Mark 16

Mark 16 is a shorthand for the 16th and final chapter of the Gospel of Mark. There is evidence that verses 16:9-20 are not part of the original document, but an ancient completion of it. It has been suggested (by C.H.Roberts) that the original was in fact a codex, and the last leaf or leaves were lost.

Table of contents

1 Possible Scenarios
2 Internal Evidence
3 Textual Evidence
4 Scholarly Conclusions
5 External Link

Possible Scenarios

1. The ending of Mark was lost in a manuscript, resulting in the evidence we see today. However, simply because one manuscript lost the ending, resulting in some confusion in the manuscript tradition, it does not automatically follow that the long ending that we have is not the original ending from the manuscripts that did not lose the ending.

2. Mark made two editions of his gospel and either somebody got hold of one version before it was complete or somebody removed the long ending because he was familiar only with the pre-completed version.

3. Mark's original ending was lost, and somebody else at a very early date completed the gospel.

4. Mark for whatever reason, intentionally ended his gospel before 16:8, and someone else completed the gospel as in 3.

Internal Evidence

Verses 16:8-9 run like this in the King James Bible:

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. 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.

Note the way the subject changes abruptly from "they were afraid" to "Now when Jesus was risen" and the way Mary Magdalene, introduced at the beginning of the chapter, is re-introduced as though she had not already been mentioned. The final sentence in verse 8 is also regarded as odd by many scholars: In Greek, "for they were afraid or "for they feared", is εφοβουντο γαρ, ephobounto gar, literally "they-were-afraid because". When Mark uses the verb phobeo, "fear, be afraid (of)", elsewhere in the Gospel, he expresses the object of fear either directly or by contextn (cf. 6:20, 6:50). Here the verb has no object and the grammar of the sentence is very odd, although not impossible. Like enim, its equivalent in Latin, the conjunction gar takes second place in a clause and almost never ends a sentence in this way, and although another example occurs in Genesis 45:3 in the Septuagint, this is the only example in the New Testament. In the rest of Mark, gar is used in the conventional way:

3:10 Πολλους γαρ [gar] εθεραπευσεν ωστε επιπιπτειν αυτω ινα αυτου αψωνται οσοι ειχον μαστιγας.

3:10 For he had healed many; insomuch that they pressed upon him for to touch him, as many as had plagues.

6:20 Ο γαρ [gar] Ηρωδης εφοβειτο τον Ιωαννην ειδως αυτον ανδρα δικαιον και αγιον.

6:20 For Herod feared John, knowing that he was a just man and an holy.

13:33 Βλεπετε αγρυπνειτε και προσευχεσθε ουκ οιδατε γαρ [gar] ποτε ο καιρος εστιν.

13:33 Take ye heed, watch and pray: for ye know not when the time is.

It is often argued that the style and vocabulary of the passage differs from the rest of Mark. However it is often pointed out that by the same criteria other chapters of Mark could be rejected. Evidently Mark was capable of some variation in style, and the different vocabulary could be explained by the differing subject matter of the end of Mark.
It is sometimes argued that the passage diverges from Matthew and Luke at this very spot. However, if the long ending had been similar to Matthew or Luke, it would be argued that it was copied from them.

Textual Evidence

Only two (albeit significant) manuscripts in the original Greek omit verses 16:9-20, ending the gospel with 16:8. These include the 4th century Codices Sinaiticus and Vaticanus. However in Vaticanus scribes left space for the text, suggesting that they were aware of the ending and weren't sure whether to include it or not. In Codex Sinaiticus the codex leaf containing this section is not the original, so we can't be certain if it was originally there or not. The Sinatic Syriac manuscript, many Old Armenian manuscripts, the Adysh and Opiza manuscripts of the Old Georgian version, and a number of Ethiopic manuscripts also omit it. However, because some of these are from the Egyptian area, they do not significantly widen the area of textual support for the omission. Whilst Jerome is often cited as saying that this section is missing from most Greek copies known to him, in fact he is merely repeating a comment made by Eusebius. Eusebius' comment in turn has been interpreted to be a hypothetical argument that could be used regarding certain aspects of the Mark passage, rather than necessarily representing his opinion.
Some manuscripts either replace this section with what is known as the Shorter Ending or Intermediate Ending. This 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 some ancient texts like the Old Latin Codex Bobbensis. Some mansucripts containing the Shorter Ending follow it with 16:9-20, such as the Codex Bobbensis and the Codex Regius of the 8th century. However Codex Bobbensis is very messed up in the last part of Mark with seeming affinities with the forged Gospel of Peter.
An expanded form of the Long Ending was mentioned by Jerome, who furnished our only knowledge of this variant until 1906 when Charles L Freer purchased a uncial manuscript that contained it. (This manuscript is now at the Freer Museum of the Smithsonian Institution in Washington, D.C).
Of all undamaged Greek copies of the Gospel of Mark (and there are over 1500), only two (or possibly three) can be shown not to have contained Mark 16:9-20 when they were made. However, this numerical weight in favor of the inclusion of the Long Ending is not as important as the evidence which shows the Long Ending's presence in different text-types. Sinaiticus and Vaticanus are both Alexandrian manuscripts (Vaticanus may be considered "Proto-Alexandrian"). Other Alexandrian manuscripts contain the Long Ending. So do Western, Caesarean, and Byzantine manuscripts. They may be likened to four branches in a family tree of the text. A variant found in only one branch is generally more likely to have originated there than a variant found in all four branches.
Furthermore, the evidence from manuscripts must be weighed alongside the evidence from patristic writings -- the writings of leaders in the early church. There are several quotations of, or references to, the contents of Mark 16:9-20 which pre-date Vaticanus or are nearly contemporary to it.
Justin Martyr, who died in A.D. 165, wrote in his First Apology ch. 45 that the apostles "going forth from Jerusalem, preached everywhere." The words "going... preached everywhere" represent three Greek words identical to Greek words used in Mark 16:20, including the somewhat rare word pantachou. A comparison of this paragraph of Justin's work shows that it is highly likely that he was borrowing his terms from the Long Ending.
Irenaeus wrote in Against Heresies (about A.D. 185), Book III, 10:5-6, "Also, towards the conclusion of his Gospel, Mark says: 'So then, after the Lord Jesus had spoken to them, He was received up into heaven, and sitteth on the right and of God." This is clearly a quotation of Mark 16:19.
Papias, a writer in the early-mid 100's, recorded that Justus Barsabbas (the individual mentioned in Acts 1:23) once drank a poisonous drink and suffered no ill effects. (This is preserved by Eusebius of Caesarea and by Philip of Side). His motivation for mentioning this story may have been to provide an example of the fulfillment of Mark 16:18.
At the seventh Council of Carthage in 256, a bishop named Vincentius of Thibaris said, "We have assuredly the rule of truth which the Lord by His divine precept commanded to His apostles, saying, 'Go ye, lay on hands in My name, expel demons.' And in another place: "Go ye and teach the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.'" Vincentius' second quotation is from Matthew 28:19. Despite attempts by some interpreters to connect the first quotation to Matthew 10:8, the references to going, laying on hands, expelling demons, and doing so in My name add up to a reference to Mark 16:15-18, especially when placed side-by-side with the parallel passage from Matthew.
Either Porphyry (an early opponent of Christianity who died in A.D. 305) or Hierocles (a student of Porphyry, writing in the very early 300's) was cited by another writer (Macarius Magnes) as having used Mark 16:18 as one of several examples of weaknesses in Christian teachings.
Aphraates (also known as Aphrahat), writing no later than 345, quoted clearly from the Long Ending in Demonstration One: Of Faith, stating, "And again He said this: 'This shall be the sign for those that believe; they will speak with new tongues and shall cast out demons, and they shall lay their hands on the sick and they shall be made whole.'"
Eusebius and Marinus (c. 330?) both reflect knowledge of the existence of the Long Ending, in Eusebius' work Ad Marinum.
Ursinus, writing in about 350 in his "Rebaptism" Part 9, strongly alluded to Mark 16:14. The testimony of "Rebaptism" may be earlier, though; he may have been repeating a composition made in the previous century, around the the time of Cyprian.
Augustine, who died in 430, used Mark 16:9-20 in Easter-time sermons, showing that by the early 400's the Long Ending was established in the lectionary in North Africa.
Ambrose, who died in 397, used the Long Ending as Scripture (one example is his use of Mark 16:18 in his work The Prayer of Job and David).
Thus the earliest evidence for the inclusion of Mark 16:9-20 pre-dates the earliest evidence for its non-inclusion. Also, the evidence for patristic use of the Long Ending is spread over a broad area: Justin (in Rome), Irenaeus (in Gaul [France]), Eusebius (in Caesarea [in Israel], Vincentius (in North Africa), and Tatian and Aphraates (in Syria). Against this, the ancient Greek evidence for non-inclusion is confined to Egypt (and Caesarea, but this is because the library at Caesarea included Egyptian manuscripts). The implication of this is that copies of Mark containing the Long Ending were in use at all these locations. And the blank column in Vaticanus suggests that the Long Ending was known in Egypt too.
An Armenian manuscript, written in A.D. 986, ascribes them to a presbyter named Ariston, who may be the same with the presbyter Aristion, mentioned by Papias as a contemporary of St. John in Asia. However, many scholars argue that it is unlikely that only an obscure manuscript from as late as A.D. 986 would preserve the correct tradition.

Scholarly Conclusions

Many contemporary scholars, particularly those in the modernist tradition, do not believe verses 16:9-20 originally belonged to Mark, but many others, particularly those in the traditionalist or fundamentalist tradition, argue that the evidence is insufficient to justify its exclusion or that the evidence in fact supports its inclusion.

See also:

External Link

For and against the authenticity of Mark 16:9-20