Mark 16 Devotional
by Pastor Mark Hudson
You probably have some notes in your Bible about Mark 16:9-20, something to the effect that some of the earlier manuscripts do not include 16:9-20. What does that mean and why are those verses still in the Bible? To begin with, there are close to 5,000 manuscripts of the New Testament scattered around the world. That means there are sections of copies the New Testament that help scholars determine the accuracy of translations. There are no original manuscripts, only copies but the New Testament is, by far, the best attested ancient document in the world. For instance, comparing the New Testament to other ancient documents the New Testament has many more copies, is closer to the date of composition, and is far more accurate than any other ancient document. That is not a matter of faith over science; it is just the truth. Homer’s works is the closest with 643 copies and a 95% accuracy compared the New Testament with 5,000 copies, written within 100 years of the event and a 99+% accuracy. Next in number is the works of Demosthenes, the earlies copies 700 years later. Only 200 copies with no way to measure the accuracy. Then the rest of the number of copies ranges from 8-20 for works of Livy, Thucydides, Herodotus, Tacitus, and Caesar. There is no comparison for 5,000 copies and those copies were written within decades of the events. See Norman Geisler Christian Apologetics Baker Books, 1976 p. 307 for an excellent graph explaining this.
Some New Testament scholars study lower or textual criticism. This study examines the various documents to determine the best ending to a word or the best word when there might be a letter or two changed in some manuscripts. Over the years, scholars have grouped certain manuscripts as more trustworthy than others. These might be earlier than other manuscripts, closer in provenance, or more reliable in other sections. Scholars have developed ways to determine why copyist may make a mistake or why some may try to smooth over difficulties by a variety of detective-like ways to go about their research.
Anyone who can read a Greek New Testament (that seminary students begin with) will often see a letter by a word referencing the lower part of the page debating the merits of an ending of a word or a letter change in a word. They even grade the certainty of their decision. This may seem tedious, if not pedantic, but remember: The Bible is the most studied book ever in the world. Scholar, lay people, believers and unbelievers study, teach, ridicule, and love this book.
The notes you have in your Bible are also signaling something else: canon. Are these verses included in the canon? Canon may not be a subject you think about often. But this is a fruitful subject for you to consider. What books are included in the Bible. Who decided that, how, and when are all hot topics regarding canon? My favorite author on this topic is Michael J Kruger, the President of Reformed Theological Seminary in Charlotte NC. His book Canon Revisited is a helpful treatment of this subject. Here are his attempt at a definition of canon. He uses three different approaches to arrive at a true definition. The first is:
1.Exclusive: Fixed final closed list
This refers to the end of the whole process. This is after the dust settles, the debates are over, and the boundaries are tight. This affects the way you date canon. You would conclude the canon was established in the 4th or 5th century if this is your only definition.
The positive aspect of this approach is that the canon took time. The negative is that before 4th century the church was in the dark. Christians didn’t know what to read. But that is not what happened. The other negative is this: if only use this, you have canon because it is something the church did. The church made the canon in this view which is not what actually happened.
- Function
We determine the books used by Christians as Scripture as a way to define canon. We ask which books function like Scripture to the early Christians. With this definition of canon, we discover a canon is found very early.
The positives is that we see a core collection of books functioning as Scripture at a very early time in the church’s life. In other words, Christians, in the first century, had a good idea what to read if they wanted to read God’s Word. And this is all before any church councils or declarations of lists. The weakness is neither of these two address the ontology of canon or what canon is of itself. Was a book Scripture as soon as it was written or only when a church declared it was part of the canon?
- Ontological This definition simply says canon is the books God gave His church . This looks at it from God’s perspective. When is the date? First century! B.B. Warfield claimed correctly that the canon was completed when John wrote Revelation. So, this is the notion that we recognize what God has established. The church does not make a book the canon; the church only receives or recognizes canon.
What Kruger proposes is that we use all three definitions to arrive at canon, not just one or two. These perspectives combine to show what should be included in the Bible or excluded. So, this is why most scholars do not think these verses belong in the Bible. After this cursory overview, you know the judgment that these verses are not canonical is arrived at by careful, well thought out deliberation that protects what is and is not included in the Bible.
Father, thank you that what I read in the Bible has been a product of your Spirit governing the words, actions, and decisions of godly people over the years. While I am reading a translation of the Bible that I will never read in the original Greek or Hebrew, I am confident I am understanding more truth than I can apply. Thank you for your Word. Even I recognize the authenticity, power, and truth of Your Word. O, heavenly Father, help me to love You more as I read, study, and listen to Your Word. In Christ’s name, Amen.