Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

gmark - Re: long ending of Mark

gmark AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Kata Markon

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: "Peter Thomas" <peter.thomas1 AT virgin.net>
  • To: gmark AT franklin.oit.unc.edu
  • Subject: Re: long ending of Mark
  • Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2002 10:25:09 -0400


My MA dissertation (London Bible College, Brunel UK 1995 supervised by
Rev. Dr. Steve Motyer, examined by Rev. Professor Colin Gunton) addressed
the issue of authorship of Mark 16:9-20 under the title, "Is the Longer
Ending of Mark Holy Scripture? An examination of the nature of Biblical
Authority."
This combined a systematics approach to the nature of Scripture with a
critical analysis of the text of Mark 16:9-20 and a survey of recent
approaches and conclusions regarding authorship.

My website has a brief summary of my conclusions at
www.pbthomas.fsnet.co.uk
I would be most happy to enter into email correspondence on the issue, or
supply the full Bibliography if requested.

Especially significant materials on the subject included
J.Hug La Finale de l'Evangile de Marc Paris: J.Gabalda, 1978
P.A.Mirecki Mark 16:9-20 Composition, Tradition and Redaction unpublished
ThD thesis, Harvard, 1986. Abstract in Dissertation Abstracts
International 47.05 (1986) 1767A.

In essence I concluded that although 16:9-20 was not originally part of
the same document as 1:1-16:8, this does not rule out Markan authorship.
Since the churches at some later period were happy to attach 16:9ff as
part of Mark's gospel, that text must itself have had a good pedigree.
Narrative and Redaction criticism clearly cannot be applied to the gospel
beyond the discontinuity at 16:8, but that does not make it legitimate to
ignore the Longer Ending completely.

B.M.Metzger argues,
"Since Mark was not responsible for the composition of the last twelve
verses of the generally current form of his Gospel, and since they
undoubtedly had been attached to the Gospel before the Church recognized
the fourfold Gospels as canonical, it follows that the New Testament
contains not four but five evangelic accounts of events subsequent to the
resurrection." (B.M.Metzger The Text of the New Testament Oxford: OUP,
1992, 229.)

I believe Metzger has a point!

Rev Peter Thomas MA MA
Brentwood, Essex, England
peter.thomas1 AT virgin.net




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page