Basic HTML Version
Puhijsb.iog:
The
PLAIN TRUTH
•
Mllguin' of
UNDBR.STANDJNG
Dear Fr1.end:
The
WORLD TOMORROW
A
WOR.LD·WIDB BROADCAST
H
8 R B S
J.
T
W. A
II I.C S T
J.
0 N
Ci
Procloimo ro
doc
World rhe
GooD
N.,...
en
TK•
'lll'oaLD
ToMCilDOW
'BoX
Lll,
PASADENA, CALIFORNIA
Are the last twelve verses of Mark
1
s Gospel 1nSp1.red?
One of the most controversial po1.nts of Scripture 1s
whether Mark 16:9-20 is actually a part of Scripture. Although
1.t appears
1n
the
K.1ng
James Version, many other translati.ons
either label' this secti.on as an appendix or leave it
1.n
the
footnotes as
1n
the controversial Revised Standard Vers.ion of
the Bible. The Moffatt Translation, together With the Goodspeed
and others
1
not only has 'the long end1.ng found
1n
the King James
Version, but it also has another shorter ending.
Since the Bible is a revelation from God about those
essential facts which we need to know, but which we have no
other way of obtaining, it is very important that we know ·what
constitutes the Bible. If this last portion of Mark
1
s Goaper–
is spurious,:rt is time we learned of the fact. If it ia
gen~e, .
it - is vital that we believe what it contains.
Let us briefly understand the facts behind the contro–
ve.rsy. The eighth verse of Mark, chapter 16, ends abruptly
--seemingly at a place where it would be natural to have · the
thought continue. Why? There have. been two reasons generally
postulated. (1) That Mark Qriginally wrote an ending
that
has
been totally lost, the present endings being merely additions
by later copyists. (2) That for some yet unknown reason Mark
was not permitted to fi_n.ish his Go_spel, and that probably
another person wrote an ending. The scholars are, of course,
in contUsion as to whether this endlng was inspired} or whether
it was merely the addition of another copyist. It might be
important to bring
in
at this point the fact that almost all
scholars dismiss the secondary short
en~
found 1.n the trans–
lations of Moffatt, Goodspeed, and others.
In
Hasting's
Dictionart oi" Christ and the Gospels it is plainly stated that
this, shor aadition 1s
no~ound
!ri
any of the early Church
writers. We can therefore consider it as merely the addition
of a copyist.