For almost fifty years, much has been written concerning Mark 16:9-20. During the same time period, evidence once counted against Mark 16:9-20 was shown to be otherwise. In this study, David W. Hester surveys modern scholarship (1965-2011) surrounding the passage. He examines the passage itself--the external evidence, with particular attention paid to the manuscripts and the patristics, especially those of the second and third centuries; and the internal evidence, featuring details that are problematic as well as those that favor Markan authorship. Finally, a proposal concerning the origin of the passage is presented. The first edition of Mark's Gospel ended at 16:8, resulting in the manuscript tradition that omits the passage, but this was not his intended ending. Later, his associates attached Mark's notes and published a second edition of the Gospel with the last twelve verses. This led to its inclusion. Given that the passage is cited by second- and third-century witnesses and attributed to Mark, along with the biblical prohibition against adding to or taking from Scripture, it is doubtful that an anonymous second-century author could have been successful in adding his own composition and it being widely accepted by the early church.David W. Hester. 6 analyzed the plot structure of Mark, utilizing narrative technique.184 Based upon this structure, Danove analyzed the implied reader of Mark in chapter 7. He assumed that the implied reader was proficient in koine greek andanbsp;...
|Title||:||Does Mark 16:9-20 Belong in the New Testament?|
|Author||:||David W. Hester|
|Publisher||:||Wipf and Stock Publishers - 2015-03-19|