Featured Mark 16: 9-20?

I prefer Giordano's Chicago style, but I'm pretty sure it's not the original pizza.

 

Are all commentaries scripture? Is Mark 16:9-20 scripture...or commentary added later?
There is no consensus to the point that we say vs 9-29 is apocryphal. But...research points in that direction.

 

Maybe. Which is why the verses remain...with a notation.

 

Oooo.. That one burns.

Sent from my Motorola Droid Turbo.

 

Irenaeus makes a direct reference to the ending of the Gospel of Mark, and this reference is to the long ending. This is in his Against Heresies, with an estimated date range of AD 175-185, so prior to the two older manuscripts that don't have it.He quotes the Scripture (Mark 16:19 So then after the Lord had spoken unto them, he was received up into heaven, and sat on the right hand of God, KJV) and places the words at the end of Mark’s Gospel.

Irenaeus, Against Heresies, Bk. 3, Ch. 10.5
“Wherefore also Mark, the interpreter and follower of Peter, does thus commence his Gospel narrative: The beginning of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God; as it is written in the prophets, Behold, I send My messenger before Your face, which shall prepare Your way. The voice of one crying in the wilderness, Prepare the way of the Lord, make the paths straight before our God. Plainly does the commencement of the Gospel quote the words of the holy prophets, and point out Him at once, whom they confessed as God and Lord; Him, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who had also made promise to Him, that He would send His messenger before His face, who was John, crying in the wilderness, in the spirit and power of Elias, Prepare the way of the Lord, make straight paths before our God. For the prophets did not announce one and another God, but one and the same; under various aspects, however, and many titles. For varied and rich in attribute is the Father, as I have already shown in the book preceding this; and I shall show [the same truth] from the prophets themselves in the further course of this work. Also, towards the conclusion of his Gospel, Mark says: So then, after the Lord Jesus had spoken to them, He was received up into heaven, and sits on the right hand of God; confirming what had been spoken by the prophet: The Lord said to my Lord, Sit on My right hand, until I make Your foes Your footstool. Thus God and the Father are truly one and the same; He who was announced by the prophets, and handed down by the true Gospel; whom we Christians worship and love with the whole heart, as the Maker of heaven and earth, and of all things therein.”

Translated by Alexander Roberts and William Rambaut. From Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol. 1, edited by Alexander Roberts, James Donaldson, and A. Cleveland Coxe, Buffalo, NY: Christian Literature Publishing Co., 1885
[bold referencing mine]

 

In the end, God must open our hearts to Him.
That being said, you can discuss the fact that the Bible is better documented than any ancient document. If you can't accept the history presented in the Bible, then you cannot accept any ancient history because the documentation is so weak.
Read "Seeking Allah, Finding Jesus" by Nabeel Qureshi as an example of the use of biblical apologetics.
You may not feel comfortable because it doesn't match your gifts, but God has gifted brothers and sisters to powerfully argue the faith.
I might have provided a direction for him to educate himself behind the argument for biblical authenticity and then go talk to the atheist. I say this because...how will the atheist know he's wrong if he does not hear?

 

I would suggest he read Lee Strobel's book "The Case for Christ" as a good primer. Also Josh McDowell's well traveled book "Evidence That Demands a Verdict" is worth a read.

 

Agreed. The interaction has to be a respectful dialogue where both parties share their worldviews and are free to question the presuppositions of the other person.
Since God will grant us perseverance in the faith we can confidently dialogue and even acknowledge the areas where we find agreement with an atheist. Like us all, they are sinners trying to find a meaning in a world that is meaningless without Christ.

 

See for yourself.

http://www.alanknox.net/2007/04/last-twelve-verses-of-mark-conference_13/


The Last Twelve Verses of Mark ConferenceSession 1 – Daniel Wallace

These people think they are right as well

 

Manuscripts (MSS, abbreviated) evidence for the reading (or Gospel ending) of Mark 16:9-20 KJB-

3 of the so-called Great Uncials : A (Alexandrinus), C (Codex Ephraemi Rescriptus), D (Codex Bezae Cantabrigensis), and many other Uncials: E, F, G, (H), K, (L), M, S, U, V, (W), X, Y.

It is in - Gamma, Delta, Theta, Pi, Sigma, (Psi), Omega, (099), (0112).

In thee vast # (1,000's of MSS) of "Cursives", being in "MAJORITY", fam 1,13.

Old Latin - aur, c, d-suppl, ff2, g1,2, l, n, o, p, r2, & Vulgate (1,000's of MSS)

SYRIAC - peshitta, curetonian, harclean, palestinian.

COPTIC - sahidic, bohairic, fayyumic.

Gothic, Armenian, Ethiopic.

It is extant (available) in 047, 055, 0211, 0233?, 0257.

Early bishops (so-called ECF), who claimed direct succession of the Apostles never left it out-

TATIAN, Diatessaron, (I 10:125,126,128,129), in entirety.

IRENAEUS, Against Heresies (I 1:426), vs. 16:18

TERTULLIAN, Resurrection of Flesh (I 3:584), vs. 16:19; Against Praxeas (I 3:627), vs. 16:19

CYPRIAN, 7th Council (I 5:569), refers to vs. 16:17,18; Gospel of Nicodemus (I 8:422,432,436,445), vs. 16:15-19

APHRAHAT, Demonstrations (III 13:351), vs. 16:16-19

APOSTOLIC CONST. (I 7:457,479), vs 16:16-19

AMBROSE, The Holy Spirit (III 10:133,134), vs. 16:15-18; Const. of Faith (III 10:216), vs. 16:15; Repentance (III 10:335), vs. 16:17,18.

Nothing in indexes of the ANPF of pre-400 AD father quoting up to vs. 8 and stopping.

Main line Bibles always had it: AV (KJB), HF & CR*; Tyndale, Great, Geneva, Bishops, Stephanus, Th. Beza, Elzivir bro., E, 238, 239, 440, 475-2nd. cor., 477, 486, 488, 489, 1071, & etc.

Basically in 10,000's of MSS, only 'missing' in: Aleph (Sinaiticus) [which omits Gen. 23:19-24:46, Num. 5:27-7:20, 1 Chron. 9:27-19:17, Exo., Jos., 1 & 2 Sam., 1 & 2 Ki., Jdg., Hos., Amo., Mic., Eze. Dan., Mrk 16:9-20 (with room for it), Jhn. 7:53-8:11; & adds Shep. of Hermes, & Ep. Barnabus], B (Vaticanus), the 2 most 'emended' (corrupted) Codices and in 'pc' (UBS cites 1 lone cursive*), (k), sin, sa-ms, Arm-mss.

 

You are mistaken. Sinaiticus has Gen. 23:19-Gen. 24:46; Numbers 5:26-7:20; 1 Chron. 9:27--1917; Amos, Micah.(Among other books and fragments of the O.T.)

I wouldn't use the term "omitted" though.Through wear and tear a number of books and passages fell away.