Does Mark 16:9-20 Belong In The Bible?

Biblegems #300

Question: A note in my Bible says that the earliest manuscripts and other ancient witnesses do not have Mark 16:9-20. Does that mean that these verses in the Gospel of Mark were added later, and are therefore not part of God’s inspired, revealed Word?

The answer is “No.” Here’s why:

First, the note in your Bible is accurate in that the earliest manuscripts do not contain this portion of Mark. However, that only means the earliest manuscripts we have found so far. All that can be said for certain is that for some reason, unknown at this time, these earlier documents—of which there are only a few—lost their final paragraph.

Second, the “ancient witnesses” the note in your Bible refers to are comments written in the margins of ancient biblical manuscripts. These “witnesses” are often identified by a number since no author’s name for the comment is available. For example, one such “ancient witness” is identified by the number “20”. He wrote in the margin of his manuscript of Mark 16:8:

                    From this to the end is not found in some

                    copies; but in the ancient copies the whole

                    is found uncurtailed.

This ancient author is telling us that he personally knows of other copies of Mark that are “ancient” to him that have not lost the last paragraph of Mark 16!

We can be confident then that Mark’s Gospel did not end with verse 8. So the question is whether verses 9-20 are authentic to Mark or whether they were added later, as many claim.

While it is true that the shift from verse 8 to verse 9 is awkward and abrupt, this is also true for much of Mark’s Gospel. Rather than flowing from one event or scene to another, events in Mark’s Gospel are presented as happening “immediately.” Style is not a convincing argument against Mark’s authorship.

Finally, most of the content in verses 9-20 can be found in the other Gospels as well, especially Matthew, and none of the content is incompatible with biblical teaching. This is even true of verses 17-18, where Jesus says just before His Ascension:

                    And these signs will accompany those who

                    believe: In my name they will drive out demons;

                    they will speak in new tongues; they will pick up

                    snakes with their hands; and when they drink

                    deadly poison, it will not hurt them at all; they will

                    place their hands on sick people, and they will

                    get well.

Some have misconstrued this to mean that all believers will demonstrate miraculous powers and will be invincible to snake bites. What Jesus actually says is that “signs will accompany those who

Believe,” and gives examples of what some of those “signs” could be.

In short, there is no reason not to trust the Gospel of Mark in its entirety. The closing paragraph is present in most manuscripts, sound in doctrine, and typical of Mark’s somewhat awkward style. And even though this final paragraph is not present in some ancient documents, the “witnesses” testify to earlier copies where it was present.

Ps. 119:43  Never take your word of truth from my mouth, for I have put my hope in your laws.

Is The Exodus Fact Or Myth?

Biblegems #297

Image: Natural Law by Jeff ArrowoodHaiku Deck‪1024 × 768‪Search by image Do Good, Avoid Evil   

Question: Is there historical, archaeological evidence for the biblical Exodus?

The short answer is “Yes!”

The Biblical Record

The year the Exodus began can be established from1Kings 6:1:

         1Kings 6:1 “In the four hundred and eightieth year after the Israelites came out of Egypt, in the fourth year of Solomon’s reign over Israel, in the month of Ziv, the second month, he began to build the temple of the Lord.” (NIV)

Solomon’s fourth year as Israel's king dates around 966 BC. 480 years earlier puts the Exodus at 1446 BC. The last two Jubilee Years observed by the Jewish people (see Lev. 25:8-55), as recorded in the Talmud[i], also confirms 1446 BC.

The Archaeological Record

• Archaeological evidence from Jericho, Ai, and Hazor—key cities in Joshua’s conquest of Canaan 40 years later (1406 BC) also supports the biblical date, and reflects the biblical descriptions of how these cities were destroyed. Archaeological finds from rebuilt Jericho during the period of the Judges, including Eglon’s palace (Judg 3:12–30), and evidence of the destruction of Hazor by Deborah and Barak, around 1230 BC (Judg. 4:24), also support the 1406 - 1400 BC date for Joshua’s conquest.




• Evidence in Egypt’s eastern delta known as Pi-Ramesse of Pharaoh’s royal palace supports the biblical date of Moses in Egypt. Also, remains of an earlier settlement are consistent with the arrival of Abraham’s family’s in Egypt.




• The “Amarna Letters” sent from desperate Canaanite kings seeking help from Egypt against the ‘apiru (Hebrews) who were “taking over” their settlements in the highlands during the mid-1300s BC, point to the biblical Israelites.

• The name “Israel” has recently been found inscribed in a partially preserved list on the base of an Egyptian column dating back to the 1400s BC that contains two other biblical names: Ashkelon and Canaan. This firmly places the Hebrews in Egypt at the time the Bible gives for the Exodus.

Why It Matters

The biblical Exodus is history—not allegory, not myth—emphasizing real places, real people, and real events experienced by thousands of people at the same time. If the Exodus never took place the authority of the biblical books describing the event from an historical perspective would be seriously jeopardized.

Jesus treated the Exodus as Jewish history experienced by their ancestors:

         John 6:49-51  Your ancestors ate the manna in the wilderness, yet they died. But here is the bread that comes down from heaven. which anyone may eat and not die. I am the living bread that came down from heaven. Whoever eats this bread will live forever. This bread is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world.”

If the Exodus did not occur then Jesus’ teaching would be incorrect, and all of His life and teaching would be suspect. Year after year, however, scientific disciplines continue to confirm the accuracy of the Bible, whether in history, biology, geology or astronomy.

         Ps. 33:4  For the word of the Lord is right and true; he is faithful in all he does.

For further study on this vital subject please check out this link:

http://www.biblearchaeology.org/post/2008/04/The-Rise-and-Fall-of-the-13th-Century-Exodus-Conquest-Theory.aspx#Article

---

[i] Rodger C. Young, “When Did Solomon Die?” JETS 46 (2003) 600-1