Take Two: Mark 16, Proverbs 26

In theological circles, Mark 16 is one of the more heavily debated. This is due to some textual variants between different archaeological finds. Let me briefly explain.

As you may know, we do not have any "original autographs" of the Scripture. This does not mean that we do not have the Scriptures, just that we have no originals. We have thousands of copies, so there really is no legitimate question about what the originals say in 99% of the Bible. Mark 16 is one of those chapters that is disputed. Some of the earliest manuscripts stop after verse 8. Others have verse 20 (the short ending) immediately following verse 8. Some later dated manuscripts have vv.9-19 in the position that they are here. As such, theologians have debated on whether vv.9-19 are in fact part of Mark's inspired work. No one can scientifically verify either way; however, if you want an opinion, I think that it is part of the original text. Here are a couple of "simplified reasons."

• First, the ending of the gospel after verse 8 would eliminate any resurrection appearances. All of the other gospels include a resurrection appearance. (Pretty important element of our theological beliefs.)
• Second, the language style in vv.9-20 bears similarities with the other passages of Mark.
• Third, there is no dispute about any of the details in the section, meaning that no "new" theology or otherwise unsubstantiated concepts are proposed in this section.
• Fourth, there is no overwhelming reason to reject the "long ending."
• Fifth, due to the reverence given to the Scriptures, it seems unlikely that a later copyist would add such an extended passage and try to pass it off as the original.

Those who oppose the "long ending" make a good argument for their position...but not overwhelming. HERE IS WHAT WE CAN TAKE FROM THIS today. Every idea/event mentioned in the "long ending" is also mentioned or supported elsewhere. If I am going to make a point from the "long ending," and it is disputed, I just cross-reference and make it from another passage as well. I have every confidence that there is no reason to question the authenticity or veracity of the Gospel of Mark...even though we may have some rational disputes on these 11 verses.

Back to the text:

In Mark 16:1-3 we see the ladies preparing to go and anoint/prepare Jesus' body for burial. From this, we can be certain that He was buried very late of Friday (close to 6PM), because if there had been time, He would have been prepared before closing the tomb. In Mark 16:4-6 we see that the women came to anoint a dead body and only found an empty tomb and an Angel. They came to serve Jesus and found that He cared for Himself. Mark 16:4 uses the "divine passive" when it states that the stone "had been" rolled away. This refers to a God-activity. GOD NEEDS NO SERVANTS. He is self-sufficient and self-satisfying.

Mark 16:7-8 gives the instructions from the angel for the women to tell the disciples...but it seems that they left and told no one (if you think it ends there). Mark 16:9-10 tells us that they did go to tell the disciples AS THE ANGEL HAD INSTRUCTED. Mark 16:12-19 give several resurrection appearances and also the commission to preach Christ to all creation (Mark 16:15). Some dispute is made over Mark 16:17-18 (the accompanying signs).

Since the modern Pentecostal movement, much attention has been given to a belief that this is a continuing promise and ability given to all Christ followers. Many people have died of snake bites trying to claim this verse as a continuing promise. Certainly the Apostolic witnesses were attested to by these signs; however, I do not believe that every believer of all times is given the ability and responsibility to heal the sick, speak in tongues, cast out demons, and take up serpents. In fact, I don't encourage taking up serpents except in small bites...with a little tabasco sauce to kill the "wild taste." (OOOOHHHHH! No he didn't just say that! Yes he did!!)

Proverbs 26:21 is the takeaway today. Contentious people are the fuel that strife lives off of. Show me dispute or division...and I will show you one or more people who thrive off of being "contrary," right in the middle of the dispute.

BEGINNING TOMORROW, we will be taking up the OT Book of Ruth. See you there!