Mark 16

Mark 16 is the final chapter of the Gospel of Mark. There is much debate about the ending of Mark, and many textual problems—there are nine different endings known—but most of the debate focuses around the so-called ‘longer’ ending (16:9-20). There is strong evidence that these verses are not part of the original document, but rather an ancient ‘completion’ of it.

Contents

1 Possible Scenarios 2 The ‘Longer’ Ending 3 The ‘Shorter’ Ending 4 The 'Expanded' Ending 5 Mark 16 and Reading in the Ancient World 6 Scholarly conclusions 7 Theological implications 8 See also 9 References 10 External Links

Possible Scenarios

• The original ending of Mark was lost, and somebody else at a very early date completed the gospel. C. H. Turner has suggested that the original version of the gospel may have been a codex and the last pages may have been lost. However, it seems unlikely that Christian use of the codex form stretched as far back as the proposed date for the writing of Mark, though there is evidence for its adoption in the second century;

• The author(s) of Mark intentionally ended the gospel at 16:8, and someone else at an early date completed the gospel;

• More than one edition of Mark’s Gospel was made, so some Christian communities would have possessed the longer ending edition, and others would have possessed the edition that stopped at 16:8.

• The original ending was inconvenient to the church, and it was replaced.

The ‘Longer’ Ending

Verses 16:8-9 read as follows in the New Revised Standard Version:

(16:8) So they went out and fled from the tomb, for terror and amazement had seized them; and they said nothing to anyone, for they were afraid. (16:9) Now after he rose early on the first day of the week, he appeared first to Mary Magdalene, from who he had cast out seven demons.

Note the way the narrative flow abruptly changes from "they were afraid" to "now after he rose". Also, Mary Magdalene, introduced at the beginning of the chapter (16:1), is re-introduced almost as though she had not already been mentioned.

The final sentence in v.8 is also regarded as strange by many scholars, because in the Greek text it finishes with the conjunction γαρ (gar, 'for'). It is contended by those who see 16:9-20 as originally Markan that γαρ literally means “because”, and this ending to v.8 is therefore not grammatically coherent (literally, it would read “they were afraid because”). However, this objection misunderstands the nature of the Greek language. Since Greek is an inflexive language as opposed to a syntactic language such as English, word order is not as important. (Compare Grammar in Greek language and Grammar in English language.) γαρ is never the first word of a sentence: there is no such rule that states it can never be the last word, though it is very rare for a book to end with γαρ.

Still, γαρ aside, the grammar of v.8 is still odd, as the verb φοβεομαι (phobeomai, 'I fear') has no object. Gundry also mentions that only 10% of Mark’s γαρ clauses—6 out of 66—conclude pericopes (Mark: A Commentary on His Apology for the Cross, Chapters 9-16). As such, this statistic favours the view that, rather than concluding 16:1-8, v.8 begins a new pericope, the rest of which is now lost to us. Gundry therefore does not see v.8 as the intended ending; a resurrection narrative was either written, then lost, or planned but never actually written. Either way, the originality of vv.9-20 is denied by Gundry—and, indeed, the overwhelming majority of textual critics.

Mark 16:9-20 is in most of the undamaged Greek copies of the Gospel of Mark. A copy of a manuscript, however, is only as good as the text being copied, so all of the texts with 16:9-20 may simply be copies of the same non-Markan addition. The verses are absent in the oldest manuscripts of Mark, including the vitally important Codices Sinaiticus and Vaticanus, which both conclude the gospel at 16:8.

Many of the early church fathers also appear to use 16:9-20:

• Justin Martyr wrote in his First Apology (ch.45) that the apostles, "going forth from Jerusalem, preached everywhere." A comparison of this paragraph shows that it is highly likely that he was borrowing his terms from the longer ending;

• Irenaeus quotes Mark 16:19 in Against Heresies III:10:5-6, which was written c.185AD;

• Eusebius of Caesarea and Philip of Side record the writings of Papias (c.125-150AD), who mentions that Justus Barsabbas (c.f. Acts 1:23) once drank a poisonous drink and suffered no ill effects. The motivation for this story may have been to provide an example of the fulfillment of Mark 16:18;

• Eusebius and Marinus (c.330AD) both reflect knowledge of the existence of the longer ending, in Eusebius' work Ad Marinum;

• Augustine (d.430) used 16:9-20 in Easter sermons. This demonstrates that, by the early 400's, the longer ending had been established in the lectionary in North Africa (though this says nothing about its originality!);

However, Mark 16:9-20 is absent in other early church fathers (e.g. Clement of Alexandria, Origen). At any rate, all that can be concluded from this use of the longer ending is that, rightly or wrongly, Mark 16:9-20 had become part of Church tradition and scripture much like other apocryphal writings such as The Shepherd of Hermas and the Didache, neither of which are now considered canonical.

Parts of the longer ending seem to be based on various elements found in the other three Gospels and the book of Acts:

• v.11 – lack of belief (Luke 24:11);
• v.15 – Great Commission (Matt. 28:19);
• v.16 – salvation/judgement (John 3:18, 36);
• v.17 – speaking in other languages (Acts 2:4, 10:46);
• v.18 – serpents and poison (Acts 28:3-5);
• v.19 – ascension of Christ (Luke 24:51; Acts 1:2, 9);
• v.20 – general summary of the book of Acts.

One could argue that the longer Markan ending is a pre-synoptic, primitive tradition (thus being original), and that the comparative pericopes in Matthew, Luke, John and Acts are extended versions of this tradition. However, given the absence of Mark 16:9-20 in the earliest manuscripts, this seems unlikely.

The ‘Shorter’ Ending

And all that had been commanded them they told briefly to those around Peter. And afterward Jesus himself sent out through them, from east to west, the sacred and imperishable proclamation of eternal salvation. (NRSV)

Some manuscripts conclude Mark’s Gospel with what is known as the shorter ending (or intermediate ending) shown above. This ending is found in several uncial manuscripts of the 7th, 8th and 9th centuries, as well as a few minuscule manuscripts and some older Coptic and Ethiopian texts. As well as this, some mansucripts containing the shorter ending then follow it with the longer ending, such as the Codices Bobbensis and Regius of the 8th century.

The 'Expanded' Ending

Found in Codex Washingtonianius and cited by Jerome after Mark 16:14 of the Longer Ending:

And they excused themselves, saying, "This age of lawlessness and unbelief is under Satan, who does not allow the truth and power of God to pervail over the unclean things of the spirits [or does not allow what lies under the unclean spirits to understand the truth and power of God]. Therefore reveal thy righteousness now" - thus they spoke to Christ. And Christ replied to them, "The term of years of Satan's power has been fulfilled, but other terrible things draw near. And for those who have sinned I was delivered over to death, that they many inherit the spirtual and incorruptible glory of righteousness which is in heaven." -Bruce Metzger's Textual Commentary on the Greek NT

Mark 16 and Reading in the Ancient World

In the ancient world, reading was not the activity it is today. Rather than someone silently reading a book on their own, Mark’s Gospel, like other ancient literature, would have been read out loud by someone to a group of people. The low literacy rates in the ancient world demanded that such an approach to reading be taken. (See Oral history) Thus, reading would have involved an interaction between the reader(s) and the hearer(s).

If Mark’s Gospel, as is postulated by some (notably Beavis, Mark’s Audience, pp.45-67, 167-73), had an evangelistic and teaching purpose, this interactive nature of ancient world reading starts to provide another theory for the ending of Mark. Given that the longer and shorter endings are seen by the overwhelming majority of text critics as not originally part of Mark (see below), these endings can be seen as reader’s responses and reactions to what Mark’s gospel tells us about the person of Christ. Specifically, the longer ending is a response by a person or community familiar with the other Gospels and Acts, especially Luke-Acts (see above). From this perspective, then, 16:8 starts to look like an intentional ending—and the acceptance of the longer ending is an indication of the general theological direction early Christians saw Mark’s Gospel headed in.

Scholarly conclusions

Almost all contemporary New Testament textual critics have concluded that neither the longer or shorter endings were originally part of Mark’s Gospel, though the evidence of the early church fathers above shows that the longer ending had become accepted tradition. The United Bible Societies' 4th edition of the Greek New Testament (1993) rates the omission of verses 9-20 from the original Markan manuscript as "certain." For this reason, many modern Bibles decline to print the longer ending of Mark together with the rest of the gospel, but, because of its historical importance and prominence, it is often included as a footnote or an appendix alongside the shorter ending. Nevertheless, a handful of scholars, particularly those in traditionalist or fundamentalist traditions, argue that the evidence is insufficient to justify its exclusion or that the evidence in fact supports its inclusion. However, in biblical scholarship, changes and advances due to creative detective work and new discoveries have a long past history of proceeding with caution very slowly, so the almost unanimous conclusion with regards to the authenticity of the ending(s) of Mark should be seriously considered.

Theological implications

Few doctrines of the mainline Christian denominations stand or fall on the support of the longer ending of Mark. The longer ending does identify Mary Magdalene as the woman out of whom Jesus had exorcised seven demons, but Mary Magdalene's significance, and the practice of exorcism, are both supported by New Testament texts outside the debated passage. However, with the two-source hypothesis, the absence of the long ending forms an argument from silence about the non-historicity of the resurrection.

The longer ending of Mark 16 is of considerable significance in Pentecostalism and related denominations. Mark 16:17 is specifically cited as Biblical support for some of these denominations' teachings concerning exorcism and spiritual warfare, and also in support of speaking in tongues. The practice of snake handling and of drinking strychnine and other poisons, found in a few offshoots of Pentecostalism, find their Biblical support in Mark 16:18. These churches typically justify these practices as "confirming the word with signs following" (KJV), which references Mark 16:20. Other denominations believe that these texts indicate the power of the Holy Spirit given to the apostles, but do not believe that they are recommendations for worship.

See also

• Gospel of Mark
• John 21
• Pericope Adulteræ
• Empty tomb

References

Beavis, M. A., Mark’s Audience, Sheffield, Sheffield Academic Press, 1989. ISBN 185075215X.

Elliott, J. K., The Language and Style of the Gospel of Mark. An Edition of C. H. Turner’s "Notes on Markan Usage" together with Other Comparable Studies, Leiden, Brill, 1993. ISBN 9004097678.

Gundry, R. H., Mark: A Commentary on His Apology for the Cross, Chapters 9-16, Grand Rapids, Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1992. ISBN 0802829112.

External Links

• The various endings of Mark (http://www-user.uni-bremen.de/~wie/TCG/TC-Mark-Ends.pdf) Detailed textcritical description of the evidence, the manuscripts, and the variants of the Greek text (PDF, 17 pages)
• Extracts from authors arguing for the authenticity of Mark 16:9-20 (http://www.bible-researcher.com/endmark.html)
• Aichele, G., “Fantasy and Myth in the Death of Jesus” (http://www.crosscurrents.org/mark.htm) A literary-critical affirmation of Mark’s Gospel ending at 16:8.
• Did the Gospel End at 16:8 — and Would That Be a Problem? (http://www.tektonics.org/lp/markend.html)