100+ hours of research. Is the longer ending of Mark authentic?: The Mark Series pt 69 (16:9-20)

Today's the day. I've spent weeks trying to dig deep on the debate of whether the last 12 verses of the Gospel of Mark are actually part of the Gospel of Mark. Video Map with Time Stamps: 0:00 - Introduction 1. 3:45 Mike admits his bias 2. 7:39 Why this research was so hard 3. 10:04 Mike’s basic conclusions on the passage 4. 11:21 Here begins the external evidence analysis 5. 16:40 Codex Sinaiticus 6. 22:38 Codex Vaticanus 7. 33:55 How important are those 2 manuscripts really? 8. 36:18 Codex 304; a Byzantine MS that ends at vs. 8 9. 40:40 Other Greek manuscripts that weigh in on this 10. 52:00 Syriac translations 11. 54:30 Armenian translations 12. 55:49 Georgian translations 13. 56:42 Sahidic translations 14. 58:03 Latin translations 15. 1:00:13 Lectionary systems 16. 1:01:38 What church fathers have to say 17. 1:02:35 Irenaeus (c. 180) 18. 1:04:01 Tatian (c. 170) 19. 1:04:38 Eusebius (mid 300s) 20. 1:10:45 Jerome (early 400s) 21. 1:16:03 Victor of Antioch (5th or 6th century) 22. 1:17:22 Clement of Alexandria 23. 1:18:04 Origen 24. 1:19:11 1st Clement (c. 95) 25. 1:22:00 My thoughts on Lunn and Snapp 26. 1:22:34 Conclusion on the church fathers 27. 1:24:32 What is the “internal evidence”? 28. 1:28:58 How vs. 9 doesn’t fit with vs. 8 29. 1:33:16 Two common bad examples of internal evidence 30. 1:36:45 Kai is not like Mark 31. 1:41:29 The historical present 32. 1:43:06 The demonstrative pronoun 33. 1:44:46 Verbs for perception 34. 1:45:57 The strongest piece of internal evidence 35. 1:50:10 21 Markisms 36. 1:55:00 The million-dollar question of scribal motives 37. 2:03:55 Why I still want the longer ending in my Bible 38. 2:06:46 Lingering issues This is a book where 4 scholars each build a case for their different views on the ending of Mark. It’s a good introduction into the issues of the debate even if no one scholar has the space to fully flesh out their case. “Perspectives on the Ending of Mark: Four Views” https://www.amazon.com/Perspectives-Ending-Mark-Daniel-Wallace-ebook/dp/B004OR17WK/ Nicholas Lunn recently wrote a book offering a very detailed case that the longer ending always part of Mark’s Gospel. At first I found Lunn’s book to be really helpful in challenging the scholarly majority. But after spending a lot of time with it I’ve come to think that his work causes more confusion than clarity on the topic. Uneven standards in how evidence is handled make his work difficult to read without leading to important misimpressions. “The Original Ending of Mark: A New Case for the Authenticity of Mark 16:9-20” https://www.amazon.com/Original-Ending-Mark-Case-Authenticity-ebook/dp/B00OU6OB78/ Larry Hurtado offered three short reviews of Lunn’s book, all three at this link. http://evangelicaltextualcriticism.blogspot.com/search/label/Nicholas%20P.%20Lunn James Snapp’s theory is that Mark wrote the longer ending but it was originally not part of the Gospel of Mark. It was taken from some other work from Mark and then added on to the end of the Gospel of Mark. He offers 5 different theories for why it is missing from some manuscripts. I respect Snapp’s tenacity but I think his logic has regular logical problems. I mean no insult by this, I just want you to be prepared to think very carefully about what he says. His book, “Authentic: The Case for Mark 16:9-20”, is free here. https://www.academia.edu/12545835/Authentic_The_Case_for_Mark_16_9_20 The most helpful resource I found for dealing with the internal evidence in the longer ending of Mark is this article from Travis Williams. https://www.academia.edu/1444542/Bringing_Method_to_the_Madness_Examining_the_Style_of_the_Longer_Ending_of_Mark My verse by verse study of the longer ending of Mark is here. It’s long, methodical and shows that the passage doesn’t pose theological problems, even if it wasn’t written by Mark. https://youtu.be/zA6s9O4o5Uo For the 12th century Greek Codex 304, which is Byzantine in nature and ends Mark at 16:8, see the two links following; and you’ll need them because Snapp and Lunn have bad info on this. The text is viewable here. https://mr-mark16.sib.swiss/show?id=R0EzMDQ= A helpful commentary, from Dr. Mina Monier, on the text and its significance can be found here. https://mark16-etalk.sib.swiss/index.php?dir=Mark16_MM_1#0 The MARK16 Project is awesome. Their website has a lot of helpful stuff and I expect a lot more in years to come. https://mark16.sib.swiss/ Randall Booth’s paper on Mark’s use of “palin” https://www.silpacific.org/resources/archives/61477 For a full list of Mark’s use of the historical present and how other Gospels tend not to, see pages 144-148 in this old book, “Horae Synopticae” https://archive.org/details/1909horaesynopt00hawkuoft/page/144/mode/2up This is part 69 of the Mark Series, going verse by verse through the Gospel of Mark. See the WHOLE Gospel of Mark playlist here. https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLZ3iRMLYFlHuGenHwUdeiQ5M-uj5XW4sF My website https://BibleThinker.org