Latest / Reformed Thinking / The Long Ending of Mark as Canonical Verity

Transcript

The Long Ending of Mark as Canonical Verity · Reformed Thinking

• 0:00
  Imagine looking at a medical X-ray of a broken arm.
• 0:04
  It is pretty binary, right? The bone is fractured or it is
• 0:07
  not. Yeah.
• 0:08
  That is what you expect. Right.
• 0:09
  You expect that same clear cut precision when you open your
• 0:12
  Bible, but if you turn to the final chapter of the Gospel of
• 0:16
  Mark, the X-ray machine sort of malfunctions.
• 0:20
  It really does. Welcome to Reform Thinking.
• 0:23
  Today we are undertaking a deep dive into the source material
• 0:27
  concerning the really intense text critical debate over the
• 0:30
  ending of Mark's Gospel. It is a massive debate.
• 0:33
  It is because you open your Bible, you read through the
• 0:36
  resurrection account, and right there after verse 8, you hit a
• 0:39
  bracket or maybe a solid line or a marginal note telling you that
• 0:42
  the earliest manuscripts lack verses 9 through 20.
• 0:45
  Yeah. Right at the climax of the
• 0:47
  story. Precisely 12 whole verses of
• 0:49
  Scripture are placed under a microscope of doubt, so the
• 0:53
  source for today is Maurice A Robinson's extensive academic
• 0:55
  paper defending the traditional long ending as canonical truth.
• 0:59
  And approaching this from a Protestant Christian perspective
• 1:03
  rooted in Reformed theology in the Westminster Confession, this
• 1:07
  raises a huge issue for us. Oh, totally, because we hold a
• 1:10
  really high view of scriptural preservation.
• 1:12
  Right. The Confession teaches that the
• 1:14
  Old and New Testaments were kept pure in all ages by God's
• 1:18
  singular care and Providence. So if that is true, how do we
• 1:23
  assess the tangible, objective data defined the genuine text,
• 1:28
  especially when modern critics challenge 12 whole verses after,
• 1:33
  you know, 1600 years of universal acceptance?
• 1:36
  That is the big question. And this matters to you, the
• 1:38
  listener, because this is not just some dry academic exercise.
• 1:42
  This is about the reliability of the Bible you read everyday.
• 1:44
  We have to see how tangible historical facts must override
• 1:48
  speculative theories. Yeah, setting that theological
• 1:51
  framework really clarifies the gravity of the problem we are
• 1:54
  looking at today, because when we analyze the manuscript
• 1:57
  history, we are not looking at a simple case of like a few
• 2:00
  missing letters or a misspelled word.
• 2:02
  No, not at all. We are dealing with four
• 2:04
  distinct known endings to the Gospel of Mark, so let us lay
• 2:08
  out the pangible data for you. First we have the short ending.
• 2:13
  OK, what does that look like? This is where the Gospel stops
• 2:15
  abruptly at Mark 16.8 with the phrase for they were afraid.
• 2:20
  Wow, just a full stop. Right.
• 2:22
  Yeah, a full stop. There is no post resurrection
• 2:25
  appearance of Jesus. There is no Commission to the
• 2:28
  disciples, just an empty tomb and fearful women fleeing an
• 2:32
  absolute terror. There's a harsh way to end the
• 2:34
  book. It is then.
• 2:35
  Second we have what is called the intermediate ending.
• 2:38
  This is a brief, rather tidy edition placed after verse 8.
• 2:42
  It gives a quick summary about the women reporting to Peter,
• 2:46
  and it concludes with Jesus sending out the sacred and
• 2:48
  incorruptible proclamation of eternal salvation from east to
• 2:51
  West. That sounds very formal.
• 2:53
  Very formal. Third, we have the long ending.
• 2:56
  This encompasses the traditional verses 9 through 20 that most
• 2:59
  Christians are highly familiar with.
• 3:01
  Right, the ones with Mary Magdalene and the Ascension.
• 3:04
  Yes, it features the appearances to Mary, the two on the road,
• 3:08
  the 11 disciples, and that final ascension.
• 3:11
  And finally there is 1/4 variation.
• 3:13
  It is the long ending with the Freer Logen expansion.
• 3:17
  The Freer Logen. That sounds like something out
• 3:19
  of a sci-fi novel. It does, right?
• 3:21
  It is found in a specific Greek manuscript known as MSW or 03/2.
• 3:27
  It inserts this massive paragraph after verse 14.
• 3:31
  What does the paragraph say? The disciples basically excuse
• 3:34
  their unbelief by describing the current era as an age of
• 3:37
  lawlessness and unbelief under Satan.
• 3:40
  They claim Satan prevented the truth of God from prevailing,
• 3:43
  and then Jesus replies to them that the term of Satan's
• 3:45
  dominion has been fulfilled. That is wild.
• 3:48
  It really is So. Looking at these four options,
• 3:50
  the scholarly consensus over the last century and a half shifted
• 3:54
  dramatically. Well, for a long time, critics
• 3:56
  operated on a lost ending theory.
• 3:59
  They assumed Mark wrote a proper conclusion that somehow
• 4:01
  physically detached and vanished in the earliest days of copying.
• 4:04
  OK, so a physical accident? Right.
• 4:07
  But more recently, the critical viewpoint shifted toward the
• 4:10
  idea that Mark intentionally stopped at verse aid.
• 4:13
  They argue he wanted to leave the reader in a state of
• 4:16
  unresolved suspense. You know, I was reading through
• 4:18
  the source material and there was this hilarious but highly
• 4:22
  illustrative story about a library barcode.
• 4:26
  Oh yes, I saw that. It totally captures how physical
• 4:29
  loss actually works in the real world.
• 4:32
  So a seminary library use barcode labels on the spines of
• 4:36
  their books and there was a hard character limit on the printer.
• 4:39
  Right, it could only print so many letters.
• 4:41
  Exactly. I mean specifically, it cut
• 4:43
  things off abruptly. A book published by the Center
• 4:46
  for Hermeneutical Studies in Hellenistic and Modern Culture
• 4:49
  was physically truncated. And what did the label?
• 4:51
  Say the resulting label. Read Center for Hermeneutical
• 4:54
  Studies in Hell. That is just incredible.
• 4:56
  It is so funny, but that is what a physical loss looks like,
• 4:59
  right? It cuts off mid sentence or mid
• 5:01
  word, leaving absolute nonsense behind.
• 5:04
  Yeah, a clean break is super rare.
• 5:06
  Right. So if the original ending of
• 5:08
  Mark was physically lost due to a missing leaf or torn scroll,
• 5:12
  what are the odds that the tear happened right after the Greek
• 5:16
  word for afraid? The odds are basically 0.
• 5:19
  Right. Concluding A grammatically
• 5:21
  complete, albeit emotionally jarring sentence, it seems
• 5:26
  highly improbable that a random physical accident would roduce
• 5:29
  such a clean stop. That barcode analogy highlights
• 5:32
  the randomness of physical damage perfectly.
• 5:35
  But before we get into the surviving manuscripts, could you
• 5:37
  explain the mechanics of how a text would even physically
• 5:40
  detach in the 1st century? Sure.
• 5:43
  So in the 1st century, texts were written on scrolls made of
• 5:46
  papyrus. The end of a scroll is the
• 5:48
  innermost part, wrapped tightly around the wooden roller.
• 5:51
  OK, so it is on the inside. Yes, it is actually the most
• 5:54
  protected part of the entire document.
• 5:56
  The outside edge, the beginning of the text, is what gets
• 5:59
  frayed, torn and damaged from constant handling.
• 6:02
  That makes total sense. You're grabbing the outside to
• 6:04
  unroll it. Right.
• 6:05
  For the ending of a scroll to break off cleanly at the
• 6:08
  specific end of a sentence without damaging the preceding
• 6:11
  lines stretches credulity. So a scroll tearing off cleanly
• 6:15
  at the end is basically impossible.
• 6:17
  Pretty much now later when Christian shifted to using the
• 6:20
  Codex, which is the modern book format with bound pages, losing
• 6:24
  the final leaf is more plausible.
• 6:26
  Because a page could just fall out.
• 6:27
  Yes, but again, a lost lift would cut the text mid sentence,
• 6:31
  just like your barcode example. The clean grammatical break at
• 6:35
  verse 8 suggests we are not looking at accidental physical
• 6:39
  damage. We are looking at a deliberate
• 6:41
  phenomenon. So somebody stopped writing on
• 6:43
  purpose. Yes.
• 6:44
  This requires us to examine the actual physical Greek
• 6:48
  manuscripts that survived antiquity, particularly the ones
• 6:51
  that omit verses 9 through 20. Wait, before we look at those
• 6:55
  specific manuscripts, The source of material constantly refers to
• 6:59
  eclectic editors and different text types like Byzantine or
• 7:01
  Alexandria. Yes, good catch.
• 7:04
  For someone listening who might picture a monk with a quill,
• 7:06
  when we say editor, what do modern eclectic editors actually
• 7:09
  do? Are they physically cutting and
• 7:12
  pasting ancient texts? That is a crucial clarification
• 7:15
  to make. Modern eclectic editors are
• 7:18
  scholars who sit down with all the varying manuscript copies we
• 7:21
  possess and try to reconstruct the original text.
• 7:24
  So they are not copying it out by hand anymore.
• 7:26
  No, they are sitting at desks comparing documents.
• 7:29
  You can think of eclectic editing like building a mosaic.
• 7:33
  The editor has thousands of different colored tiles.
• 7:36
  OK, the tiles represent different manuscripts.
• 7:38
  Yes, representing different manuscript readings, and they
• 7:41
  choose which tile they think belongs in the original picture.
• 7:45
  They are making subjective judgments based on a set of
• 7:48
  rules they have developed. Oh, so it is highly subjective?
• 7:52
  Very. Subjective As for the text
• 7:54
  types, scholars have categorized the surviving manuscripts into
• 7:57
  rough families based on their geographical origins and shared
• 8:01
  characteristics. Like regional accents for
• 8:03
  manuscripts. That is a great way to put it.
• 8:06
  The Alexandrian text type comes from Egypt.
• 8:09
  It is highly favored by modern critics, who believe it is the
• 8:12
  most pristine. OK, so Egypt is Alexandria,
• 8:14
  right? Then the Byzantine text type
• 8:17
  comes from the Greek speaking region of the Byzantine Empire.
• 8:21
  It is the vast majority text, representing over 90% of all
• 8:24
  surviving manuscripts. 90% That is a massive majority.
• 8:28
  It is huge. And then the Western text type
• 8:31
  comes from Rome and North Africa.
• 8:34
  When eclectic editors put together the modern Greek New
• 8:36
  Testament, they tend to heavily favor the Alexandrian tiles,
• 8:40
  even if the Byzantine pile has thousands more tiles in it.
• 8:43
  I really appreciate that breakdown.
• 8:44
  It makes the subjective nature of the whole process much
• 8:46
  clearer. So, returning to the external
• 8:49
  evidence, the entire modern argument for omitting the long
• 8:53
  ending relies almost exclusively on two major Alexandrian
• 8:56
  manuscripts. Yes, from the 4th century.
• 8:58
  Right Codex and Atticus and Codex Vaticanus.
• 9:01
  The source indicates that if you remove these two witnesses from
• 9:04
  the equation, the debate basically evaporates.
• 9:06
  It totally evaporates. The omission relies almost
• 9:09
  entirely on those two specific codices, but when we physically
• 9:13
  examine them, they exhibit highly unusual physical quirks
• 9:16
  right at the end of Mark. Quirks like what?
• 9:18
  Well, in Codex Vaticanus, the scribe finishes Mark 16.8 near
• 9:24
  the bottom of the second column of the page.
• 9:26
  Then, contrary to his standard practice throughout the entire
• 9:30
  manuscript, he leaves the rest of that second column completely
• 9:33
  blank. OK, that is weird.
• 9:35
  And he leaves the entire third column completely blank too.
• 9:38
  A blank column of that size in such a highly valued manuscript
• 9:42
  is a glaring anomaly, and Codec Synapticus is equally suspicious
• 9:47
  at this specific location. The original pages were removed
• 9:50
  and replaced with what is known as a cancel sheet.
• 9:54
  I hear what you were saying about the blank columns in the
• 9:56
  cancel sheet, but let me push back on that for a second.
• 9:59
  Go for it. Couldn't the blank column just
• 10:01
  mean describe ran out of ink? Or maybe he realized he made a
• 10:04
  spelling error and stopped. Or maybe his shift was over for
• 10:07
  the day. Why do we immediately jump to
• 10:09
  the conclusion that he knew about the long ending and was
• 10:12
  leaving space for it? It is a fair question, but we
• 10:15
  have to understand the manufacturing process of a 4th
• 10:18
  century codex. These Bibles were written on
• 10:20
  vellum. Which is animal skin, right?
• 10:21
  Right. Yes, prepared animal skin vellum
• 10:25
  was exceedingly expensive to produce.
• 10:28
  A complete Bible like Vaticanus required the skins of an entire
• 10:32
  herd of sheep or calves. The entire herd, just for one
• 10:36
  book. Exactly.
• 10:37
  I mean, yes, precisely. Scribes did not waste space.
• 10:41
  The parchment was carefully pricked with a pin and scored
• 10:44
  with a straight edge to maximize every square.
• 10:46
  Inch. So leaving blank space was like
• 10:48
  throwing away money. It was incredibly wasteful.
• 10:51
  A scribe does not just leave an entire column and a half blank
• 10:54
  because he needs a break. Throughout the rest of
• 10:56
  Vaticanus, when a book ends, the next book begins on the very
• 11:00
  next column. Oh, so it is just jam packed
• 11:02
  everywhere else? Everywhere else, yeah.
• 11:04
  The space left after Mark 16.8 is the only blank column in the
• 11:08
  entire New Testament portion of that manuscript.
• 11:10
  The only one that is a massive detail.
• 11:13
  It is and it is the exact amount of space required to write the
• 11:16
  long ending. This physical evidence proves
• 11:19
  the scribe knew of a longer ending, deliberately left space
• 11:22
  for it, and perhaps was waiting for an exemplar manuscript to
• 11:25
  verify the specific. Wording that makes a ton of
• 11:27
  sense. What about the other one?
• 11:28
  Sign Atticus. Regarding sign Atticus, a cancel
• 11:31
  sheet means a later corrector literally cut out the original
• 11:36
  folios. They cut the actual pages out of
• 11:38
  the book. Just slice them right out.
• 11:40
  Slice them Out rewrote the end mark in the beginning of Luke
• 11:43
  and sewed the new pages back into the binding.
• 11:45
  That is shady. Very, and this corrector spread
• 11:49
  out his letters, stretching the text out to force it to end at
• 11:53
  16.8. Like a middle school student
• 11:55
  trying to hit a page requirement on an essay.
• 11:57
  That is the perfect comparison. You contrast this highly
• 12:01
  suspicious behavior in these two Alexandrian manuscripts with the
• 12:04
  overwhelming support for the long ending across the rest of
• 12:08
  the manuscript tradition. Because the rest of them have
• 12:10
  it. Yes, dozens of manuscripts
• 12:12
  across the Byzantine, Western, and Cesarean text type support
• 12:16
  versus 9 through 20. That visual of a scribe actively
• 12:19
  stretching out his handwriting to fill space is staggering.
• 12:23
  It points to a deliberate editorial decision, not a
• 12:26
  faithful copying process. Totally deliberate.
• 12:29
  And this brings up a striking inconsistency cited in the
• 12:32
  source material regarding how modern eclectic editors treat
• 12:36
  these manuscripts. The source points out that
• 12:39
  modern editors often reject certain readings even when those
• 12:42
  readings have incredibly strong and non Byzantine support.
• 12:45
  Yes, they do it all the time. But they treat Mark entirely
• 12:48
  differently. Take First Corinthians 15.51 as
• 12:51
  an example. Right the We shall not all sleep
• 12:54
  passage. The modern critical text accepts
• 12:57
  the Byzantine reading there, despite the fact that
• 13:00
  alternative readings have strong support from favored Alexandrian
• 13:03
  manuscripts, Western manuscripts, and early Church
• 13:06
  fathers like Origen and Augustine.
• 13:08
  So they side with the Byzantine majority there, right?
• 13:11
  In that case, the critical editors look at a strong
• 13:13
  combination of non Byzantine witnesses and just reject them
• 13:17
  in favor of the Byzantine text. Yet when it comes to the Gospel
• 13:20
  of Mark, the non Byzantine support for the short ending is
• 13:23
  vastly weaker than the evidence they reject in Corinthians.
• 13:26
  It is a massive double. Standard.
• 13:28
  Why the double standard? Why is the omission in
• 13:30
  Sinatticus and Vaticanus treated as unquestionable truth in Mark,
• 13:34
  but similar manuscript alignments are dismissed
• 13:36
  elsewhere? It reveals that subjective
• 13:39
  preferences are heavily influencing the editors rather
• 13:42
  than a consistent objective methodology.
• 13:44
  Definitely, since the oldest complete Greek manuscripts like
• 13:47
  Sinaiticus and Vaticanus only date to the 4th century, around
• 13:51
  the years 325 to 3:50, we need to look further back in time.
• 13:55
  We have to go back to the earliest days.
• 13:57
  Right, we need to see what the earliest Christians living long
• 14:00
  before these 4th century codices were produced, we're actually
• 14:04
  reading in their local churches. Moving back to the 2nd century
• 14:07
  provides clarity that the 4th century manuscripts cannot
• 14:10
  offer. We have the writings of Justin
• 14:12
  Martyr and Irenaeus. Two heavyweights of the early
• 14:15
  church. Absolute heavyweights.
• 14:16
  Their testimonies predate Sinaticus and Vaticanus by
• 14:19
  roughly 200 years. So you go back to Justin Martyr.
• 14:23
  He wrote his first apology around the year 155.
• 14:27
  OK, so just a few generations after the apostles.
• 14:29
  Yes, he was writing a defense of the Christian faith directly to
• 14:33
  the Roman Emperor. In Apology 1.45 he writes about
• 14:37
  the disciples, stating that having gone forth preached
• 14:41
  everywhere. OK, that sounds familiar.
• 14:43
  In Greek, this is a specific three word phrase.
• 14:45
  The fascinating reality is that this specific three word
• 14:48
  combination occurs nowhere else in the entire New Testament.
• 14:52
  Nowhere. Nowhere, nor does it appear
• 14:54
  anywhere in the Greek Septuagint translation of the Old
• 14:57
  Testament. The only place it exists is in
• 14:59
  Mark 16 point 20. Wow.
• 15:02
  So Justin is quoting Mark 16. Justin is clearly integrating
• 15:06
  the specific vocabulary of the long ending into his defense of
• 15:09
  the Christian faith in the year 155.
• 15:11
  That is incredible. What about Irenaeus?
• 15:13
  Then we have Irenaeus writing his massive work against
• 15:16
  heresies around the year 180. Irenaeus was the Bishop of Lyon,
• 15:20
  writing to combat Gnostic groups and.
• 15:22
  What does he say? In book 3, chapter 10, Irenaeus
• 15:24
  is completely explicit. He says at the end of his
• 15:26
  gospel, Mark says. And then he directly quotes Mark
• 15:29
  16.19. He actually they quotes it word
• 15:31
  for word. Word for word he writes.
• 15:34
  And so the Lord Jesus, after he had spoken to them, was received
• 15:38
  into heaven and sits at the right hand of the Father.
• 15:42
  So you are telling me we have ironclad proof from the year 180
• 15:46
  that a prominent Bishop was quoting this specific text as
• 15:49
  authoritative scripture? Ironclad proof.
• 15:52
  That timeline is absolutely devastating to the argument that
• 15:55
  the long ending was a late addition.
• 15:58
  If Irenaeus and Justin Martyr are quoting verses 19 and 20 in
• 16:02
  the middle of the 2nd century, that completely outweighs the
• 16:05
  speculations of 4th century figures like Eusebius or Jerome.
• 16:09
  Those guys lived hundreds of years later.
• 16:11
  Right. And they claimed the best
• 16:12
  manuscripts lacked those verses. But the objective data shows the
• 16:16
  early church clearly possessed the long ending.
• 16:18
  This aligns perfectly with the Reformed view that the
• 16:21
  Scriptures were kept pure in all ages it.
• 16:23
  Absolutely does. But this raises A logical
• 16:25
  hurdle. If the early Church clearly had
• 16:27
  the long ending, why would 4th century scribes like those
• 16:31
  copying Sinaiticus and Vaticanus intentionally cut it out or
• 16:34
  shorten it? That is the $1,000,000 question.
• 16:37
  To understand how intentional truncation works in literature,
• 16:40
  we could look at a fascinating modern parallel involving the
• 16:43
  American poet Marianne More. I love this analogy.
• 16:46
  It is so good she wrote a poem titled Poetry.
• 16:51
  Her original version, published in 1919, was a long 40 line
• 16:55
  piece. OK, 40 lines.
• 16:57
  Years later in 1925, she heavily reworked it into a 13 line
• 17:02
  intermediate version. Then decades later, in 1967, she
• 17:07
  drastically altered her own work again, truncating it into a tiny
• 17:11
  three line short version. Just three lines.
• 17:13
  Yeah, from 40 down to 3. She even included an epigraph
• 17:17
  and her complete poem stating omissions are not accidents.
• 17:20
  She knew what she was doing. She totally did.
• 17:22
  If her publishing history were entirely unknown to us, and
• 17:25
  literary critics dug up these three versions centuries from
• 17:28
  now, they would almost certainly apply modern text critical
• 17:31
  assumptions. They would assume the three line
• 17:33
  version was the primitive original.
• 17:34
  Right. They would argue that the 40
• 17:36
  line version was a later inauthentic make expansion added
• 17:38
  by a zealous editor. They would assume the shortest
• 17:41
  text is always the original, but they'd be entirely wrong.
• 17:44
  Completely wrong. The 40 line version was the
• 17:47
  original, and the author intentionally mutilated it
• 17:50
  later. Applying this to Mark, assuming
• 17:52
  the shortest text is always the authentic original is a
• 17:56
  fundamentally flawed methodology.
• 17:58
  That poetic analogy perfectly illustrates the flaw, and
• 18:01
  assuming shorter is always earlier, with intentional
• 18:05
  omission established as a verifiable historical
• 18:07
  phenomenon, we must ask what theological or practical motives
• 18:11
  would prompt early Christian scribes to take a knife to
• 18:14
  verses 9 through 20. Right.
• 18:16
  What was making them so uncomfortable?
• 18:17
  That the textual analysis points to two major motives.
• 18:21
  First, we have apparent contradictions.
• 18:23
  Early 4th century critics like Marinus wrote to Eusebius asking
• 18:27
  how Mark 16.9, which states Jesus appeared first to Mary
• 18:31
  Magdalene, harmonizes with Matthew 28.
• 18:34
  Because Matthew implies he appeared to a group of women.
• 18:37
  Yes, exactly. Scribes also noticed that the
• 18:40
  stubborn disbelief of the disciples described in the long
• 18:42
  ending of Mark conflicted with the partial doubt mentioned in
• 18:45
  Matthew's account. Scribes really like things to
• 18:48
  match up perfectly. They did.
• 18:50
  Scribes who are highly concerned with harmonizing the four gospel
• 18:53
  accounts might have viewed the long ending as an embarrassment.
• 18:56
  OK, what is the second motive? 2nd, and perhaps more
• 19:00
  significantly, there is the issue of the sign gifts.
• 19:04
  The promises in Mark 16 about believers speaking in new
• 19:07
  tongues, handling serpents and drinking deadly poison without
• 19:11
  harm would have caused severe anxiety for church leadership.
• 19:15
  OK, let us play devil's advocate here for a second.
• 19:18
  Why would a scribe sitting in a monastery actively decide to
• 19:22
  hack off 12 verses of scripture just because he found them hard
• 19:25
  to understand? It seems extreme, right?
• 19:28
  Very extreme, but looking at this through a reformed
• 19:30
  theological lens, the context of the post Constantine Church
• 19:33
  makes that anxiety entirely understandable.
• 19:36
  In the early centuries, the Orthodox Church was fighting
• 19:38
  against Neo Montanism and various fringe prophetic
• 19:41
  movements. Yes, those groups were causing
• 19:44
  massive disruptions. They were, these groups claim,
• 19:46
  continuing new revelation, ecstatic utterances and
• 19:48
  spectacular miracles. The bishops and Orthodox leaders
• 19:52
  were trying to maintain doctrinal order and
• 19:54
  institutional stability. So reading a text that endorses
• 19:57
  that behavior would be scary. Terrifying.
• 20:00
  Reading a text in Mark 16 that promised a spectacular dangerous
• 20:04
  sign gifts as a standard mark of belief would have been highly
• 20:08
  uncomfortable for them excising that text or simply refusing to
• 20:12
  copy a damaged page that contained it.
• 20:14
  Might have felt like a pious solution to a severe problem of
• 20:18
  theological instability. They probably thought they were
• 20:20
  doing God a favor. Right.
• 20:22
  They might have convinced themselves they were protecting
• 20:24
  the flock from radical fringe groups.
• 20:26
  This motive provides a solid historical rationale for
• 20:30
  intentional omission. It definitely does.
• 20:32
  But as we see in the manuscript record, some scribes did not
• 20:35
  just stop at verse 8. Stopping it, for they were
• 20:38
  afraid, was so narrative breaking that they felt the need
• 20:42
  to smooth over the abrupt stop with a fabricated intermediate
• 20:46
  ending. The creation of the intermediate
• 20:48
  ending proves that stopping at verse 8 was viewed as highly
• 20:50
  problematic by the scribes themselves.
• 20:52
  They knew it was broken. They did.
• 20:54
  We see this intermediate ending primarily in the old Latin
• 20:57
  manuscript K, known as Codex Bobbiensis, and we also see it's
• 21:01
  phrasing mixed into a postscript of the Egyptian Gnostic text
• 21:05
  known as Pista Sophia. What is going on in Codex
• 21:08
  Babiensis? To understand the mindset of the
• 21:11
  scribes transmitting this intermediate ending, you have to
• 21:14
  look at how Codex Babiensis handles the rest of the
• 21:16
  resurrection narrative. This manuscript features wild
• 21:20
  unhistorical embellishments. Like what kind of
• 21:23
  embellishments? Well, for instance, right at the
• 21:25
  rolling away of the stone, it inserts a scene where darkness
• 21:29
  covers the earth. Angels ascend from heaven, and
• 21:32
  they ascend back up with Jesus in a great brightness.
• 21:34
  Whoa, that sounds like a movie scene.
• 21:36
  It is very theatrical. This demonstrates A scribe who
• 21:39
  is entirely willing to heavily edit, embellish, and rewrite the
• 21:43
  biblical text to suit his theological or dramatic
• 21:46
  preferences. Someone like that would not
• 21:48
  hesitate to fix an ending. A scribe with that mindset would
• 21:51
  have 0 hesitation in creating a smooth theological summary to
• 21:55
  replace an ending he deemed problematic.
• 21:57
  The theory surrounding the lectionary influence on this
• 21:59
  intermediate ending calling too the liturgical angle is.
• 22:02
  Fascinating in the early Greek. Orthodox Liturgy.
• 22:05
  Specific portions of Scripture were assigned to be read
• 22:08
  publicly on specific days. The reading assigned for the
• 22:11
  third Sunday after Easter was Mark 15.43 through Mark 16.8.
• 22:17
  OK picture. That setting right?
• 22:19
  Imagine sitting in a. Congregation celebrating the
• 22:22
  resurrection of Christ and the public reading of the Gospel
• 22:24
  concludes with the women fleeing the empty tomb, saying nothing
• 22:28
  to anyone for they were afraid. Talk about a mood.
• 22:31
  Killer ending a joyous. Resurrection Sunday reading on a
• 22:34
  note of absolute terror and silence is incredibly jarring.
• 22:39
  It does not preach well. It leaves the congregation
• 22:41
  unsettled. But how does a public reading
• 22:43
  schedule physically alter the text of a copied Bible that is a
• 22:47
  mechanical? Process we need to understand
• 22:49
  when a Lecter reads from a lectionary, there are
• 22:51
  instructional notes written in the margin like stage
• 22:54
  directions. Sort of.
• 22:56
  They are often in red ink called rubrics.
• 22:59
  These rubrics tell the reader when to start reading, when to
• 23:01
  stop, and sometimes offer a concluding liturgical phrase to
• 23:05
  tie the reading off nicely so the reader knows to.
• 23:07
  Say Amen or something. Yes, over.
• 23:10
  Centuries of copying. A scribe working in a dimly lit
• 23:14
  scriptorium might see a marginal note or a concluding phrase from
• 23:18
  a lectionary, and they might mistakenly assume it was a piece
• 23:22
  of the original text that a previous scribe had accidentally
• 23:25
  left out. Oh, so they just.
• 23:27
  Merge it right in the scribe then.
• 23:29
  Incorporates that marginal note directly into the main body of
• 23:32
  the text. The intermediate ending was
• 23:35
  likely a liturgical adjustment designed specifically to fix the
• 23:38
  jarring stop at verse. It just smoothed the whole
• 23:41
  thing. Over it gave the public.
• 23:43
  Reading a positive evangelistic conclusion about Jesus sending
• 23:47
  out the sacred and incorruptible proclamation of eternal
• 23:50
  salvation, it provided a neat theological conclusion on the
• 23:54
  lectionary reading without requiring the priest to read the
• 23:57
  entirely separate, distinct narrative of the long ending.
• 23:59
  Why wouldn't they just read the long?
• 24:01
  Ending because the long ending. Was a sign to be read on
• 24:04
  Ascension day. It was a separate event on the
• 24:06
  calendar. That makes so much sense.
• 24:08
  This liturgical. Usage explains why the
• 24:11
  intermediate ending exists and why it appears alongside the
• 24:14
  long ending in several manuscripts.
• 24:17
  The scribes knew the long ending with scripture, but they
• 24:19
  included the intermediate ending as a helpful liturgical reading
• 24:23
  aid. But critics who prefer.
• 24:24
  The short ending often ignore this liturgical history.
• 24:28
  Instead they attack the long endings vocabulary.
• 24:31
  They love to talk about the. Vocabulary critics say the long.
• 24:34
  Ending does not sound like Mark. They throw around terms like
• 24:37
  hapax legomena. What does that mean for the
• 24:40
  average person, and how do they use it against verses 9 through
• 24:44
  20, a hapax legomenon? Is simply a Greek word that
• 24:47
  occurs only once in a specific author's writings.
• 24:51
  The vocabulary argument has been the primary weapon used against
• 24:54
  the long ending for over a century.
• 24:56
  So they just count words. Pretty much.
• 24:59
  Critics look at the Greek text and count the words that Mark
• 25:02
  does not use anywhere else in his Gospel.
• 25:04
  For example, they point out that the long ending uses the
• 25:07
  uncompounded verb poriomae, meaning to go three times
• 25:11
  uncompounded. While the rest of Mark.
• 25:13
  Only uses compounded forms of that verb, meaning forms with
• 25:16
  prefixes attached. They argue this variation proves
• 25:20
  a different author wrote the ending.
• 25:21
  That sounds like a stretch. It is.
• 25:23
  Robinson's data completely dismantles this argument by
• 25:26
  showing Mark's own internal inconsistency.
• 25:29
  Take the verb acalutheo, meaning to follow in the undisputed
• 25:34
  sections of Mark. The author uses the uncompounded
• 25:36
  form of this verb 20 * 20 times. Got it.
• 25:39
  But. Randomly.
• 25:40
  In Mark 5.37 he uses the compounded forms in Aklotheo
• 25:44
  specifically one time, just once just.
• 25:47
  Once if you. Apply the critics logic.
• 25:48
  You would have to assume a different author wrote Mark 5.37
• 25:51
  simply because the author varied his vocabulary.
• 25:54
  Authors are not machines, right? They vary their word.
• 25:57
  Choices based on the specific narrative context, especially
• 26:00
  when. Summarizing a series of distinct
• 26:02
  events like the post, its resurrection appearances, I
• 26:05
  really appreciate how. The source material compares the
• 26:08
  long ending to other undisputed sections of Mark to expose the
• 26:12
  statistical weakness of this vocabulary argument.
• 26:15
  The math just does. Not work for the critics trying
• 26:18
  to dissect an. Author's identity based on a
• 26:20
  dozen unique words in a 12 verse segment is a fundamentally
• 26:24
  flawed statistical method. The sample size is simply too
• 26:28
  small. Way too small if you take a.
• 26:29
  Section of. Mark that everyone agrees, he
• 26:31
  wrote. Like the parable of the sea
• 26:33
  growing secretly in Mark chapter 4 or the garden arrest in Mark
• 26:37
  chapter 14. And you run the exact same
• 26:39
  statistical analysis on the vocabulary.
• 26:42
  The results are devastating to the critics.
• 26:44
  Give us the numbers on that. OK, the garden.
• 26:46
  Arrest Pericope has a unique vocabulary rate of 7.4%.
• 26:50
  The parable in chapter 4 has a unique vocabulary rate of 11.2%.
• 26:54
  OK, so a fairly wide. Range, yes, and the long.
• 26:57
  Ending of Mark sits comfortably right in the middle of those two
• 26:59
  with 9.04% unique vocabulary that is perfectly normal.
• 27:03
  Right, the presence of. Unique words in the long ending
• 27:06
  is mathematically consistent with Mark's writing style
• 27:09
  throughout the rest of the Gospel.
• 27:11
  Rather than counting individual Greek words on a spreadsheet,
• 27:14
  looking at the overarching literary themes and theological
• 27:17
  structures provides a much stronger test for Mark and
• 27:20
  authorship. Thematic.
• 27:21
  Structural. Analysis provides overwhelming
• 27:23
  evidence for the authenticity of the long ending.
• 27:26
  Mark's gospel relies heavily on a distinct promise and
• 27:29
  fulfillment structure. He sets something up and.
• 27:32
  Then pays it off, yes. Jesus frequently makes a
• 27:35
  prediction, and Mark meticulously records the
• 27:38
  fulfillment of that prediction within the narrative.
• 27:41
  A prime example is Mark 14.62, where Jesus stands before the
• 27:45
  high priest and explicitly predicts his future session at
• 27:48
  the right hand of God if the Gospel ends at verse.
• 27:50
  Eight, that prediction is just left hanging.
• 27:52
  It hangs entirely. Unresolved, the narrative simply
• 27:55
  snaps off, but the long ending resolves it perfectly in verse
• 27:58
  19, noting that Jesus was received into heaven and sat
• 28:02
  down at the right hand of God. That structural tie.
• 28:04
  In is massive. Furthermore, Warren.
• 28:06
  Gage's research identifies a powerful Elijah motif running
• 28:10
  through the entire gospel. Let us slow down and define.
• 28:13
  That term. What specifically is a motif,
• 28:17
  and how does Elijah factor into the Gospel of Mark?
• 28:20
  A motif is. A recurring thematic element or
• 28:22
  pattern in a literary work. In Mark, references to the Old
• 28:26
  Testament prophet Elijah frame the beginning, the middle, and
• 28:29
  the end of the narrative. OK, so he shows up.
• 28:32
  Throughout Yes, John, the. Baptist is introduced clothed in
• 28:35
  camel's hair, mirroring Elijah. During the Transfiguration,
• 28:39
  Elijah appears with Moses at the cross.
• 28:42
  The bystanders think Jesus is calling for Elijah.
• 28:45
  He is everywhere. In the text, the fascinating.
• 28:47
  Detail is that Mark 16.19 directly mirrors the specific
• 28:52
  Greek language used in the Septuagint translation of 2
• 28:54
  Kings 2.11, which describes Elijah.
• 28:57
  Yes, it describes Elijah. 'S bodily ascension into heaven.
• 29:00
  The linguistic parallel is undeniable, the theological.
• 29:03
  Implications of that Elijah motif are spinning, especially
• 29:06
  from a reformed perspective that values the unity of the Old and
• 29:10
  New Testaments it connects. Them beautifully Mark is
• 29:13
  intentionally. Presenting Jesus as the new
• 29:15
  Elijah Just as Elijah ascended to heaven and passed his mantle
• 29:18
  of prophetic authority to Elijah, Jesus ascends to heaven
• 29:22
  and passes his authority to his disciples.
• 29:24
  He empowers them for. Ministry.
• 29:26
  Yes, empowering them. With the sign gifts mentioned in
• 29:29
  the long ending, if you strip away the ascension scene in the
• 29:32
  long ending, you severely damaged the structural framework
• 29:35
  of the entire gospel. You lose the whole.
• 29:38
  Theological payoff. You leave the new Elijah.
• 29:40
  Stranded on Earth and the passing of the mantle never
• 29:42
  happens. The structural integrity of Mark
• 29:45
  demands the ascension account, and the structural integrity
• 29:48
  goes beyond just broad theological themes.
• 29:52
  There is a literal word for word chiastic mirror between the 1st
• 29:55
  chapter of Mark and the 16th chapter.
• 29:57
  The compositional proof. Found in those structural
• 30:00
  mirrors is arguably the most compelling internal evidence we
• 30:03
  possess. A chiasm is a literary device
• 30:05
  where concepts or words are repeated in a reverse order,
• 30:09
  creating a symmetrical pattern like a mirror.
• 30:11
  Image in the text exactly. The linguistic parallels between
• 30:15
  the opening of Jesus's public ministry in Mark 1.32 to 39 and
• 30:20
  the conclusion of his earthly ministry in the long ending are
• 30:23
  startling. Walk us through those.
• 30:25
  Parallels in Chapter 1 the. Narrative setting occurs as the
• 30:28
  sun goes down in chapter 16. The setting is as the sun rises
• 30:33
  in chapter 1. Jesus heals many people and
• 30:36
  casts out many demons, commanding them to be silent.
• 30:39
  Right? The messianic secret.
• 30:41
  Yes, but in chapter. 16 The disciples are commissioned to
• 30:43
  lay hands on the sick and cast out demons, but instead of
• 30:46
  silence, they are promised they will speak in new tongues.
• 30:49
  The reversal of silence. And finally in chapter.
• 30:51
  One Jesus says, let us go into the surrounding towns that I may
• 30:55
  proclaim there also in chapter 16 he commands them go into all
• 30:59
  the world and proclaim the gospel to the whole creation.
• 31:02
  This is highly. Sophisticated, deliberate
• 31:04
  literary framing. It brackets the entire.
• 31:07
  Earthly ministry of Christ with matched thematic and linguistic
• 31:11
  bookends. But let me play the skeptic.
• 31:12
  Again, just to make sure we cover all bases.
• 31:14
  Always a good idea. Couldn't a later scribe?
• 31:17
  Living in the second or third century, recognize that Mark
• 31:20
  lacked an ending and simply construct those linguistic
• 31:23
  bookends by copying and summarizing the Gospels of
• 31:26
  Matthew and Luke. If a scribe.
• 31:29
  Was simply creating a tidy summary of the other gospels.
• 31:32
  To fix a broken ending, we have to ask why they would invent
• 31:35
  totally new unharmonious details, Details that caused.
• 31:38
  The very contradictions critics complain about, right?
• 31:41
  Why add the? Specific detail that the
• 31:43
  disciples were mourning and weeping, which does not appear
• 31:47
  in the other resurrection accounts.
• 31:48
  That makes no sense. For a harmonizer to do, why
• 31:51
  state that Jesus? Appeared in another form to the
• 31:54
  two on the road when Luke simply says their eyes were were kept
• 31:57
  from recognizing him. A later scribe trying to
• 32:00
  harmonize the text to make it fit seamlessly with Matthew and
• 32:02
  Luke would have made it match perfectly.
• 32:04
  They would not have introduced. Raw unharmonious data that
• 32:07
  creates friction we actually possess.
• 32:09
  Historical proof of what a later scribes summary looks like.
• 32:13
  Ms. 2145 is a 12th century manuscript that contains an
• 32:17
  actual explicitly identified summary of the long ending.
• 32:20
  So someone actually did. Summarize it later, yes, and
• 32:23
  when you examine. This actual summary you see
• 32:26
  specifically what you would expect from an editor.
• 32:28
  It uses only 12% of the original vocabulary.
• 32:32
  Wow, just 12%. It perfectly smooths.
• 32:34
  Over all the rough edges and it strips out all the problematic
• 32:38
  non harmonious details. It reads like a clean calculated
• 32:42
  abridgment, a completely sanitized.
• 32:44
  Version Yes, the. Long ending, by contrast, is
• 32:48
  full of raw independent data. The rawness of the long ending,
• 32:52
  its introduction of unique details, and its distinct
• 32:55
  thematic mirroring of chapter 1 proves it is an independent
• 32:59
  original composition, not a later scribes tidy summary when
• 33:03
  you synthesize this. Entire discussion.
• 33:05
  The case for the traditional text is incredibly robust.
• 33:08
  It holds up under pressure. We started by looking at.
• 33:10
  The medical X-ray of textual criticism, assuming the
• 33:13
  diagnostic landscape was hopelessly murky.
• 33:15
  But when you weigh the suspicious blank columns and
• 33:18
  cancel sheets of the 4th century codices against the explicit
• 33:21
  citations of the 2nd century church fathers, the evidence
• 33:24
  shifts dramatically. It shifts in favor of the.
• 33:27
  Traditional text when you look past the.
• 33:29
  Flawed statistical word count based on a 12 verse sample size
• 33:34
  and recognize the heavy theological symmetry of the
• 33:36
  Elijah motif and the deliberate structural mirrors of Mark's own
• 33:40
  writing. The traditional long ending
• 33:43
  stands up to the highest scrutiny.
• 33:44
  It absolutely does. The providential.
• 33:46
  Preservation of Scripture, we confess, is evident in the
• 33:49
  tangible, objective manuscript data.
• 33:52
  The long ending is not a late forgery.
• 33:55
  It is the authentic, canonical conclusion to the Gospel.
• 33:59
  I think it is highly. Appropriate to leave you with a
• 34:01
  final thought to ponder from the text itself.
• 34:04
  The source points out that the long ending concludes in verse
• 34:06
  20 by stating that the disciples went out and preached
• 34:08
  everywhere, the Lord working with them, the Lord working.
• 34:12
  With them, that is a beautiful phrase.
• 34:14
  Consider how differently we. View the Great Commission if we
• 34:16
  recognize that Jesus did not just leave instructions and
• 34:19
  depart into the ether. According to Mark's canonical
• 34:22
  conclusion, Jesus ascended to the right hand of God
• 34:25
  specifically to actively cooperate with his followers.
• 34:28
  In the present day he is still engaged.
• 34:30
  In the work he is executing. His authority from heaven
• 34:34
  working alongside his church on earth.
• 34:36
  How does reading Mark 16 point to me with the assurance that it
• 34:39
  is authentic, preserved scripture change your view of
• 34:42
  everyday Christian living?