Is Mark 16:17-20 for today?

[charles_creech78]

So you're saying you can't see how what you said can be seen in the light of how I saw it? It was definitely lending itself to that.

At least you admit people don't have to believe in the charismatic signs and wonders hoopla to be saved.

:thumbs:

Not at one point did it lead to that brother. Thats the way you saw it! I would say go back and read it again but I don't want to waste my time. I know what I said and God knows what I said and all of you know what I said and at no point was I out of the way of the truth. God bless.

 

[luke1616]

James 2

20 But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead?

21 Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar?

Matthew 5

16 Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father which is in heaven.

Matthew 11

20 Then began he to upbraid the cities wherein most of his mighty works were done, because they repented not:

John 14

12 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me, the works that I do shall he do also; and greater works than these shall he do; because I go unto my Father.

Yahoo Jesus!:applause:

 

[Rippon]

From An Introduction To The New Testament by D.a.Carson and Douglas J.Moo.

"But the arguments against this ending being original are very strong.First it is missing from what are generally considered the two most important manuscripts (the unicals [Aleph]and B),as well as several others. Second,Jerome and Eusebius both state that the best manuscripts available to them did not cotain this longer ending.Third,two other endings to the gospel exist:a shorter ending ...and the longer ending combined with an interpolation... The presence of these alternative endings suggests that there was uncertainty about the ending of Mark for some time. Fourth,the longer ending contains several non-Markan words and expressions. Fifth, the longer ending does not flow naturally after 16:8:Jesus is presumed to be the subject in verse 9 (the Greek does not have an expressed subject),although 'the women'is the subject in verse 8;Mary is introduced in verse 9 as if she has not been mentioned in verse 1;and 'when Jesus rose early on the first day of the week' (v.9) sounds strange after 'very early on the first day of the week' (v.2). With the great majority of contemporary commentators and textual critics,then, we do not think that verses 9-20 were written by Mark as the ending for his gospel. The resemblances between what is narrated in these verses and the narrative of Jesus' resurrection appearances in the other gospels suggest that this longer ending was composed on the basis of these other narratives to supplement what was felt to be an inadequate ending to the gospel." (p.189)

There is a current thread touching on the legitimacy of the longer ending of Mark. I thought this would help.

 

[Rippon]

From An Introduction To The New Testament by D.A.Carson and Douglas Moo.

"...Mark may have intended to end his gospel with verse 8. This third possibility is becoming more popular and is most likely. Mark refrains from making very many editorial comments about the significance of the history he narrates. He lets his story speak for itself,forcing his readers to discover the ultimate significance of much of the story of Jesus. A somewhat enigmatic ending to the gospel suits this strategy perfectly.The reader knows that Jesus has been raised (v.6). But the confusion and astonishment of the women (v.8) leaves us wondering about just what it all means. And that is just the question Mark wants us to ask --and find answers to." (pages 189 and 190)

This is a continuation of the previous post.

 

[JesusFan]

There is a current thread touching on the legitimacy of the longer ending of Mark. I thought this would help.

per the OP....

Would say its about the same as book of Acts for theology today...

Inspired history from God in what really happened, but theology not Normantive for today!

 

[John of Japan]

17 And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues;

18 They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover.

19 So then after the Lord had spoken unto them, he was received up into heaven, and sat on the right hand of God.

20 And they went forth, and preached every where, the Lord working with them, and confirming the word with signs following. Amen. Does this scripture apply to today's believers?

Yes, they are for today, but not in the Charismatic understanding of testing God.

I speak in a "new tongue," Japanese. I remember hearing Richard Wurmbrand (I think it was) tell of being tested by a Communist guard by this passage, who told him if he really believed God he would drink the poison the guard had. Wurmbrand drank it and was protected from harm.

(Sorry to jump in on this thread late. Didn't see it before, but feel my comments are relevant.)

 

[Martin Marprelate]

The verses in question are in about 99.6% of the extant Greek manuscripts and are quoted by some of the earliest Church fathers. Yes, they are the words of our Lord and yes, they are for today, but need to be understood correctly.

The words were spoken to the Apostles (v14). See Heb 2:3-4 for confirmation, if it were needed, that our Lord's words were fulfilled.

As for the alleged 'flow' of the verses. The Gospel reads somewhat oddly however you end it. If you stop at v8, it ends with a preposition. We can trust the Lord to have preserved His word in the vast majority of the texts.

Steve