Tuesday, 22 April, 2014
Mark 16:9-20
Modern translations usually omit the passage for today or consign it to a footnote with the remark that it does not appear in the most ancient and reliable manuscripts. Mark’s Gospel may have originally included some other ending that was lost very early, or perhaps Mark always intended to finish his Gospel abruptly after 16:8, affirming the Resurrection but leaving out any reports of post-Resurrection appearances of Jesus. We have no way of knowing. But there are good reasons for thinking that 16:9-20 are not in the original text, that instead some later scribe decided to “complete” the Gospel by inserting this section.
First is the external evidence: Verses 9-20 do not appear in the early manuscripts, so it is likely they were written later. There is also a shorter alternative ending, and this one too does not appear to be original. Some late manuscripts have the two mixed together.
Next is the question, “Does this section fit?” It doesn’t seem to. Mark has already affirmed the Resurrection in the preceding paragraph, and it’s not his custom to repeat himself, as verse 9 does. The writing style of this last section seems quite different from the rest of the Gospel. It’s a rather flat listing of events and teachings, in contrast to the rapid-moving stories full of interesting details that characterize Mark. Almost everything in the section appears either in Matthew or Luke, so it looks like the author is familiar with those two Gospels, implying that Mark was written later, and most scholars believe Mark is the first of the Gospels to be written.
Notice how the Resurrection appearances in this section seem to contradict details from elsewhere. Mark 16:1 has two women who came early and discovered the empty tomb; out of astonishment and fear (v. 8), they said nothing to anyone. But the added section has only Mary Magdalene, and she isn’t silent. The author of this section says repeatedly that the disciples would not believe, opposite to what the Gospels say. Far from rebuking the disciples (v. 14), the risen Jesus in other accounts is gracious with them, even with Thomas, who refused to believe until he saw the risen Jesus for himself (John 20:24-29).
This section subtly shifts meaning from other accounts. The miraculous signs in v. 18 are stated as characterizing all believers, and some groups have run off into harmful extremism because of this, not taking the whole scriptural account into consideration. I think of the snake-handling sects who “prove” their faith in God by handling dangerous poisonous snakes, as stated in v. 18. Yes, Acts 28:3-6 tells of a poisonous viper that fastened onto Paul’s hand, but he shook it off and suffered no harm. Paul didn’t grab the viper deliberately or try to prove his faith; it was an accident. The snake handlers’ actions are reminiscent of the temptation of Jesus (Matt. 4:5-7) where the devil told Jesus to throw himself off the pinnacle of the Temple, and Jesus refused, replying, “You shall not put the Lord your God to the test.”
In spite of all this, this section can still prompt us in our discipleship. Would the risen Jesus rebuke us for our unbelief and hardness of heart? And how about the fascinating challenge in v. 15 to proclaim the Gospel – the good news of Jesus Christ – not just to people but to the whole creation? What would it mean to bring the Good News to all the creatures of land and sea and air, to the Earth itself, to all the heavenly bodies too? Do we need to change how we live as well as what we say?
-- Robert Kruse
No comments:
Post a Comment