Mark- The Long Ending

This morning we arrive at one of the more difficult passages of Scripture to preach through. It is not impossible, but it is difficult and it will require that we dig into certain concepts of theology in order to come to a complete and solid conclusion about the text. With that said, this morning will be more in the lines of a teaching type of sermon, so I challenge all of you to do your best to follow along. Pretend you are back in school (for some of you, that will be harder to do that others- depending on how many years you have to go back in your memory banks to recall your time as a student).

This morning we arrive at what some theologians call the long ending of Mark. Now if you have a modern English translation in front of you, you may notice that there are brackets around verses 9-20, some of you may even have a footnote stating that “some of the earliest manuscripts do not include vv. 9-20”. This is because not all of the Greek manuscripts or copies of the NT agree with one another. There are actually 4 different endings to Mark recorded in various Greek manuscripts that we have available to study. 2 of them have little to no textual support and will not be the topic of our study this morning, but 2 of them do have a good amount of support in the available Greek manuscripts. Some of the earliest manuscripts end Mark at v. 8, while some of the later manuscripts include vv. 9-20.

So what are we to do about this problem? Perhaps you are sitting here this morning and have never heard anything about manuscripts or variant readings. This might be somewhat of a shock to you to hear that there are verses in your Bible that may not be original to the authors of Scripture. Well, the goal today is to talk about it. My goals are to help you understand a bit about the ancient Greek manuscripts of the NT that we have available to us today, to uphold and solidify your confidence in the reliability of Scripture, and to discuss the facts about the originality of Mark 16:9-20.

Greek NT Manuscripts

The Reliability of Scripture

The Originality of Mark 16:9-20

I. Greek NT Manuscripts

Before we can understand or even talk about the long ending of Mark we must have a general background understanding of how our NT is preserved in the Greek manuscripts.

A. God has chosen to preserve His Word in the multiple copies of the Greek NT

The first thing you need to understand is that we do not have at our disposal the original Greek manuscripts as penned by Matthew, or Luke, or Paul. They have been lost to time. And by the way, God could have preserved the original documents, but He chose not to. Why? Wouldn’t this all be a lot easier if God has chosen to preserve the originals? Yes and No. What do you think man would do if the original manuscripts had been preserved? Listen to what Paul says in the letter to the Romans:

Romans 1:25 KJV 1900

Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.

Do you think that human beings would worship the created thing, the originals if they still existed, instead of the Creator? I think we certainly would have. Also, even rare copies of the Scriptures today are the cause of wars and violence, imagine if we still had the originals. And there could be more reasons that we just are not aware of. I say all that to say this- God knew what He was doing when He chose to preserve His Word in the multiple copies of the Greek NT.

So with that being said- what do we have available to us today in terms of the Greek copies of the NT?

There are 5,656 Greek NT manuscripts available to us today.

We have more than 10,000 copies of the NT in Latin, more that 1,000 copies in other languages, and if you include references to Scripture by the early church fathers that number goes into the millions.

Of the extant Greek manuscripts, 59 have the complete text of the NT, most have a few verses, chapters, or books of the NT.

Manuscripts

The Greek manuscripts come to us in four main forms: papyri, uncials, minuscules, and lectionaries.

Papyri are manuscripts made of the papyrus plant (rather than animal skin, called vellum).

They are in uncial (capital) script. Because papyrus does not stand up as well as vellum, only about one hundred of these manuscripts have survived, most of them from Egypt. These manuscripts are early (second to eight centuries A.D.) and most of them have been discovered in the past one hundred years. Only nine of the papyri were discovered before the year 1900.

Uncials refer to manuscripts made of animal skins and are written in capital letter script.

Of the about three hundred uncials that we have, only one of them has the complete text of the NT. They date from about the third to the tenth century A.D.

Minuscules are written in a cursive script that has smaller, connected letters.

This script began to be used in the ninth century to save time and because the letters take less space than do uncial letters. These manuscripts (about 2,850 of them) are primarily from the Majority (or Byzantine) text types.

Lectionaries are service books of Scripture for church meetings.

There are more than 2,400 of them, and they are the least important of the Greek manuscripts.

So how do we get from 5,636 Greek NT manuscripts, that have variant readings, to the Greek NT that we use today (and then to our English translations)?

B. Scholars use a process called textual criticism to determine as closely as is possible the original text.

Textual criticism is often thought of as a negative and destructive thing. And we can blame many of today’s post modern thinkers for that. However, textual criticism does not need to be considered as evil. In fact look at the Bible you are holding in your hands. Every single one of you is holding a product of textual criticism. Why? Because every Greek text is a product of textual criticism and, thus, every English text is also a product of textual criticism.

So what exactly is textual criticism?

Textual criticism is the study of the copies and translations of any written composition of which the autograph (the original) is unknown, for the purpose of determining as closely as possible the original text.

Do we have the autograph (the original) manuscripts of the NT? No

What do we have? We have 5,636 copies of the originals.

Do all 5,636 copies agree with each other in content? No, there are differences, minimal differences, but still there are differences.

Then how do we know what the originals said? We use textual criticism.

So textual criticism is the process where scholars take the 5,656 copies and study them and compare them in order to determine to the best of their abilities the original text.

This is a difficult and complex process as you can imagine, but praise God, over the years there have been many brilliant scholars who have diligently, carefully, and tirelessly studied the Greek NT manuscripts that are available to us today.

II. The Reliability of Scripture

Now, the last thing that I want to happen if for any of you to lose confidence in the reliability of your Bibles. So let me say up front- we have the very Words of God. Our Bibles are reliable and trustworthy and dependable. Let me give you a few facts to support that claim.

A. Our Bible is the most remarkably preserved book in the ancient world.

God has given us 5,656 manuscripts containing all or parts of the Greek NT. Not only do we have a great number of manuscripts, but some of them are also very close in time to the originals that they represent. Some partial manuscripts of the NT are from the second century A.D., and many of them are within four centuries of the originals.

Let me put this information into a bit of context for you. No one questions the authenticity of other books of historical antiquity just because we do not posses the originals. Even though other ancient books have far fewer manuscripts than we posses of the NT. Compares to the NT look at the poverty of some other ancient documents.

10 manuscripts of Caesar's Gallic Wars (58 - 50 B.C.)

8 manuscripts of Thucydides’s Peloponnesian War (460 - 400 B.C.)

8 manuscripts of Herodotus’s History (ca. 480-425 B.C.)

2 manuscripts of Tacitus’s Histories and Annals (ca. A.D. 100)

The oldest manuscript of Caesar’s Gallic Wars is dated nine hundred years after Caesar. The oldest manuscripts of Thucydides and Herodotus date to A.D. 900. The two manuscripts of Tacitus's work are from the ninth and eleventh centuries. Again, the NT evidence is far superior to these; our earliest manuscripts of the NT is only one generation after the originals were written.

Therefore, the number and early date of the NT manuscripts gives us great confidence that God’s Word has been preserved in those documents.

No other ancient document in the history of the world has been preserved like our NT. God knew what He was doing when He preserved and protected His precious Word.

B. Less than 2% of the Greek manuscripts that we have today are significantly affected by the variations.

Of the variations that exist in the Greek NT manuscripts 98% of them are insignificant matters such as spelling, word order, differences in style, or confusion concerning synonyms.

Only around 1 to 2% of variant readings substantially affects the meaning of the text.

In fact I have been told by different seminary professors that if you were to compile all of the variations of the Greek NT that were significant in any way to the meaning of the text you could fit them on less than 1 page.

C. NO fundamental doctrine of the faith is changed by any textual variant.

Of those variants that significantly affect the meaning of the text, none of them affects the overall doctrinal content of Scripture or touches on any moral commandment or article of faith that is not clear elsewhere in Scripture.

So of all the NT Greek variants 98% of them are inconsequential. Only 1 to 2% of them have any significant affects on the meaning of the text, and of that 1 to 2% of variant readings NONE of them alter of affect the fundamental doctrines of Scripture. No moral command of God is called into question. None of them affect our overall doctrine.

What does that mean? It means that God has absolutely preserved His word, and whatever good English translation you are using, you have the Word of God. It is right in front of you, in your hands, and when you read it and apply it you will come to the same doctrine of Scripture that God intended you to come to. Whatever “good” version you read will lead you to the same doctrine, the same theology that God intended and, thus, IS the Word of God.

D. God’s Word contains repetition and is multidimensional in nature.

God’s word contains the principle of inspired repetition. By repetition, the ultimate Author of the Bible has protected us from the dangers of a miscopied text or an inadequate translation.

The Spirit of inspiration did not limit Himself to one statement about salvation by faith. This morning if I asked you to prove from the Bible that salvation is by faith alone, what passage of Scripture could you turn to? Is there only one text available for us to demonstrate that salvation is a matter of faith alone? NO, there are numerous passages in God’s Word that attribute genuine salvation to faith apart from our works. What about the distinctions between the law and God’s grace? How about the mission of the NT church, or the dangers of a literal lake of fire? Does the Bible offer more than one passage when dealing with these issues? Absolutely! So God’s Word is preserved through inspired repetition.

The 66 books of the Bible reflect a wonderfully orchestrated symphony of testimony.

Listen to Hebrews 1

Hebrews 1:1–2 KJV 1900

GOD, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets, Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds;

God’s Word is multidimensional- God spoke at different times and in different ways in the OT, now in the NT He has spoken unto us through His Son.

What kind of record do we have of the Son? Do we just have the book of Mark to go off of? No God committed the record of His Son to multiple pens- so we have a Matthew, Luke, and John. Then God entrusted the inspirited story to the letters of Paul, James, Peter Jude, and John- not always to provide new information, but to provide a wonderful, jewel-like, multi-faceted revelation of inspired Scripture.

So it is because of rather than in spite of multiple prophets, multiple apostles, multiple translations, and multiple interpreters that we can say with great confidence that we have in our hands the absolutely reliable Word of God. It is because the Bible was spread throughout the world in many thousands of copies that scholars can assure us that only a small percentage of the original autographs is in question, and none of which jeopardize a major doctrine of the faith.

God absolutely knew what He was doing when He chose to preserve His Word. Because we have so much data, because of all of the information to compare and contrast, we have an absolute assurance that what we hold in our hands in the very words of God.

III. The Originality of Mark 16:9-20

It is so very important to keep in mind what we studied this morning. If you were not in this morning’s service I highly encourage you to go onto our website and listen to it for yourself. By way of review:

God has chosen to preserve His Word in the multiple copies of the Greek NT

We no longer possess the original Greek manuscripts of the NT, rather we have over 5,000 copies of them in the Greek language, and many more in other languages.

Therefore, scholars must use a process called textual criticism to determine as closely as possible the original text. All Bibles are the result of some form of textual criticism. It is not a bad thing, but simply the process of comparing all of the copies of an autograph (an original) to determine as closely as possible what the original stated.

This in no way implies that our Bibles are unreliable- in fact quite the opposite. We can be confident that we hold the very Words of God when we read our English bibles. This is true for several reasons:

Our Bible is the most remarkable preserved text in the ancient world. No other existing copy of literature from the ancient world even comes close to the amount number of copies of the NT. So the number and the early date of the copies of the Greek NT gives us great confidence that God has preserved His Word in the manuscripts we have available to us today.

Less than 2% of the Greek manuscripts we have available today are significantly affected by any kind of variant.

No fundamental doctrine of the faith is changed by any of the textual variants

God’s Word contains repetition and is multidimensional in nature.

With that in mind we move on to the discussion of originality of Mark 16:9-20

A. External Evidence

As I said this morning there are actually 4 different endings to Mark found in the extant manuscripts. Two of them have very little to no support and are not even worth including in our study.

So the two endings that we will deal with today are the ending that includes vv. 9-20 or the longer ending. And the ending that simply ends with v.8 and does not include vv. 9-20.

The Short Ending (v.8)

vv. 9-20 are absent from the two earliest and generally regarded most reliable Greek manuscripts

Several early translations or versions omit 16:9-20 including the Old Latin, the Sinaitic Syriac manuscript, about one hundred Armenian manuscripts, and the two oldest Georgian manuscripts.

Neither Clement of Alexandria nor Origen shows any awareness of the existence of the longer ending, and Eusebius and Jerome attest that vv. 9-20 were absent from the majority of Greek copies of Mark know to them (the Greek manuscripts that were available to them have not survived to today)

The Long Ending (vv.9-20)

The traditional ending of Mark is present in the vast number of Greek NT Manuscripts. So the majority of Greek manuscripts do contain vv. 9-20. However most of these manuscripts are later in origin, they were further removed from the originals. Some of the manuscripts are earlier manuscripts, but most are not. However, there are a number of these manuscripts that have scribal notes stating that the older Greek copies lack vv. 9-20.

The earliest church father witness to part or all of the long ending are Irenaeus and Diatessaron, and perhaps Justin Martyr although not certain.

OK, Pastor Jon, you just said that most of the Greek NT Manuscripts have the long ending included. Doesn’t that prove that vv. 9-20 are original to Mark?

Not necessarily. Have you ever played the game “Telephone”?

You know where you start with the first person in the chain, and they whisper something into the next person’s ear and so on down the chain. Let’s say person #2 in the chain hears “The man was as cleaver as a fox”, but person #3 doesn’t hear the message quite right and they get “The man was as cleaver as a sock”. What message are people 4 -6 going to get? Socks right? Now the majority of the people are talking about socks, does that make their message the most like the original? No. Actually person #2 has it right, and we would tend to take his word over the rest. Why? Because he is closer to the source.

The long ending of Mark may have been added fairly early on, but just because it has the majority vote does not mean it is the correct reading. We must consider the source.

B. Internal Evidence

The vocabulary and style of vv. 9-20 are not consistent with the rest of Mark.

In these 12 short verses there are 18 words that do not otherwise appear in the book of Mark. Also there are several unique word forms and syntactic constructions. This is very strange that Mark would all of a sudden gain a different vocabulary just does not make sense.

The sudden shift in theme and subject from v.8 to v.9 is strange. In v.8 the subject of the sentence is the frightened women. Then in v.9 Jesus is the presumed subject- that is Jesus is no where specified- we have to supply Him as the subject.

Mary Magdalene is reintroduced in v.9 even though Mark has already made mention of here on three previous occasions. And the other women of v. 1-8 are forgotten.

In vv. 9-20 Jesus is for the first time in Mark referred to as the “Lord Jesus”, or simply “the Lord”, rather than Mark’s custom of calling Jesus by his give name. This would seem to have been derived from later Christian worship.

Vv. 9-20 present themes that are found no where else in Scripture. Particularly v. 18

Mark 16:18 KJV 1900

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.

There is mention of the Apostle Paul surviving a snake bite on the island of Malta in Acts 28, but nowhere in Scripture does it mention believer’s drinking poison.

So based on the external evidence, the earliest manuscripts do not contain the longer ending, and the internal evidence, the vocabulary and style are not consistent with Mark- it seems that vv. 9-20 are a later addition to Mark and are not part of the original Manuscript. The longer ending was added quite early on, probably the first part of the 2nd century. It was most likely added by believers who wished to “fix” the ending of Mark by adding in the resurrection appearance of Jesus.

So that leaves us with another question- did Mark intend to end his gospel with v.8?

Some scholars would argue that yes Mark did indeed intend to end his gospel with v. 8.

Others will say, that ending on v. 8 seems very strange for Mark. The purpose of Mark is to bring people to faith in the Divine Son of God, and to end with fearful women seems out of place. Also, v. 8 ends with a conjunction in the Greek. There are only three known example of Greek books ending with a conjunction.

So what happened to the ending of Mark? Two possibilities are suggested.

The ending was lost due to wear and tear on the last leaf of a codex.

Mark was interrupted or died before completing it. This could be a distinct possibility if Mark composed his Gospel during the rule of emperor Nero- Mark may have been one of the names among the martyrs of Nero’s reign.

Ultimately we will have to wait until we get to heaven to know for sure. But it does seem very likely that the last twelve verses are not original to Mark. Now we still have Matthew, and Luke, and John. We loose nothing of our theology by not having the last twelve verses of Mark. And as we have concluded today, we absolutely have the very Words of God in our hands. God’s Word that He masterfully, sovereignly, and purposefully preserved for you and me so that we might everything we need for faith and practice.