Where does the gospel of Mark end? Modern day snake handlers derive their practice from Mark 16:17-18 (KJV)
Where does the gospel of Mark end?
“I testify to everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: If anyone adds to these things, God will add to him the plagues that are written in this book”—Revelation 22:18 NKJV
Promoters and believers in faith healing often use Mark 16:17,18 as Biblical support for their healing practices:
“They will lay their hands on the sick and they will recover” (NKJV).
Snake handling “Christians” love these last few verses of Mark because they say:read more
The woman caught in adultery story is well known today among Christians, and even in popular Western culture, but there are questions about it’s authenticity.
“Yahweh’s promises are promises unalloyed; natural silver which comes from the earth seven times refined”—-Psalm 12:6 NJB
“Every word of God is flawless . . . Do not add to his words or he will rebuke you and prove you a liar”—Proverbs 30:5,6 NIV
“I warn everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this scroll: If anyone adds anything to them, God will add to that person the plagues described in this scroll. And if anyone takes words away from this scroll of prophecy, God will take away from that person any share in the tree of life and in the Holy City”—Revelation 22:18,19 NIVread more
The Book of Revelation is without doubt the most complicated, controversial, and esoteric of the entire Bible! Some even doubt that it should even be in the Bible at all, and assert that its place in the Bible Canon was controversial from the start. This is false. Why? The early acceptance of Revelation by the Christian Church is proof that the book is divinely inspired.
We have early, widespread and consistent reception of Revelation. Papias (c 125), Justin Martyr, Irenaus, the Muratorian Fragment, Hippolytus, Clement of Alexandria, Tertullian, and Origen all accepted Revelation as authentic. That’s impressive! Every one of these accepted Revelation as inspired, on the basis that John, the apostle was the recorder. B W Bacon was so impressed with the initial widespread acceptance of Revelation, that he wrote: “There is no other book in the entire NT whose external attestation can compare with that of Revelation, in nearness, clearness, defintiteness, and positiveness of statement” (The Making of the New Testament, 190).
Objections to Revelation were later and limited. Gaius in the early 3rd century rejected Revelation, thinking it was a forgery of the apostate Cerinthus. This is the first real objection.
Objections to Revelation were not on any historical basis. Gaius rejected the literal millennnial reign of Christ, so he thought the reference in chapter 20 of such had to be a product of the apostate Cerinthus.
Any such objections were resolved early. It was accepted by the synods of Hippo (393) and Carthage (397), by Philastrius of Brescia (c 385), Rufinus of Aquilia (c 404), Jerome (c 414), and Augustine (c 426). They accepted Revelation as authentic because it was accepted by the early Christians as authentic.
There are many quotations from Revelation by early writers, who quoted it as being authentic.
Although it is popular to do so, we should not measure the existence of the New Testament (NT) canon (authoritative, or inspired, books) just by the existence of lists, which came into being somewhat later than the NT canon’s coming into existence. When we examine the way the NT books were viewed and used in the very early days of Christianity, we can determine the de facto existence of a functioning canon by about 100 CE.
Did it take until the fifth century to finalize the NT canon?
The views expressed here are admittedly a little different than the traditional, or orthodox, view of how the New Testament canon, in particular, and the Bible as a whole, came into acceptance. The views presented here actually stand in stark contrast to modern-day populist scholars, like the agnostic Bart Ehrman.
“Jesus replied, “Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah, for this was not revealed to you by flesh and blood, but by my Father in heaven.” (Matthew 16:17). The NT canon was not revealed by humans, but by God.
The books of the Bible did not become the Word of God because people decided it to be so. A book became canonical if it was inspired by God (2 Timothy 3:16,17; 2 Peter 1:20,21). Inspiration by God, and not humanly contrived lists, determines canonization.
“That by revelation there was made known to me the mystery, as I wrote before in brief. By referring to this, when you read you can understand my insight into the mystery of Christ, which in other generations was not made known to the sons of men, as it has now been revealed to His holy apostles and prophets in the Spirit” (Ephesians 3:3-5). Canonical books (inspired books of the Bible), prophecy, and revelation were revealed by the holy Spirt, not man-made councils.
The Roman Catholic Church (RCC) claims responsibility for the decision as to which books should be included in the Bible canon. However, the NT canon was settled long before then – not by any council’s decision, but by the same holy Spirit that inspired the Bible in the first place (2 Timothy 3:16; 2 Peter 1:20,21).
“And we also thank God continually because, when you received the word of God, which you heard from us, you accepted it not as a human word, but as it actually is, the word of God, which is indeed at work in you who believe.” (1 Thessalonians 2:13) The NT canon was accepted as the word of God by the early church, shortly after each book was written, which was long before the RCC came into existence in the 4th century.
There is no evidence that any book in our canon today gradually gained acceptance over time. There were no stages of acceptance for each individual canonical book.
“Dear friends, although I was very eager to write to you about the salvation we share, I felt compelled to write and urge you to contend for the faith that was once for all entrusted to God’s holy people ” (Jude 3). This body of truth, or faith, contained in the New Testament, was delivered “once for all” time, being completed prior to 100 CE, according to the evidence.
“Just as our dear brother Paul also wrote you with the wisdom that God gave him. He writes the same way in all his letters, speaking in them of these matters. His letters contain some things that are hard to understand, which is ignorant and unstable people distort, as they do the other Scriptures, to their own destruction (2 Peter 3:15,16). This gives scriptural status to all 14 of Paul’s letters, by placing them as having equal status with the Hebrew Scriptures. Why can we say this?
Since Peter wrote to the “exiles scattered throughout [5] provinces” or regions (1 Peter 1:1), it is reasonable that Peter was referring to the entire collection of Paul’s letters available at the time. Peter probably knew all but possibly one or two of Paul’s letters that were available at the time. Not only would this mean that Peter was well aware of Paul’s writings, but as a leading apostle, he affirmed them. It’s obvious that Paul’s letters had a widespread reputation. From this we can infer that they were circulating possibly as a corpus, or body, in the 60’s. Ignatius of Antioch in the early 100’s, and Polycarp in the mid 100’s show familiarity with Romans, 1 Corinthians, Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, 1 and 2 Thessalonians, 1 and 2 Timothy, and Hebrews – eleven of Paul’s letters! The Chester Beatty papyrus 46, dated to around 200 CE, is a collection of most of Paul’s letters, including Hebrews. The facts solidly prove that the Pauline corpus was circulating early, long before the Roman Catholic Church (RCC) councils of the latter part of the 4th century.
From this platform of Paul’s 14 letters circulating as scripture from the 60’s on, we can verify the rest of 13 NT books.
“For the Scripture says… ‘The worker deserves his wages.'” (1 Timothy 5:18) Paul apparently quotes from Luke 10:7, which says “…for the worker deserves his wages”, and also quotesDeuteronomy 25:4, calling both “Scripture”. This quote of 1 Timothy 5:18gives scriptural status, or acknowledges the scriptural status, of Luke’s writings, namely volume 1 – Luke, and volume 2 – Acts.
Since Luke and Acts comprise Volumes 1 and 2 of Luke’s history (“my former book” – Acts 1:1), we can conclude that they both were circulating as scripture in the 60’s. Polycarp cites some verses in Luke, in the mid-100’s.
“Remember what the apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ foretold.” (Jude 17) The word of the apostles was authoritative. The New Testament was written by four apostles directly chosen by Jesus, namely, Matthew, John, Peter and Paul. Four other close associates of the apostles, namely, Mark, Luke, James, and Jude, wrote the rest of the New Testament.
In the 60’s, when Jude wrote his letter, the apostles and their very close associates’ writings were considered authoritative. Papias and Justin Martyr referred to Matthew and Mark’s books, with Mark named as Peter’s secretary.
“The church in Babylon, also chosen, sends you greetings, as does Mark, my son” (1 Peter 5:13). Mark was a very close associate of Peter, apparently his secretary, writing the book of Mark. So Mark’s book had apostolic authority.
Polycarp and Justin Martyr in the mid-100’s referred to 1 John and John, respectively. Ignatius of Antioch, who was martyred c. 110 CE, makes clear references to John’s writings.
The Muratorian fragment of c. 170 CE named 23 of the 27 NT books as authentic. Only Hebrews, James and Peter’s 2 letters were omitted. This proves widespread circulation and approval of, and for, the 23 books some time prior to this. Since the Muratorian document is fragmentary – omission from it does not imply non-acceptance.
John and Peter’s status as prominent apostles gave them outstanding authority, and their writings would have been received as such.
1 Corinthians 15:7 – “Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles.” Jesus appeared to James, his half-brother.
History says Matthew, Mark, Luke and John wrote the books with those titles. People seem to have a highly variable standard in their assessment of what ancient writings are genuine, especially the Bible. What do we mean? Here is an example:
Did Matthew, Mark, Luke and John really write the Gospels, or were these names attributed later?
Most people accept Alexander the Great as a real historical figure. Yet, the two earliest biographies of Alexander the Great were written by Arrian and Plutarch more than 400 years after the Great One’s death 323 BCE. Legends about him developed centuries after these two writers. Yet, Alexander’s true, accurate history is viewed as being preserved for hundreds of years prior to these legends.read more
The New Testament canon was established early, by Holy Spirit
The New Testament canon was established early, by Holy Spirit
The New Testament canon was established in the first century by Holy Spirit. Let’s examine some notes on the scriptures which confirm this fact:
2 Peter 1:16-21 – Peter affirms Old Testament prophets wrote God’s word. He puts himself and other apostles in the same category.
2 Peter 3:15-16 – Paul’s letters were on the same level as all the “rest of the scriptures.” That is, inspired of God. Early Greek manuscripts show Paul writing 14 letters.
2 Timothy 3:16-17 – The rest of the scriptures (the Old Testament) are inspired of God. We can broaden this now, and apply the principle to all 66 canonical books as shown below:
Acts 1:1-3 – “In my former book, Theophilus…” (NIV) So he implies Acts is the second volume.
Jude 17 – “But you, my dear friends, must remember what the apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ said.” Jude was apparently referring to Acts 20:29; 1 Timothy 4:1-2; 2 Timothy 3:1-5; 2 Peter 2:1-3; 2 John 7. Apostolic authority carried great weight. The apostles’ writings apparently were considered scripture.
Galatians 1:17-20 – Paul put his own apostleship in the same category as the original twelve apostles. Jesus’ brother James was considered an apostle by this time, and likely their brother Jude was also.
So books by Matthew, John, Paul, Peter, James (Jesus’ brother) and Jude were considered scripture. Mark wrote for Peter. Luke wrote for Paul and interviewed many eyewitnesses.
Increase in the knowledge of God
The Old Testament predicted an increase in the knowledge of God when Christ comes with the new covenant:
“They will neither harm nor destroy on all my holy mountain, for the earth will be filled with the knowledge of the Lord as the waters cover the sea.” (Isaiah 11:9)
“I will give them a heart to know me, that I am the Lord. They will be my people, and I will be their God, for they will return to me with all their heart.” (Jeremiah 24:7)
“‘This is the covenant I will make with the people of Israel after that time,’ declares the Lord. ‘I will put my law in their minds and write it on their hearts. I will be their God, and they will be my people. No longer will they teach their neighbor, or say to one another, ‘Know the Lord,’ because they will all know me, from the least of them to the greatest,’ declares the Lord. ‘For I will forgive their wickedness and will remember their sins no more.'” (Jeremiah 31:33-34)
“For the earth will be filled with the knowledge of the glory of the Lord as the waters cover the sea.” (Habakkuk 2:14)
It is an extraordinary claim that Jesus rose from the dead
“He is not here, but He has been resurrected” (Luke 24:6 HCSB). Is there extraordinary proof of Jesus’ resurrection? The claim that Jesus rose from the dead is extraordinary. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. What is the strongest proof that Jesus was resurrected? Let’s start at the point of beginning, and work, or build from there.
This beginning point is that the universe, the earth, etc. very strongly witness to God’s existence as Creator. Psalm 19:1 says: “the heavens declare the glory of God.” (NIV)
Building on this is the text of the New Testament. It has been subjected to the most extreme scrutiny imaginable. This has resulted in the number one “Extraordinary Proof” of all time. This is the fact that the text of the New Testament in Koine Greek that we have today is verified as being 99.5% pure. That is 99.5% of the words are the same as originally written by writers Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Paul etc. What about the other 0.5% in which there is some doubt? These somewhat doubtful words do not affect any of the principles, truths or doctrines in the Bible. They are of inconsequential interest to some scholars, technicians, those who love trivia, etc., but that’s it. No other work from ancient times comes anywhere close to the New Testament textual integrity.
To review so far, creation tells us there must be a Creator, just as a house tells us that somebody built it. (Hebrews 3:4) Second, the Biblical New Testament text has been verified as pure – that is, today it is virtually identical to the original writings done from circa 40 to 98 CE. (Romans 1:19-22; 1 Peter 1:24-25)
Third, the Old Testament text has been verified as being unchanged as to essentials after many hundreds of years of copying, by the Dead Sea Scrolls. (Isaiah 40:8) The Old Testament text was fixed, and the Canon closed before 400 BCE. Jesus quoted from and confirmed the entire Old Testament as God’s infallible word. (Luke 24:44)
Fourth, just as extraordinary point #2 above builds on point #1, so it is with this one. Old Testament prophecy not only predicted accurately Jesus conception, birth, life and death – it gave predictions of his resurrection. (Isaiah 52:13-15; Isaiah 53:1-12; Psalm 16:10) Critics may try to claim these prophecies were written after the fact. However, the clear evidence proves them flatly wrong. How? The Dead Sea Scrolls prove these prophecies were written hundreds of years prior to Jesus’ human existence.
Reviewing now, we have added the accurately preserved Old Testament text, and the uniquely accurate Old Testament prophecies about Jesus’ death and resurrection to the list of extraordinary proofs.
Back to extraordinary proof #2: the verified pure, unadulterated New Testament text clearly documents Jesus’ resurrection. (
Some have claimed the different accounts of resurrection appearances are “proof” of contradictions
Some have claimed the different accounts of Jesus’ resurrection appearances in the four Gospels and 1 Corinthians are “proofs” these Bible books are riddled with errors and contradictions. If true, these would, in turn,” prove” the Bible not to be inspired of God, or infallible, as many Christians believe that it is.
The Bible itself says that these different resurrection appearances confirm the Bible’s inspiration by God.
“To whom He also presented Himself alive after His suffering, by many infallible proofs, being seen by them during forty days and speaking of the things pertaining to the kingdom of God.” (Acts 1:3 NKJV, emphasis added)
When people point out the differences in the reporting in the Gospels and 1 Corinthians of which individuals saw the resurrected Jesus and claim these are contradictions, they actually point out something that defeats their own argument. Rather than contradicting one another, the differences in the reporting actually show that these five different accounts are independent of one another. They were written, not in collusion with each other to fabricate a myth or legend, but by five different men who had different perspectives. Each of the writers accurately recorded the events they wrote about from their differing perspectives.
Two of these writers were “apostles whom He had chosen” during His earthly ministry, “to whom He also presented Himself alive after His suffering by many infallible proofs” (Acts 1:2-3 NKJV), namely Matthew and John. “Mark, my son in Christ,” as Peter called him, was his recorder of his eyewitness account, so Mark’s gospel is essentially the apostle Peter’s eyewitness account. (1 Peter 5:13 NCV) Luke, who was not an eyewitness himself, notes that others had “set out to write accounts about the events that have been fulfilled among us. They used eyewitness reports circulating among us from the early disciples.” (Luke 1:1-2 NLT) These writings were not legends, or rumors, they were accurate historical accounts based on eyewitness statements. Luke says that he, “having carefully investigated everything from the beginning … decided to write a careful account” (Luke 1:3 NLT), using accurate, truthful, factual material. Luke traveled extensively with the Apostle Paul, who had encountered the resurrected Jesus a couple of years after Jesus’ resurrection. Jesus personally selected Paul to be his “chosen instrument to take my message to the Gentiles and to kings, as well as the people of Israel.” (Acts 9:15 NLT) Paul and Luke, during their extensive travels, spent time with many of the original early Christians over a period of a number of years. Furthermore, the fact is that the “Spirit of the truth” would “guide [them] into all truth”(John 16:13 NLT), as Jesus promised. So it proved to be, the New Testament writings were guided by the holy Spirit.
Another point worth noting is that each writer had to be highly selective in choosing which material to record. Why? John, using hyperbole, explains in his endnote: “Jesus did many other things as well. If every one of them were written down, I suppose that even the whole world would not have room for the books that would be written.” (John 21:25 NIV, emphasis added) John also made a similar admission when he stated the purpose of his writing: “Jesus performed many other signs in the presence of his disciples, which are not recorded in this book.” (John 20:30 NIV), emphasis added) So John plainly states there are multitudes of Jesus’ activities that he did not record. Although the synoptics do not explicitly state it, it is obvious also that they had to be highly selective about which of numerous events in Jesus’ life to record.
If each Gospel account was identical, then why would the New Testament not have but one Gospel book? In that case, there would be no need to waste all the time writing materials and make four copies of the same identical account. The reason the New Testament includes these four Gospels is because there are four independent, accurate accounts of Jesus’ life, with major emphasis on the events of the week leading up to his execution, and the events that follow.
If the differences in the four Gospels and 1 Corinthians concerned the main points, there may be some cause for concern. Let’s take an example of this. Mark’s Gospel in its original form ended at 16:8, and included no resurrection appearances of Jesus. The other three Gospels and 1 Corinthians do record resurrection appearances of Jesus, with variations. Is Mark’s omission here a contradiction? No, omission is not tantamount to contradiction, in, and of, itself. Notice two key points:
None of the four Gospels, or 1 Corinthians, individually, give all the details regarding Jesus’ resurrection appearances. These accounts supplement each other. No group of four or five witnesses, news reporters, or news outlets will give identical reports when reporting a series of major events. They will agree on the main points, but the details will differ.
Yes, the four Gospels and 1 Corinthians differ in their reporting of who saw the resurrected Jesus. Critics claim these differences amount to contradictions. However, this is actually not the case. Why not? For one thing, most of the reporting done in the five accounts lacks specific time references, which pulls the rug out from under the so-called “chronological contradictions.”
While carefully examining the five accounts of the witnesses of the resurrected Jesus, we can come up with who saw Jesus first, etc. (John 20:1-18) But the exact chronological order of these witnesses is not the major event. The event of gigantic proportions is the resurrection of Jesus.
One alleged contradiction is Paul’s list of witnesses in 1 Corinthians 15:3-8. He lists Cephas (Peter) first, so critics claim this contradicts John’s account in which Mary Magdalene first meets the resurrected Jesus. However, looking carefully at Paul’s account, we notice that he does not say that Cephas (Peter) saw the risen Jesus first. Paul states “that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, and that he appeared to Cephas.” (1 Corinthians 15:4-5 NIV) Paul writes factually, without giving every detail, including an exhaustive list of different witnesses.
As to the critics’ assertion that none of the writers of the four Gospels met with the risen Jesus, again, a careful examination of the evidence proves this to be an invalid objection, as follows:
“The apostles he had chosen” were given “many convincing proofs that he was alive. He appeared to them over a period of forty days.” “The apostles he had chosen” included Gospel writers Matthew and John. Peter was also an apostle, and we know Mark was his writer for the second Gospel. (Acts 1:1-3 NIV)
Risen Jesus commanded them: “Do not leave Jerusalem, but wait for the gift…. Then the apostles returned to Jerusalem…. Those present were Peter, John… and Matthew.” (Acts 1:4, 12-13 NIV) They decided to select a replacement for Judas, “appointed to serve with us as a witness to his resurrection.” (Acts 1:22 NJB) The new apostle had to be one who had witnessed the risen Jesus, so he could “serve with us as a witness to his resurrection.” “Us” here included witnesses Matthew, Peter and John.
Were there any eyewitnesses to Jesus’ death, burial, and resurrection?
Critics of the Bible claim there are no eyewitnesses of Jesus’ death, burial and resurrection. This article takes an objective look at the facts.
“[The Gospels] were written down thirty-five to sixty-five years after Jesus’ death . . . not by people who were eyewitnesses, but by people living later”—Jesus, Apocalyptic Prophet of the New Millenneum, 2005, pages 44-45, by Bart Ehrman
“There is not a sentence concerning Jesus in the entire New Testament by anyone who had ever met the unwilling King of the Jews”—Jesus and Yahweh, 2005, page 19, by H. Bloom
These are common claims today by those who are considered to be scholars, and which are popularly believed by many. On the other hand, New Testament Bible writers tell a very different story.
“They were handed down to us by those who were eyewitnesses”—Luke 1:2 NIV
“The original eyewitnesses and servants of the word handed them down to us=&0=&
“We were eyewitnesses of his majesty”—2 Peter 1:16 NIV
“We have heard, which we have seen with our own eyes, which we have looked at and our hands have touched — this we proclaim concerning the Word of life . . . We proclaim to you what we have seen and heard”—1 John 1:1-3 NIV)
Much importance is given today to eyewitness reports, but what about New Testament Bible writers? These writers claim to either be eyewitnesses themselves, or to use eyewitness testimony, in much of their writings. Who, and what, should we believe about all of this?
Many non-believers, skeptics and critics, do not doubt the existence of the historical Jesus. It is the miracles, and most importantly, his death and resurrection that they deny. But the Bible contains much evidence that should be examined by any honest-hearted skeptic, especially if they are truly open-minded enough to give it a fair chance. To assist with this, let’s take a look at the witnesses to Jesus’ execution, burial, empty tomb, and resurrected state.
The placement of witnesses is very important in proving things. Police reports give much importance to eyewitness statements. Many local news programs are titled “Eyewitness News.” The Gospels and letters (such as 1 Corinthians) were all written independently. There were no “rules,” such as requiring strict chronological listing of all witnesses of Jesus in his resurrected state. The writers of Matthew, Mark, Luke, John and 1 Corinthians made true and accurate statements in their books. There are no false statements, even though there are divergences. Divergent accounts are not tantamount to contradictions, as some critics and skeptics assert. In fact, virtually identical accounts would be highly suspect to be collusion, so the divergences actually are a testimony to Biblical accuracy.
Notice the similarities among the four Gospel accounts:
There are named witnesses at Jesus’ execution site Friday afternoon.
There are named witnesses at his burial Friday near dusk.
There are named witnesses at his newly emptied tomb around sunrise on Sunday morning.
There are named witnesses of Jesus in his resurrected state (including 1 Corinthians, but excluding Mark, because Mark ends at 16:8. Verses 9-20 are spurious additions).
There are unnamed, anonymous witnesses in each of the above categories.
Does the temple cleansing in John contradict the Synoptic Gospels?
Critics claim that the temple cleansing in the Gospel of John is either the same temple cleansing reported by the three Synoptics, Matthew, Mark and Luke, or is out of place, therefore constituting a “contradiction” in the Gospels. Below are listed a number of reasons why the temple cleansing in John is accurate and was performed by Jesus around the time of the first Passover after his baptism, which was probably about six months earlier. John clearly states in John 20:31 and John 21:25 that he was highly selective in his reporting on the events of Jesus’ life. The other three Gospel writers had already reported on the second temple cleansing by the time John wrote his gospel. Upon close examination, it seems fairly obvious that John was very familiar with these other three Gospels, and quite possibly had copies of them in his possession as he wrote the fourth Gospel. John filled in many gaps that the Synoptics did not report on. In fact, 92% of his gospel is unique. John reports the following details about the first temple cleansing, that are omitted from the second temple cleansing recorded in Matthew, Mark, and Luke: read more
