There’s a debate raging about whether Mark 16:9-20 was originally written by Mark, or if it was written latter and then added to Mark. Given that I have articles on the other two major textual variants (the Johannine Comma and the woman caught in adultery), I wanted to have one on the longer ending of Mark.
Thus I was gearing up for a very long and in-depth research project, when I discovered that a pastor/teacher that I greatly respect had already done a huge study. So I watched it. It was very complete, very thorough, and lined up perfectly with everything I’d already discovered.
Further, he was able to get access to some people/resources I would’ve had a near impossible time getting access to. In at least one case, those resources were decisive in their evidence.
Good stuff.
Thus instead of writing a long article, I’m going to embed his video below for your viewing pleasure. Fair warning: the video is about 2 hours and 10 minutes long because it’s very complete.
This video comes with my highest recommendation, with only one caveat: While I do definitely agree with his conclusion, I also definitely disagree on his short addendum. He admits right up front that it’s a strange addendum, and it is. I just needed to give that disclaimer. (The reason I reject his addendum is below the video, in expand/collapse text so I don’t spoiler the ending.)
Click Here to expand my thoughts on his addendum Also, I highly recommend his follow-up video, which frankly is incredible. His conclusion is near iron-clad in my opinion, but it does leave some lingering questions. He does a great job of answering those lingering questions. And that’s all for today folks. If you enjoyed those articles, you might also enjoy my articles on the Johannine Comma and the woman caught in adultery, and especially my article on textual criticism.
; Was it Original or Added?){kind=link}
Have you considered the heptadic structure argument of the last 12 verses of Mark covered in depth by the late Chuck Missler?
https://www.khouse.org/articles/2000/201
It is very compelling to me as a fingerprint of God upon the passage and its inclusion.
Well, I went to the TR and just started by double checking the claims. According to MS word and several online character counters, those verses only have 166 words, not 175 like he claims. That’s not even divisible by 7, calling everything he said into question. So I wouldn’t say that’s evidence at all, or perhaps he’s using a different version of the TR.
I wonder if there was doubt with Erasmus, Tyndale, the 50 scholars of the KJV, Calvin and Beza? Calvin and Beza had the ‘Comma’ in half of their 16 or so manuscripts each. Did they doubt the Markan ending? hmmm
scholars doubt that John ch.21, 1&2 Timothy, Titus and 2 Thessalonians should be in the bible. They say that they are obvious later additions. The style and word usage are different than the authors. Perhaps the translators of the ESV will remove or bracket them!