Does Mark 16 end at v8?

This is a trick to ignore Charismatic gifts/signs promised to Christians; an anti-Charismatic teaching/training/persuasion.

Let everyone follow his/her own persuasion.

16:8 她們就出來, 從墳墓那裡逃跑. 又發抖, 又驚奇, 甚麼也不告訴人. 因為她們害怕. - 和合本

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. - KJV

D.Lim: Who should think that a Gospel book ought to end at an anti-climax, ending with fear of the believers? Fleeing from the truth with amazement.

The majority of the disciples knew not what happened.

They did not preach and were not bold.

Jesus had not yet visited them.

No statement of baptism for believers, and salvation to follow.

No exocism. No speaking in tongues.

There was no Great Commission and no ascension of Christ. You really favor that?

Is this how you conceive the Gospel of Mark?

Is this how you would expect and accept from any Gospel Book?

What kind of Gospel is this to you?

By whose standard and ideal is Mark ending at 16v8?

How did you come to trust them wholeheartedly?

What axe are you grinding?

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. - KJV

16:10 她去告訴那向來跟隨耶穌的人. 那時他們正哀慟哭泣.

And she went and told them that had been with him, as they mourned and wept.

16:11 他們聽見耶穌活了, 被馬利亞看見, 卻是不信.

And they, when they had heard that he was alive, and had been seen of her, believed not.

16:12 這事以後, 門徒中間有兩個人, 往鄉下去. 走路的時候, 耶穌變了形像向他們顯現,

After that he appeared in another form unto two of them, as they walked, and went into the country.

16:13 他們就去告訴其餘的門徒. 其餘的門徒, 也是不信.

And they went and told it unto the residue: neither believed they them.

16:14 後來, 十一個門徒坐席的時候, 耶穌向他們顯現, 責備他們不信, 心裡剛硬. 因為他們不信那些在祂復活以後看見祂的人.

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.

16:15 祂又對他們說, 你們往普天下去, 傳福音給萬民聽. ((萬民原文作凡受造的))

And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature.

16:16 信而受洗的必然得救. 不信的必被定罪.

He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.

16:17 信的人必有神蹟隨著他們, 就是奉我的名趕鬼. 說新方言.

And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues;

16:18 手能拿蛇. 若喝了甚麼毒物, 也必不受害. 手按病人, 病人就必好了.

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.

16:19 主耶穌和他們說完了話, 後來被接到天上, 坐在神的右邊.

So then after the Lord had spoken unto them, he was received up into heaven, and sat on the right hand of God.

16:20 門徒出去, 到處宣傳 (.福音.), 主和他們同工, 用神蹟隨著, 證實所傳的道.阿們.

And they went forth, and preached every where, the Lord working with them, and confirming the word with signs following. Amen. - KJV

D.Lim: How is reliability defined?

The most reliable amongst the group of early manuscripts?

Or

The most reliable and early manuscripts?

This is to say that the manuscripts that contain these verses are not so reliable as these; yet they are included in all our translations.

This is to say that the KJV and all other translations have unreliable passages/verses stuck at the end of Mark 16v8.

What are the other ancient witnesses?

Are they manuscripts?

Or

Are they historical writings, people?

-=-

7 "But go, tell His disciples and Peter, '(10) He is going ahead of you to Galilee; there you will see Him, just as He told you.'"

8 They went out and fled from the tomb, for trembling and astonishment had gripped them; and they said nothing to anyone, for they were afraid.

NASV: 1)Later mss add vv 9-20

[[2] And they promptly reported all these instructions to Peter and his companions. And after that, Jesus Himself sent out through them from east to west the sacred and imperishable proclamation of eternal salvation.]

2)A few late mss and versions contain this paragraph, usually after v 8; a few have it at the end of ch

D.Lim: If the Gospel of Mark ends at Mk 16v8, the gospel is less a gospel for the women(tomb visitors) did not get the message. They were afraid, for trembling and astonishment had gripped them.

D.Lim: Here in this revered, highly literal translation, the footnote 1 tells us that later mss add vv9-20. Later but not proved to be copies of the former ones. They are not proved to be dependent. The omission of the former does not prove the later ones to be less accurate in including them.

The few late mss and versions agreed and included these verses, even before the Pentecostal and Charismatic Movements. Not a matter of conspiracy.

-=-

[Some of the earliest manuscripts do not include 16:9-20.]

D.Lim: Some but not all? No expression about which ones are more reliable.

Which others are there?

Missing out these verses we throw The Great Commission out for the sack of ousting Charismatic Movement, Christians and doctrine. Sad!

The Great Commission starts at v14.

Some manuscripts end the book with 16:8; others include verses 9-20 immediately after verse 8. A few manuscripts insert additional material after verse 14; one Latin manuscript adds after verse 8 the following: But they reported briefly to Peter and those with him all that they had been told. And after this, Jesus himself sent out by means of them, from east to west, the sacred and imperishable proclamation of eternal salvation. Other manuscripts include this same wording after verse 8, then continue with verses 9-20

D.Lim: The ESV being( I believe) the most accurate English translation, contains these verses.

The Latin manuscripts were done while there was Rome and the early witnesses of Greek manuscripts being present in the Roman library. They witnessed what was there.

-=-

16:8 NU-Text and M-Text omit quickly.

16:18 NU-Text reads and in their hands they will.

16:20 Verses 9-20 are bracketed in NU-Text as not original. They are lacking in Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Vaticanus, although nearly all other manuscripts of Mark contain them.

D.Lim: Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Vaticanus are the oldest texts used and revered by advocates of the oldest text method. They are not respected by advocates of the majority text method (ie: upholders of the KJV and Received Text). They are not worshipped by advocates of Eclectic method.

They(Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Vaticanus) are not proven to be more reliable just because they are oldest. They differ with the majority text in many places.

-=-

D.Lim: Modern scholarship/translations do not omit these verses.

-=-

ANOTHER OLD ENDING

TO MARK'S GOSPEL <footnote rnd=134516985 idx=3 >16.9,10 Another Old Ending to Mark's Gospel: Some manuscripts and early translations have both this shorter ending and the longer one (verses 9-20). </footnote>

9-10The women quickly told Peter and his friends what had happened. Later, Jesus sent the disciples to the east and to the west with his sacred and everlasting message of how people can be saved forever.

Footnotes

16.9 One Old Ending to Mark's Gospel: Verses 9-20 are not in some manuscripts.

16.19 right side: See the note at 12.36.

16.9,10 Another Old Ending to Mark's Gospel: Some manuscripts and early translations have both this shorter ending and the longer one (verses 9-20).

-=-

contains verses up to v20.

-=-

[Shorter Ending of Mark]

Then they reported all these instructions briefly to Peter and his companions. Afterward Jesus himself sent them out from east to west with the sacred and unfailing message of salvation that gives eternal life. Amen.

D.Lim: This inclusion expresses the importance of The Great Commission.

[Longer Ending of Mark]

9It was early on Sunday morning when Jesus rose from the dead, and the first person who saw him was Mary Magdalene, the woman from whom he had cast out seven demons. 10She went and found the disciples, who were grieving and weeping. 11But when she told them that Jesus was alive and she had seen him, they didn't believe her.

12Afterward he appeared to two who were walking from Jerusalem into the country, but they didn't recognize him at first because he had changed his appearance. 13When they realized who he was, they rushed back to tell the others, but no one believed them.

14Still later he appeared to the eleven disciples as they were eating together. He rebuked them for their unbelief--their stubborn refusal to believe those who had seen him after he had risen.

15And then he told them, "Go into all the world and preach the Good News to everyone, everywhere. 16Anyone who believes and is baptized will be saved. But anyone who refuses to believe will be condemned. 17These signs will accompany those who believe: They will cast out demons in my name, and they will speak new languages.[3] 18They will be able to handle snakes with safety, and if they drink anything poisonous, it won't hurt them. They will be able to place their hands on the sick and heal them."

19When the Lord Jesus had finished talking with them, he was taken up into heaven and sat down in the place of honor at God's right hand. 20And the disciples went everywhere and preached, and the Lord worked with them, confirming what they said by many miraculous signs.

Footnotes

16:2 Greek on the first day of the week; also in 16:9.

16:8 The most reliable early manuscripts conclude the Gospel of Mark at verse 8. Other manuscripts include various endings to the Gospel. Two of the more noteworthy endings are printed here.

16:17 Or new tongues; some manuscripts omit new.

D.Lim: There are very few early manuscripts. 2 in existence. Which ones or others are less reliable amongst the oldest manuscripts?

This version still claim that vv9-20 are noteworthy instead of unreliable.

-=-

1969 by Christian Literature International

contains all vv9-20.

-=-

Jay P. Green, Sr.

Hendrickson Publishers1987

Mk16vv9-20 are included with no footnote throughout.

-=-

Westcott and Hort

Macmillan & Co.

Mk16vv9-20 are included on a separate page(p113) as the previous verse ends right at the end of p112.

-=-

Revised Version (from Westcott and Hort Greek Text advocating the Oldest Text Method)

Humphrey Milford

Oxford University Press 1937

Cambridge University Press London

Mk16 vv9-20 are included.

-=-

London

The British and Foreign Bible Society 1958:

Mk16vv9-20 are included. Apparatus tells that Aleph, B Cl Or Eus and some others finished at v8. Many variation in the proceeding verses are also included.

-=-

Newly translated from the Vulgate Latin and Authorized by the Archibishops and Bishops of England and Wales

London

Burns Oates and Washbourne Ltd 1946:

Vv9-20. It seems that the manuscripts of St. Mark were mutilated at the end in very early times; the whole of this chapter being sometimes omitted (St. Jerome Ad Hedyb. Q.3). And in a few of our existing manuscripts these last twelve verses are wanting, which fact (together with the abruptness of their style) has made some critics think that they were added from another source. But they are evidently a primitive account, and there is no reason why we should not ascribe their inclusion here to St. Mark.

V9 John XX 14. V12 Luke XXIV 13.

-=-

A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament (third edition)

Bruce M. Metzger

United Bible Societies 1975

. . Thus on the basis of good external evidence and strong internal considerations it appears that the earliest ascertainable form of the Gospel of Mark ended with 16v8. At the same time, however, out of deference to the evident antiquity of the longer ending and its importance in the textual tradition of the Gospel, the Committee decided to include verses 9-20 as part of the text, but to enclose them within double square brackets to indicate that they are the work of an author other than the evangelist.

D.Lim: By whose ideal and standards are these bssis good external evidence and strong internal considerations?

D.Lim: It always sound Liberal when scholars try to tear any book of scriptures apart by assigning different portions and different styles to different independent sources and authors, thus disowning integrity of the books and unity of themes and authority. It is common that books of the Bible have style change appearing to be works of different authors. (I have style change in my own writings, and I testify they are all my personal expression and comment. Integrity does not equate coherence.)

It is not a matter of who wrote what or whether a single authorship can be asign to certain book.

It is a matter of recognising Divine inspiration at particular times, and the unity of canon.

Whether Mark (or any Gospel book) is written by a single author has nothing to do with its authority and witness as one compilation or tradition or source.

No one is proving that later manuscripts are copies of the oldest ones found, only to have vv9-20 added to Mark.

Many are assuming that Jerome must have been exposed to the whole picture of manuscripts, able to access all sources. By this, many are assuming Roman Catholic supremacy and domination of the whole church. Many failed to recognise independence of Christian tradition and churches down the centuries. Many cannot think (freely)independent to the teachings instilled to them by their professors and institutes. Many are assuming that scholars and writers are free from sin and human deficiency.

The setting in order or a narrative is not necessarily singularity of authorship. It could be compilation, and editorial. News in any broadcast, report and newsmedium is not inspiring doubt by having editorial/editors and relays. Somehow when it comes to truth reporting and record in scriptures people/scholars apply much more restrictive rules/principles.

Luke tried to present an orderly account (v3). He could still present dictation of others. He probably had shorthand skill and took word to word record at times.

Mark did not start with any assuring remark that it is a story of his single authorship. He is free to use any record. Matthew and John show no hint of restriction either.

The messages any scripture is to bring across are not restricted by the scholastic game or decision of assigning the work to one single author.

Some books of scriptures such as Books of Moses, Chronicles, Psalms and Proverbs are certainly product of multi-authorship. The NT is not without example (eg: Romans and writings of John) hinting multi-authorship and change of writing style.

-=-

Chr. Wordsworth, D.D. 1807 - 1885 Vol.1 Matthew to Acts

Rivingtons, Waterloo Place London, Oxford, and Cambridge.

P 153-154:

The fact is, that the whole of this portion (9-20) is found in all the extant Greek Manuscripts of St. Mark, with one or two exceptions, particularly the Vatican and Sinaitic MSS.

It is found in almost all the Versions of the Gospel; in the very ancient Curetonian Syriac Version lately discovered, verses 17-20 are preserved; the rest of the Version of this Gospel being lost.

But, as Cardinal Mai has shown (p255), this testimony as to the copies is controverted by other evidence; and, as if this way of removing the difficulty did not quite satisfy his own mind, Eusebius then proceeds to offer another solution.

It appears, also, that the Ammonian Sections and the Eusebian Canons were not originally continued beyond verse 8.

But the remarks of Eusebius (it may be observed) are by no means of the same force, as a direct testimony would be, which affirmed that this portion (vv9-20) is not found in the MSS. of this Gospel.

Besides, if it had been true, that these verses were not found in the MSS. Generally in the fourth century, how is it, that of the many hundreds of MSS. Which exist now, there should be only one, of any note, in which these verses, and the whole of the residue, to the end of the Gospel, are not found? How is it that they exist also in almost all Versions of the Gospel? The circumstance that Eusebius and others appeal to the absence of these verses (9, 10) from some MSS. In order to get rid of a difficulty, suggests the belief that some copyists might be disposed to conclude the Gospel with verse 8, ethobounto gar, and so the omission might be propagated; and it also leads to a belief that these verses, supposed to contain a difficulty, were not very likely to be added to the Gospel of St. mark by an unauthorized hand, or to be received, as they have been received, in almost every extant Manuscript and Version of the Gospel.

Besides, it may be added this portion is acknowledged by S. Hippolytus (scholar of S. Irenaeus), Bishop of Portus, near Rome; and so the Roman Church, for which this Gospel was specially written, bears witness to it. (See Apost. Const. In Hippolyt. Ed. Fabric. I.245.) So S. Leo, ed. Lug. P.19; Gregory the Great, Bishop of Rome, cited below, v. 17. It is acknowledged by S. Augustine (de Cons. Ev. Iii. 24), and is commented on as authentic by Bede (p. 257), Theophylact (p.263), and Euthym. (p.116), and in the Catena Aurea.

Besides, if the portion beginning with the word anastas has not been a continuation of what precedes, but an independent pericope, it is probable that the word Jesus would have been found in the first sentence.

It has, indeed, been confidently asserted from internal evidence that this portion is not from the pen of St. mark himself. Many expressions occur in this section which are not found in any portion of St. Mark; e.g. poreuomai used thrice (10, 12, 15), and in no other place of St. mark; theaomai used twice (11, 14), and in no other place of St. Mark: eteros used v. 12, and in no other place of St. mark: ekeinos, put absolutely without a substantive three times (10, 13, 20), and in no other place of St. Mark; and o kurios used twice for Christ (19, 20), and in no other place of St. mark; and the less common words, parakolouthew, epakoloutheo, sunergew, bebaioo.

So great a change as that wrought by the Resurrection of Christ might suggest a change of style; as changes are made in jusic to mark changes of action and feeling.

After all, even if the Author of these verses were doubtful, it would suffice us to know that this portion of the Gospel is received by the Universal Church, bearing witness to it in the great body of Manuscripts and Versions, and that it is received and read by her as Holy Scripture; in short, that it is received as the Word of God, by the Spirit of God, in the Church of God.

Let us add, that the fact to which reference has been made viz. The supposed uncertainty of authorship is suggestive of very instructive reflections.

We do not know who was employed by the Holy Spirit to write the Book of Job, or the conclusion of the Books of Deuteronomy, or of Joshua, or many of the Psalms; but we receive them as Canonical Scripture, and as the work of the Holy Ghost.

If we know, by whose hand every book of Scripture was penned, we might be tempted to imagine that the Inspiration of Scripture depended on the writers, by whose instrumentality Scripture was written, and not on the Holy Ghost, who employed them.

Our ignorance of the human instrument raises our eyes to the Divine Agent; it leads us to consider, why we receive the Books of Scripture as Scripture? We do not receive them because they were indited by Moses or by David, by St. Matthew or by St. Paul, - but because they are inspired by the Holy Ghost, and have been received as such by the Voice of Christ speaking in His Body, the Church, to which He has promised His own presence and guidance for ever.

Even, therfore, if this portion of the Gospel had not been written by St. Mark, still it is as much a part of the Gospel as what was written by him; and it serves to bring out forcibly the great truth, that though all the Books of Scripture were anonymous, they would be no less Scripture than they are now. It reminds us of our duty to distinguish, in sacred things, the human channel from the Divine Source. It speaks of the solemn obligation under which we are, to receive the Scriptures and the Sacraments, - not because they are ministered to us by the hands of this or that man, - however holy he may be, - but because they flow from the one fountain and well-spring of all Truth and Grace, - the Wisdom and the Love of God.

(D.Lim: We have here, an argument in scholarly consideration, from some non-charismatics, on affirming the last 12 verses of Mark to be Scripture. Let the students of the Truth of God be not fooled by their anti-charismatic institutes, churches, preachers and teachers. Let the students of the Truth of God be more scholarly, studious and work hard to reach conclusions, instead of being gullible as many Liberals and Atheists accuse Christians of being.

Let this study and exposition be a warning and stimulation.

Fashion yourselves to be agreeable to God Almighty.)

-=-

Marvin R. Vincent, D.D.

Macdonald Publishing Company, Mclean, Virginia 22102 p233-235

P233:

It is omitted from the two oldest manuscripts.

D.Lim: By literal criticism, some would believe that vv9-20 were the writing of another author. This is no confirmation for the doctrine that these verses are unscriptural, not belonging to the Gospel of Mark. No one is expressing rejection of the idea of multiple authorship.

P235:

D.Lim: This commentary from advocates of the Oldest Text Method (Westcott and Hort) named many scholars and affirms the validity of the 12 verses as Scripture.

-=-

D.Lim: I heard of an anti-Charismatic preaching telling people that the majority of the best scholars omit Mk16vv9-20, dismissing them as non-reliable and not part of the Bible.

I wonder who these scholars are. How the preacher/Theologian came to trust them.

I wonder how all translations old and new contain these verses if the majority of scholars dismiss them as unBiblical.

The NIV, in my opinion, is one of the most inaccurate English translation in circulation. I would not take words of scholars and producers of the NIV seriously.

3 of the most accurate English translations, in my opinion, the NASV, NKJV and ESV do not express that the most reliable and earliest manuscripts omit Mk 16 vv9-20.

Who would like to prove that scholars behind the NIV are better than those of these 3 translations?

D.Lim: I am yet to find translation that omit these verses, and point out that they are not trustworthy or noteworthy.

By their inclusion, we need to face their significance, their pointing to promises of Jesus to signs and charismatic gifts amongst Christians.

We are not living in olden times when readers are restricted by the copies/manuscripts of their particular tradition. Today, we have texts of different traditions, thousands of them, works of comparison, commentary and eclectic compilation. It is left for us to decide which branch of thoughts to follow.

For the Anti-charismatics who favor the removal of Mark16 vv9-20 to disown promises of God and to put down Charismatics, in the name of orthodoxy and sound scholarship, they would play fair to have a Gospel of Mark that ends with fear and without speech(somehow hard to preach such partial Gospel and have to turn to other books for missing extras such as the Great Commission, ascension and continuation of Christian history, Acts. . ), also many of their accustomed believes have the need for removal and revision, as the oldest texts differ from the majority texts and others. The Revised Version was widely rejected for its use of the Oldest Texts and revising the KJV, having 16,000 variation.

Does it not dawn on anyone(Anti-charismatics and Evangelicals) that no Modern English Bible(translation) is purely from the revered oldest texts?

Personally I am glad that the oldest texts are not all I have.

David Lim is founder of The Church of God Jesus Christ, a denomination with Evangelical footing and Charismatic doctrine/persuasion.

-=-

NLT Acts 19:11-12 God gave Paul the power to do unusuall miracles. So that even when handkerchiefs or cloths that had touched his skin were placed on sick people, they were healed of their diseases, and any evil spirits within them came out.

-=-