# The Last Twelve Verses of Mark



## CalvinandHodges (Mar 1, 2010)

Hi:

I just finished a paper for my Greek Exegesis class on the last twelve verses in Mark. I did not realize how little textual evidence there is for the omission of the Traditional (long) ending.

There are 1800 mss of the Gospel of Mark. Only three omit the Traditional ending - Codex Aleph, B, and a mideval mss. According to Burgon, Tischendorf claims that the last four pages Aleph's copy of Mark (which omit the long ending) are a forgery.

Two mss out of 1800 mss of the Greek text omit the ending, and we are supposed to believe it is not genuine?

Unbelievable!

Blessings,

Rob


----------



## sastark (Mar 1, 2010)

Welcome to the wonderful world of Higher Criticism. Please check your brain at the door.


----------



## Mushroom (Mar 1, 2010)




----------



## MW (Mar 1, 2010)

Not only so, but space has been left for the omitted text.


----------



## jayce475 (Mar 1, 2010)

That's why it's remarkable how many openly embrace modern versions which question the authenticity of these verses.


----------



## Contra_Mundum (Mar 2, 2010)

I preached through Mark's Gospel, and happily preached the final 12vv of it as wholly inspired. I saw no reason to doubt it; I _heard_ no reason to doubt it.

JA Alexander's Commentary on Mark contains his thoughts on the ending (questions on which, he was aware of). If I may summarize him: the ending is *ideal*. And if I may add, I too have no reason to question it, in the way of content. Some object to certain terms (taking up serpents, e.g.) as reflecting a "later" theology and the influence of superstition.

In a word, those objections are bunkum. Interpreted against a biblical (OT) background; having a hermeneutic that is not a prisoner of the same rationalism that imposed on us a wooden, crass literalism; there is no reason at all that Mark could not have written those words. In truth, if Peter's preaching is summarized in the main body of the Gospel, the final vv of ch16 may best represent the inspired penman (Mark) himself.

Confessionally, we ought to consider how text from those verses are used as prooftexts for the WCF. Does how our father's considered: they well-heard the Savior's echo in those words, impact us?

"Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature." Mk.16:15. Just a pious sentiment? Not inspired from Holy Ghost? That's your decision. If anyone wishes to make it, based on *no more* than a 19th or 20th century scholar's opinion of the textual remains (scraps), OK.


I am not of the school that doesn't think there could never be an uninspired insertion in the text. I'm not wholly adverse to the idea of believing textual study/criticism (emphasis on "believing"). Myself, I have some serious questions about 1Jn.5:7-8, the _Comma_. Beside that one verset, I have yet to come to the conclusion that any part of the traditional Bible is inauthentic.


----------



## CalvinandHodges (Mar 2, 2010)

Hi Bruce:

Are those sermons available online?

Blessings,

Rob



Contra_Mundum said:


> I preached through Mark's Gospel, and happily preached the final 12vv of it as wholly inspired. I saw no reason to doubt it; I _heard_ no reason to doubt it.
> 
> JA Alexander's Commentary on Mark contains his thoughts on the ending (questions on which, he was aware of). If I may summarize him: the ending is *ideal*. And if I may add, I too have no reason to question it, in the way of content. Some object to certain terms (taking up serpents, e.g.) as reflecting a "later" theology and the influence of superstition.
> 
> ...


----------



## Jerusalem Blade (Mar 3, 2010)

Rob,

Are you familiar with _Perspectives on the Ending of Mark: Four Views_, Maurice Robinson (Author), Darrell Bock (Author), Keith Elliott (Author), Daniel Wallace (Author), David Alan Black (Editor). This doesn't change anything with regard to the authenticity of the last 12 verses, but shows some of the latest scholarship and arguments.


----------



## CalvinandHodges (Mar 3, 2010)

Hi Steve:

Yes, I have that book, but I cannot seem to locate it at this time. Was there something specific you wanted to point out in it?

Blessings,

Rob


----------



## Contra_Mundum (Mar 3, 2010)

CalvinandHodges said:


> Hi Bruce:
> Are those sermons available online?


No.


----------



## JennyG (Mar 4, 2010)

a few years ago I read Dean Burgon on The Last Twelve Verses of Mark.
I would hate to have to recapitulate his arguments at this point, but what I do vividly remember is how utterly convincing they are, as soon as you look into them.
I don't know what can really account for the blindness of modern textual critics- It seems to be "...make their ears heavy, and shut their eyes; lest they see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and understand with their heart, and convert, and be healed"


----------



## Kaalvenist (Mar 8, 2010)

Burgon's work can be read online at a few different places.

Internet Archive: Internet Archive: Free Download: The last twelve verses of the gospel according to S. Mark : vindicated against recent critical objectors and established
Google Books: The last twelve verses of the Gospel ... - Google Books
CCEL: Last Twelve Verses of the Gospel According to S. Mark Vindicated Against Recent Critical Objectors and Established | Christian Classics Ethereal Library


----------



## tommyb (Mar 9, 2010)

Interesting post. I also never knew how much evidence there was in support for the authenticity of those verses in Mark. Is this situation similar for the disputed verses in the Book of John (end of Chapter 7-beginning of Chapter8), the story of the adulterous woman? I recall reading a scholarly commentary by Kostenberger (sp?) where he pretty much accepted, based on the evidence, that these verses were inserted later.


----------



## BlackCalvinist (Mar 9, 2010)

I believe the last 12 verses to be legit, since they are cited by ECF's within 100 years of writing and about 100-150 prior to the earliest copy we have extant.


----------

