Taking Scripture Out Of Context

These words were spoken to the Apostles and the promises of signs following applied to them. Anyone saying that they are for today had better go and join the snake-handlers.Eek

A text that may be helpful in understanding this is Heb. 2:3-4. '....How shall we escape if we neglect so great a salvation, which at the first began to be spoken by the Lord, and was confirmed to us by those who hear Him [ie. the Apostles], God also bearing witness both with signs and wonders, with various miracles and gifts of the Holy Spirit, according to His own will.'
First of all, the context is clearly in the past at the time of writing ['was confirmed.....'], secondly the witness was borne to the Lord and to the Apostles and thirdly, the signs and wonders are according to the will of the Holy Spirit, not the will of man.

 

"Some of the earliest manuscripts do not include 16:9–20."

- ESV Bible Note

 

Around 99.5% of extant manuscripts do include it.

 

If for only me, could you please let me know your source on this.

 

So what do you think brother, non-baptized folks going to hell?

 

There around 900 extant Greek manuscripts containing Mark's Gospel. Of these, according to my UBS 4th Edition (revised) of the Greek N.T., only three MSS do not have those verses.

There are more modern editions of the Greek N.T. but I'm not aware of any changes to the above.

 

The following post of the NET footnote makes clear why modern scholars doubt the long ending of Mark

 

9 tc The Gospel of Mark ends at this point in some witnesses (א B 304 sys sams armmss Eus Eusmss Hiermss), including two of the most respected mss (א B). The following shorter ending is found in some mss: “They reported briefly to those around Peter all that they had been commanded. After these things Jesus himself sent out through them, from the east to the west, the holy and imperishable preaching of eternal salvation. Amen.” This shorter ending is usually included with the longer ending (L Ψ 083 099 0112 579 al); k, however, ends at this point. Most mss include the longer ending (vv. 9-20) immediately after v. 8 (A C D W [which has a different shorter ending between vv. 14 and 15] Θ Ë13 33 2427 Ï lat syc,p,h bo); however, Jerome and Eusebius knew of almost no Greek mss that had this ending. Several mss have marginal comments noting that earlier Greek mss lacked the verses, while others mark the text with asterisks or obeli (symbols that scribes used to indicate that the portion of text being copied was spurious). Internal evidence strongly suggests the secondary nature of both the short and the long endings. Their vocabulary and style are decidedly non-Markan (for further details, see TCGNT 102-6). All of this evidence strongly suggests that as time went on scribes added the longer ending, either for the richness of its material or because of the abruptness of the ending at v. 8. (Indeed, the strange variety of dissimilar endings attests to the probability that early copyists had a copy of Mark that ended at v. 8, and they filled out the text with what seemed to be an appropriate conclusion. All of the witnesses for alternative endings to vv. 9-20 thus indirectly confirm the Gospel as ending at v. 8.) Because of such problems regarding the authenticity of these alternative endings, 16:8 is usually regarded as the last verse of the Gospel of Mark. There are three possible explanations for Mark ending at 16:8: (1) The author intentionally ended the Gospel here in an open-ended fashion; (2) the Gospel was never finished; or (3) the last leaf of the ms was lost prior to copying. This first explanation is the most likely due to several factors, including (a) the probability that the Gospel was originally written on a scroll rather than a codex (only on a codex would the last leaf get lost prior to copying); (b) the unlikelihood of the ms not being completed; and (c) the literary power of ending the Gospel so abruptly that the readers are now drawn into the story itself. E. Best aptly states, “It is in keeping with other parts of his Gospel that Mark should not give an explicit account of a conclusion where this is already well known to his readers” (Mark, 73; note also his discussion of the ending of this Gospel on 132 and elsewhere). The readers must now ask themselves, “What will I do with Jesus? If I do not accept him in his suffering, I will not see him in his glory.”

The above is from the NET footnote for Mark 16:9 and following.

 

SneakyWhistling

 

Irenaeus, (c. 130-200AD) is a considerably older witness than Eusebius or Jerome and he quotes from Mark 16:9ff.

But those who wish to follow 0.5% of the extant MSS are free to do so. I will follow the 99.5% and treat the verses as Scripture. Since this is the Theology and Bible Study section, perhaps those who don't believe the verses are in the Bible will leave the rest of us to our discussion.

 

It is those who do not believe who will be condemned, but the question is begged, why would someone who believes in Jesus Christ neglect His clear command to be baptized?

It may be a British thing, but I am astonished how many new Christians in evangelical churches treat baptism as an optional extra and put it off, sometimes for years, while proclaiming that they are followers of Christ.

 

Sounds real important here, don't you think?

38 And Peter said unto them, Repent ye, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ unto the remission of your sins; and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. Acts 2

 

Thanks for the information.

Not sure if it is worth saying, but I will say it anyways. I have no issue with those verses so long as you don't twist verse 16. As far as the other issue here, I am a cessationist and find that to be a lesser issue.