because they find it to be accurate, maybe simply because they have the witness of the Holy Spirit to it, or they might see how certain people are just trying to discredit the Bible by making it seem like manuscripts contradict one another.

But the Alexandrian manuscript material, if I remember the name Alexandrian correctly, has a lot of small pieces which have been gathered and put together, but they do not have Mark 16:9-20 and a variety of verses and words and expressions, if I remember correctly. However . . . what is in the Alexandrian materials does not directly contradict the manuscript items used for translation the King James Bible. So, they can be taken to be an independent witness to God's word . . . though not in every detail.

And what matters really is how God Himself translates His word, into how He has us becoming like Jesus and loving like Jesus. God knows this meaning, and He alone is able to bring this to pass in us and our lives

But ones would decoy our attention to squabbling and gobbling so we don't feed on God's love meaning of His word.

ByTheSpirit · May 5, 2022

ewq1938 said:
But the gospel would have no valid ending if verse 9 onward was removed. All gospels contain things no other does. Also, older manuscripts don't equal more valid manuscripts. Old errant ones would be less accurate than newer ones without errors.

I'd rather trust that God made sure it was correct.

I suppose it depends on what textual tradition a person would hold that would determine their response to my question.

I don't think a gospel, or any book for that matter, has to "have" a specific meaning. God is the one who inspired them and he could have had them finished any way he wanted. But at any rate, thank you for your response.

ewq1938 · May 5, 2022

Mat 28:16 Then the eleven disciples went away into Galilee, into a mountain where Jesus had appointed them.
Mat 28:17 And when they saw him, they worshipped him: but some doubted.
Mat 28:18 And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth.
Mat 28:19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:
Mat 28:20 Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen.

Mar 16:14 Afterward he appeared unto the eleven as they sat at meat, and upbraided them with their unbelief and hardness of heart, because they believed not them which had seen him after he was risen.
Mar 16:15 And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature.
Mar 16:16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.
Mar 16:17 And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues;
Mar 16:18 They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover.
Mar 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.
Mar 16:20 And they went forth, and preached every where, the Lord working with them, and confirming the word with signs following. Amen.

Luk 24:36 And as they thus spake, Jesus himself stood in the midst of them, and saith unto them, Peace be unto you.
Luk 24:37 But they were terrified and affrighted, and supposed that they had seen a spirit.
Luk 24:38 And he said unto them, Why are ye troubled? and why do thoughts arise in your hearts?
Luk 24:39 Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself: handle me, and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have.
Luk 24:40 And when he had thus spoken, he shewed them his hands and his feet.
Luk 24:41 And while they yet believed not for joy, and wondered, he said unto them, Have ye here any meat?
Luk 24:42 And they gave him a piece of a broiled fish, and of an honeycomb.
Luk 24:43 And he took it, and did eat before them.
Luk 24:44 And he said unto them, These are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me.
Luk 24:45 Then opened he their understanding, that they might understand the scriptures,
Luk 24:46 And said unto them, Thus it is written, and thus it behoved Christ to suffer, and to rise from the dead the third day:
Luk 24:47 And that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem.
Luk 24:48 And ye are witnesses of these things.
Luk 24:49 And, behold, I send the promise of my Father upon you: but tarry ye in the city of Jerusalem, until ye be endued with power from on high.
Luk 24:50 And he led them out as far as to Bethany, and he lifted up his hands, and blessed them.
Luk 24:51 And it came to pass, while he blessed them, he was parted from them, and carried up into heaven.
Luk 24:52 And they worshipped him, and returned to Jerusalem with great joy:
Luk 24:53 And were continually in the temple, praising and blessing God. Amen.

Joh 21:15 So when they had dined, Jesus saith to Simon Peter, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou me more than these? He saith unto him, Yea, Lord; thou knowest that I love thee. He saith unto him, Feed my lambs.
Joh 21:16 He saith to him again the second time, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou me? He saith unto him, Yea, Lord; thou knowest that I love thee. He saith unto him, Feed my sheep.
Joh 21:17 He saith unto him the third time, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou me? Peter was grieved because he said unto him the third time, Lovest thou me? And he said unto him, Lord, thou knowest all things; thou knowest that I love thee. Jesus saith unto him, Feed my sheep.
Joh 21:18 Verily, verily, I say unto thee, When thou wast young, thou girdedst thyself, and walkedst whither thou wouldest: but when thou shalt be old, thou shalt stretch forth thy hands, and another shall gird thee, and carry thee whither thou wouldest not.
Joh 21:19 This spake he, signifying by what death he should glorify God. And when he had spoken this, he saith unto him, Follow me.
Joh 21:20 Then Peter, turning about, seeth the disciple whom Jesus loved following; which also leaned on his breast at supper, and said, Lord, which is he that betrayeth thee?
Joh 21:21 Peter seeing him saith to Jesus, Lord, and what shall this man do?
Joh 21:22 Jesus saith unto him, If I will that he tarry till I come, what is that to thee? follow thou me.
Joh 21:23 Then went this saying abroad among the brethren, that that disciple should not die: yet Jesus said not unto him, He shall not die; but, If I will that he tarry till I come, what is that to thee?
Joh 21:24 This is the disciple which testifieth of these things, and wrote these things: and we know that his testimony is true.
Joh 21:25 And there are also many other things which Jesus did, the which, if they should be written every one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written. Amen.

CallofChrist · May 5, 2022

One thing that reading to only the shorter ending of Mark does is add some drama.

The Great Commission is in Matthew, also, so the longer endings are not "needed" there, per se. It is definitely a mystery as to which ending to call canonical. An interesting question for certain. I don't think any essential doctrines are affected by this particular controversy, please correct me if I am wrong. Thanks to the OP for raising this question.

Petros2015 · May 5, 2022

ewq1938 said:
Joh 21:25 And there are also many other things which Jesus did, the which, if they should be written every one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written. Amen.

I love that ending.
I suppose my answer would be "stick with the ending that you love"

public hermit · May 5, 2022

ewq1938 said:
Would a gospel just end like that? Nothing about what happened when they found him?

I think it's a good ending for the reader; it leaves one wanting to find out what happened. The obvious implication is that he is risen, but the shorter ending is like an unresolved chord progression: it leaves one wanting more. In that sense, it functions as a tool for evangelism.

The shorter ending is a great take off place for proclaiming the good news. You read the shorter ending, and then share the good news of the resurrection (like in Acts, every sermon is centered around the resurrection). Perhaps, that's how was initially used. That's speculative but not a reach, I don't think.

Leaf473 · May 6, 2022

I think there are two questions which often get lumped together:

Is the longer ending part of the original document?

Is the longer ending scripture?

DragonFox91 · May 6, 2022

public hermit said:
I think it's a good ending for the reader; it leaves one wanting to find out what happened. The obvious implication is that he is risen, but the shorter ending is like an unresolved chord progression: it leaves one wanting more. In that sense, it functions as a tool for evangelism.

The shorter ending is a great take off place for proclaiming the good news. You read the shorter ending, and then share the good news of the resurrection (like in Acts, every sermon is centered around the resurrection). Perhaps, that's how was initially used. That's speculative but not a reach, I don't think.

All of this is how it was taught to me.

pescador · May 7, 2022

Leaf473 said:
I think there are two questions which often get lumped together:

Is the longer ending part of the original document?

Is the longer ending scripture?

a) There is no "original document", there are only copies.
b) The "long ending" of Mark is not in the earliest sources. It was most probably added by a zealous scribe.

Leaf473 · May 7, 2022

pescador said:
a) There is no "original document", there are only copies.
b) The "long ending" of Mark is not in the earliest sources. It was most probably added by a zealous scribe.

There was an original document at one time. The question is How did it end?

If the longer ending was added later, it still could be scripture imo. Books like Psalms and Proverbs are compilations, yet we consider the end result to be scripture.

pescador · May 7, 2022

Leaf473 said:
There was an original document at one time. The question is How did it end?

If the longer ending was added later, it still could be scripture imo. Books like Psalms and Proverbs are compilations, yet we consider the end result to be scripture.

Again, the "long ending" of Mark is not in the earliest sources. Psalms and Proverbs (and other OT "books" are also compilations, but the canon of Scripture was fixed long ago. If that wasn't the case then anything could be added and considered to be Scripture.

Leaf473 · May 7, 2022

pescador said:
Again, the "long ending" of Mark is not in the earliest sources. Psalms and Proverbs (and other OT "books" are also compilations, but the canon of Scripture was fixed long ago. If that wasn't the case then anything could be added and considered to be Scripture.

Which Cannon are you referring to?

The ending of Mark

Come Lord Jesus

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Change is inevitable, feel free to spare some.

✦

Well-Known Member

Come Lord Jesus

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Come Lord Jesus

Well-Known Member

Active Member

Well-Known Member

social troglodyte

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Wise old man

Well-Known Member

Wise old man

Well-Known Member

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency