The Ending of Mark’s Gospel

There are four possible endings to Mark’s Gospel presented to us in the Greek manuscripts.  The best evidence is that the original ending of Mark 16 after verse 8 has been lost.  We do not know how Mark finished his Gospel.  Some have attempted to give it an ending that is more satisfying than ending at verse 8.

The Traditional King James Version Ending

Includes verses 9-20 of Mark 16 in the KJV

Manuscript evidence:  the Byzantine or Majority text type.  There are more of these manuscripts than any other text family, and some consider that is because they represent the superior text and were therefore copied more frequently.  They are not the earliest textual witnesses.

Internal evidence:  If they are not the ending of Mark’s Gospel, then it ends very abruptly and unsatisfyingly.  Though some feel there is not sufficient evidence to say they belong to Mark’s Gospel, they see them as nevertheless historically accurate and because God saw fit to include them in so many manuscripts, they may be considered inspired.

The Critical Text Ending (NIV, et al)

Ends at verse 8

Manuscript evidence:  The two oldest manuscripts, several versions (translations), and Eusebius (4^th century) remarked that “accurate” copies ended with verse 8.  Jerome said, “almost all the Greek codices do not have this concluding portion.”  It is easier to explain that someone added an ending to an otherwise abrupt conclusion than it is to explain why someone would have that ending and remove it.

Internal evidence:  The vv.9-20 ending does not pick up and relate the predicted appearance of the risen Lord in Galilee promised in 16:7, but gives other appearances.  The transition from verse 8 to verse 9 is not smooth.  Mary Magdalene is introduced as the woman from whom Jesus cast out seven demons, as if this had not already been mentioned in 16:1.  The vocabulary does not seem similar to the rest of Mark.

The Short Ending After Verse 8 and Omitting 9-20

Reads, after verse 8, “But they reported briefly to Peter and those with him all 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.  Amen.”

Manuscript evidence:  the origin is mid-second century, 10 manuscripts (two of which leave off the “Amen” and all but one also have the long ending, verses 9-20, either before or after these verses).

Internal evidence:  it seems to contradict verse 8 which says that they did not speak to anyone about what they saw, and the vocabulary does not sound like Mark’s.

Long Addition at Verse 15

Reads, “And they excused themselves saying, ‘This age of lawlessness and unbelief is under Satan, who does not allow the truth and power of God to prevail over the unclean things of the spirits.  Therefore reveal thy righteousness now.’  Thus they spoke to Christ.  And Christ replied to them, ‘The term of years of Satan’s power has been fulfilled, but other terrible things draw near.  And for those who have sinned I was delivered over to death, that they may return to the truth and sin no more, in order that they may inherit the spiritual and incorruptible glory of righteousness which is in heaven.’”

Manuscript evidence:  one manuscript (5^th century) includes this and Jerome mentioned that it was in some Greek manuscripts.

Internal evidence:  nothing about this reading recommends it as genuine.

 

It is very interesting to compare what Muslims have done with the Qur’an to what Christians have done with the various manuscripts of the New Testament.  When variations began showing up in the copies of the Qur’an the powers that be decided to make a singular text to be copied over and over and erased the history of variations in their copies.

Christians, on the other hand, have kept the evidence of textual transmission.  What this does is show that even given the thousands of variants in our text of the New Testament, we have not tried to cover up differences.  When we look at the variants we find that the vast majority of them are incidental and do not change the meaning, a few give different possible meanings for passages but do not change our overall theological picture of the New Testament, and a very few leave us with large sections missing, like in the Gospel of Mark and John 8:1-11, but again do not leave us without a witness to what we need to know about the life of Jesus.

This confirms that even though we don’t possess the original manuscripts of Mark or Paul or John, we do have faithful copies and a fairly complete sense of what they wrote with a history of textual transmission to prove it.  No one has tried to alter the text in any major way as evidenced by the history of the various texts from different parts of the world.  Islam cannot legitimately make that claim about their own Scriptures.