Mark 16>

Discussion in '2000-02 Archive' started by hrhema, Nov 13, 2002.

  1. hrhema

    hrhema
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2002
    Messages:
    715
    Likes Received:
    0
    Why did Jesus say the words he said in Mark 16:15-18? Why did Mark even bother to record them at all if they have no meaning for today?

    Many modern day Bible scholars when confronted with the 16th verse try to say the whole chapter did not exist in the original writings of Mark. THey admit that this is one scripture that throws a wrench in modern teaching concerning Baptism.

    Most Baptists don't believe in the signs that Jesus spoke of and declare they have been done away with. Many make fun of the snake handling words but it was real for the Apostle Paul. That Viper could have killed him.
     
  2. Charlie T

    Charlie T
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2002
    Messages:
    112
    Likes Received:
    0
    I think it is proper to research if verses were part of the original texts. I personally think that this is part of the original text and believe it.

    Some may just be trying to explain away supernatural events.
     
  3. BrianT

    BrianT
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2002
    Messages:
    3,516
    Likes Received:
    0
    No, this is not true. It is challenged because of textual evidence. There is no reason to associate those that question the authenticity of the passage with those who question what it teaches, just as one shouldn't say that those who think "the Holy Spirit" shouldn't be in Acts 4:25 are people who don't want to believe that the Holy Spirit inspired the OT authors.
     
  4. Helen

    Helen
    Expand Collapse
    <img src =/Helen2.gif>

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2001
    Messages:
    11,703
    Likes Received:
    1
    Here is what I just typed for a similar thread regarding Mark 16:9-20:

    Serious doubt exists as to whether these verses belong to the Gospel of Mark. They are absent from important early manuscripts and display certain peculiarities of vocabulary, style and theological content that are unlike the rest of Mark. His Gospel probably ended at 16:8, or its original ending has been lost.
    NIV Study Notes.
     
  5. RaptureReady

    RaptureReady
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2002
    Messages:
    1,492
    Likes Received:
    0
    15  And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature.
    16  He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.
    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.

    These signs existed for that time so others would believe. Today we no longer need a sign because that which is perfect has come and that my friend is the Bible. People today take a piece of scripture and never bother to study the context of it. I dare anyone to let the most venomous snake bite them, not go to the doctor and lets see how long they last.

    Back then God used signs to help those there to believe. Today He uses the Bible. Believe it or not.
     
  6. BrianT

    BrianT
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2002
    Messages:
    3,516
    Likes Received:
    0
    What in the context indicates this promise was only temporary?

    Where in scripture is this idea taught? Or instead, is it just a rationalization to explain why you don't want to try to be bitten by a snake? ;)
     
  7. Daniel Dunivan

    Daniel Dunivan
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2002
    Messages:
    374
    Likes Received:
    0
    Textual criticism is not a theological issue, but the employment of a quasi-scientific method (I say quasi, because they do make exceptions when the context shows this to be appropriate. Seeing what is "appropriate" comes with great familiarity with the method and the Greek text. This is something I don't possess, and few do.)
     
  8. Aaron

    Aaron
    Expand Collapse
    Member

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2000
    Messages:
    15,655
    Likes Received:
    225
    Why quibble over whether they belong to the Gospel of Mark or not? One thing is certain, their qualification as Scripture is easily seen.
     
  9. Helen

    Helen
    Expand Collapse
    <img src =/Helen2.gif>

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2001
    Messages:
    11,703
    Likes Received:
    1
    Why quibble over whether they belong to the Gospel of Mark or not? One thing is certain, their qualification as Scripture is easily seen.</font>[/QUOTE]How?
     
  10. JonHenry

    JonHenry
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2002
    Messages:
    110
    Likes Received:
    0
    God will no longer perform sign miracles because we have the Bible?
    If that is true, is He no longer going to miraculously return as promised because we have the completed Word of God? Are we to quit praying for the sick, knowing that God will not heal them publicly having become shy since He completed His Word?

    The Bible nowhere explicitly states the hyper-dispensationalist view that signs cease when the Word is complete. If the Bible taught this view, it would also teach us the standard by which to apply it.

    I will not pick up a scarry snake for these reasons: Jesus was not speaking to me. I am not an apostle. I was not on that hill. I cannot go to Jerusalem first Judea next, since neither is anywhere close. & I am afraid of snakes.

    jh
     
  11. RaptureReady

    RaptureReady
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2002
    Messages:
    1,492
    Likes Received:
    0
    What in the context indicates this promise was only temporary?

    1 Corinthians 13:10  But when that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away.

    Where in scripture is this idea taught? Or instead, is it just a rationalization to explain why you don't want to try to be bitten by a snake? ;)
    </font>[/QUOTE]Signs where for those that did not believe.
    1 Corinthians 14:22  Wherefore tongues are for a sign, not to them that believe, but to them that believe not: but prophesying serveth not for them that believe not, but for them which believe.

    and I don't want to be bitten.
     
  12. RaptureReady

    RaptureReady
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2002
    Messages:
    1,492
    Likes Received:
    0
    Huh? He will return for those that are saved.

    Again, huh? Never stop praying. If God wants to heal publicly He will, but not the way Benny Hinn says he does.

    Then explain 1 Corinthians 13:10.
     
  13. Baptist Believer

    Baptist Believer
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2002
    Messages:
    6,655
    Likes Received:
    189
    I'm not JonHenry, but that verse seems to discuss the return of Jesus, not the completion of the canon of scripture as so many dispensationalists claim.
     
  14. Aaron

    Aaron
    Expand Collapse
    Member

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2000
    Messages:
    15,655
    Likes Received:
    225
    How?

    The witness of the Holy Spirit. Scholarship cannot discern which writings are inspired or not. For every test of canonicity, there is at least one portion of Scripture that is an exception.

    Truly the only true criterion is the witness of the Holy Spirit.
     
  15. RaptureReady

    RaptureReady
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2002
    Messages:
    1,492
    Likes Received:
    0
    I'm not JonHenry, but that verse seems to discuss the return of Jesus, not the completion of the canon of scripture as so many dispensationalists claim.</font>[/QUOTE]Well, I don't know who Jon Henry is nor what a dispensationalists is. I do believe that this verse deals with the perfecting of the Bible.

    In verse 8 it talks about things ceasing, why, because that which is perfect has come. No need for signs and wonders because we have God's complete revelation.

    I guess I will have to lookup the things I don't know.
     
  16. RaptureReady

    RaptureReady
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2002
    Messages:
    1,492
    Likes Received:
    0
    Oops!, I just figured out who Jon Henry is. :rolleyes:

    Sorry JonHenry.
     
  17. hrhema

    hrhema
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2002
    Messages:
    715
    Likes Received:
    0
    When the Apostle Paul wrote the book of Corinthians he was telling the Corinthians that in the future these things would pass away because Jesus who is perfect would come.

    I find it very unbelievable how many people try to say the perfect to come was the Bible. When Paul wrote this there was no new testament. He was writing letters to churches. I would say he probably had no idea at all that they would become part of what we call the New Testament.

    This whole idea is taught by people who do not want to accept the fact that God is still the same God and he performs the same miracles he did.
    God said he is the same and never changes. Jesus Christ the same yesterday, today and forever.

    Tongues have not ceased nor has prophecies nor has healing or miracles or any supernatural things God chooses to do. I have challenged people right and left to prove beyond a shadow of the doubt that the scriptures says this and absolutely no one can do it. They can speculate. They can read commentaries who may agree with them but Paul did not say the Bible is that which is perfect. Anyhow with this thread and what has already been brought up that this chapter is not supposed to be in the original manuscript then the Bible is not perfect. What people keep forgetting is that translators are human and not perfect.

    God is still the same and does not change.
    Trying to make it so does not. All the Baptist preachers can say it is so but it does not make it so. Everyone can interpret what they want the Bible to say but does not mean it says it.
     
  18. RaptureReady

    RaptureReady
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2002
    Messages:
    1,492
    Likes Received:
    0
    He may not, but the Holy Spirit who inspired him to write these things did.

    I agree that He never changes. But, things progress.

    Nor did he say that it was Jesus. I believe in a perfect Bible and you obviously don't, so therefore we will always bump heads

    Your right, the translators were human and not perfect, but when the Holy Spirit inspired them just like He did Paul, God gave us His perfect Word. Where else would you know about faith in Jesus.

    Well, I ask you what makes more since. Believing in a God that is perfect in everything he does, or believing in a God that can create the Heavens and Earth, part the Red Sea, heal the sick, raise the dead, but, for some reason, He can't keep a couple of pages together?
     
  19. JonHenry

    JonHenry
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2002
    Messages:
    110
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ultra-dispensationalism can be hard to understand. I wrote the following annecdote to help illustrate the meaning of I Cor. 13:10 as some people see it:

    An evangelist (let's call him Ted) is in Antioch, healing the sick etc. He finishes healing someone with gout and begins healing a leper. Meanwhile, the apostle John on Patmos writes the final "Amen" and ends the Book of Revelation. The evangelist (Ted) tries in vain to heal the leper. "Oops," he says, "Sorry. Someone must have just completed the canon of Scripture. You can no longer be healed by a sign gift. However, I will send you a Bible and we will pray for you in our midweek service."

    Of course, the leper does not understand a word Ted is saying, since Ted also lost his ability to converse in the man's foreign tongue.

    Then Ted, walking away, is bitten by a viper and dies.
     
  20. BrianT

    BrianT
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2002
    Messages:
    3,516
    Likes Received:
    0
    1 Cor 13:10 is not in the context of then end of Mark 16. And it doesn't mention anything about snakes. [​IMG]
     

Share This Page

Loading...