Mark’s Resurrection Account…
Since we are nearing ever closer to Resurrection Sunday, I thought to add one more post on Mark’s Resurrection account, and this one has some real apologetic and theological “hot potatoes.”
One “hot potato” is the fact that the earliest and arguably more reliable Greek manuscripts of Mark 16 end at verse 8. Complicating things is that some of the later Greek manuscripts contain verses 9-20, but few of them end with the lines: 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.
Of course, the problem is not as bad as it seems. Suppose for a moment Mark did in fact end his Gospel at 16:8, with the women who were so shocked and astonished about witnessing the empty tomb they kept silent, such does not pose any problems for those who believe Christ had risen. The reality is that Mark is not the first one to write about the resurrection of Christ. An earlier example of a Christian writing on the resurrection is Paul, who wrote, “For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received, that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, and that He was buried, and that He was raised on the third day according to Scriptures, and that He appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve” (1 Cor. 15:3-5).
Now Mark’s Gospel is dated between AD 45-AD60, and 1 Corinthians around AD 55; however, Paul’s testimony to the resurrection in chapter 15 is actually a written affirmation of still yet an even earlier Christian creed, which the apostle most likely received as a new convert. In fact the words “received,” and “deliver” signify the apostle was passing on a tradition, one which may have been originally in Aramaic given it use of the Aramaic name “Cephas” for Peter that had been translated into Greek, and one that can be dated back to the mid AD 30s, approximately three to eight years after Jesus’ crucifixion.1 So even if Mark just ended with women astonished and keeping quiet about the matter, we can still know they eventually broke their silence, and the risen Lord did in fact appear to many witnesses.
The fact that someone else besides Mark wrote verses 9-20 does not mean that they are not part of the inspired Word of God, and what may have happened was that Mark died before completing his Gospel, or the original end had been destroyed before it could be copied.2
The other “hot potato” is Christ’s commission: “Go into all the world and preach the gospel to all creation. He who has believed and has been baptized shall be saved; but he who has disbelieved shall be condemned. These signs will accompany those who have believed: in My name they will cast out demons, they will speak with new tongues; they will pick up serpents, and if they drink any deadly poison, it will not hurt them; they will lay hands on the sick, and they will recover” (Mk. 16:15-20).
I must admit Christ’s commission to the disciples in Mark 16 is a pretty tough passage to understand, and wisdom dictates one must not be overly dogmatic in using this passage as a proof text as the sole support for controversial doctrines, like speaking in tongues is the initial evidence of the baptism of the Holy Spirit, or in the idea that a true believer can handle snakes and drink poison without getting harmed.
Perhaps Christ was simply describing the activity of the apostles throughout their forthcoming ministry in setting the foundations of the church. For example, in Acts we find examples them casting out demons (Acts 19:11-20), speaking with new tongues (Acts 2:1-13; 10:44-48; 19:1-7), Paul was bitten by a poisonous snake but lived (Acts 28:1-6), and divine healings took place (Acts 3:1-10). So these signs did accompany those who believe. Yet, it is debatable that Jesus meant to communicate that the same set of signs would repeat over and over again with each successive generation of Christians throughout every century. It is not to say that God could not do things today if He so desired; however, the there is no indication from this passage that these types of supernatural signs would be normative for all believers.
One “hot potato” is the fact that the earliest and arguably more reliable Greek manuscripts of Mark 16 end at verse 8. Complicating things is that some of the later Greek manuscripts contain verses 9-20, but few of them end with the lines: 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.
Of course, the problem is not as bad as it seems. Suppose for a moment Mark did in fact end his Gospel at 16:8, with the women who were so shocked and astonished about witnessing the empty tomb they kept silent, such does not pose any problems for those who believe Christ had risen. The reality is that Mark is not the first one to write about the resurrection of Christ. An earlier example of a Christian writing on the resurrection is Paul, who wrote, “For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received, that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, and that He was buried, and that He was raised on the third day according to Scriptures, and that He appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve” (1 Cor. 15:3-5).
Now Mark’s Gospel is dated between AD 45-AD60, and 1 Corinthians around AD 55; however, Paul’s testimony to the resurrection in chapter 15 is actually a written affirmation of still yet an even earlier Christian creed, which the apostle most likely received as a new convert. In fact the words “received,” and “deliver” signify the apostle was passing on a tradition, one which may have been originally in Aramaic given it use of the Aramaic name “Cephas” for Peter that had been translated into Greek, and one that can be dated back to the mid AD 30s, approximately three to eight years after Jesus’ crucifixion.1 So even if Mark just ended with women astonished and keeping quiet about the matter, we can still know they eventually broke their silence, and the risen Lord did in fact appear to many witnesses.
The fact that someone else besides Mark wrote verses 9-20 does not mean that they are not part of the inspired Word of God, and what may have happened was that Mark died before completing his Gospel, or the original end had been destroyed before it could be copied.2
The other “hot potato” is Christ’s commission: “Go into all the world and preach the gospel to all creation. He who has believed and has been baptized shall be saved; but he who has disbelieved shall be condemned. These signs will accompany those who have believed: in My name they will cast out demons, they will speak with new tongues; they will pick up serpents, and if they drink any deadly poison, it will not hurt them; they will lay hands on the sick, and they will recover” (Mk. 16:15-20).
I must admit Christ’s commission to the disciples in Mark 16 is a pretty tough passage to understand, and wisdom dictates one must not be overly dogmatic in using this passage as a proof text as the sole support for controversial doctrines, like speaking in tongues is the initial evidence of the baptism of the Holy Spirit, or in the idea that a true believer can handle snakes and drink poison without getting harmed.
Perhaps Christ was simply describing the activity of the apostles throughout their forthcoming ministry in setting the foundations of the church. For example, in Acts we find examples them casting out demons (Acts 19:11-20), speaking with new tongues (Acts 2:1-13; 10:44-48; 19:1-7), Paul was bitten by a poisonous snake but lived (Acts 28:1-6), and divine healings took place (Acts 3:1-10). So these signs did accompany those who believe. Yet, it is debatable that Jesus meant to communicate that the same set of signs would repeat over and over again with each successive generation of Christians throughout every century. It is not to say that God could not do things today if He so desired; however, the there is no indication from this passage that these types of supernatural signs would be normative for all believers.
Gary Habermas, The Historical Jesus: Ancient Evidence for the Life of Christ (Joplin, MO: College Press Publishing Company, 1996), 153-154.
Stephen S. Short, Mark: New International Bible Commentary, ed. F.F. Bruce (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1979), 1180
Comments
Post a Comment