A Proposal that the Longer Ending of Mark is Dependent on the Gospel of Luke

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.

User avatar
Ben C. Smith
Posts: 8075
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: A Proposal that the Longer Ending of Mark is Dependent on the Gospel of Luke

Post by Ben C. Smith » Thu Feb 27, 2020 8:54 pm

Does the following appeal to anyone?

Aristion, Luke, & the Longer Ending of Mark.png
Aristion, Luke, & the Longer Ending of Mark.png (67.94 KiB) Viewed 10806 times

What speaks for it (besides my previous observations) or against it?
ΤΙ ΕΣΤΙΝ ΑΛΗΘΕΙΑ

Bernard Muller
Posts: 3423
Joined: Tue Oct 15, 2013 6:02 pm
Contact:

Re: A Proposal that the Longer Ending of Mark is Dependent on the Gospel of Luke

Post by Bernard Muller » Fri Feb 28, 2020 9:07 pm

Hi Ben,
Don't you think the author of the long ending (Mk16:9-20) knew also about John's gospel: Mk16:9-11 <=> Jn20:14-18?
Cordially, Bernard
I believe freedom of expression should not be curtailed

User avatar
Ben C. Smith
Posts: 8075
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: A Proposal that the Longer Ending of Mark is Dependent on the Gospel of Luke

Post by Ben C. Smith » Fri Feb 28, 2020 10:26 pm

Bernard Muller wrote:
Fri Feb 28, 2020 9:07 pm
Hi Ben,
Don't you think the author of the long ending (Mk16:9-20) knew also about John's gospel: Mk16:9-11 <=> Jn20:14-18?
Cordially, Bernard
There is definitely a relationship here. I am not (yet) sure in which direction the arrow of dependence points, however.
ΤΙ ΕΣΤΙΝ ΑΛΗΘΕΙΑ

Bernard Muller
Posts: 3423
Joined: Tue Oct 15, 2013 6:02 pm
Contact:

Re: A Proposal that the Longer Ending of Mark is Dependent on the Gospel of Luke

Post by Bernard Muller » Sat Feb 29, 2020 9:58 am

Hi Ben,
The author of the long ending seems to reconcile Mark with John as follows:
- The women are afraid by what they experienced at the empty tomb and do not tell anyone about it (Mk 16:6, last verse before the long ending).
- Later Mary Magdalene (implied: she returned to the empty tomb) is the first to see the resurrected Jesus and then tell the disciples about it (as per long ending & John's gospel).
Elegant problem solving!
However in Luke, the author departed drastically from Mk 16:6 and has the women tell the disciples and others about what they experienced at the empty tomb.
How to explain Luke did not adopt the elegant solution of the long ending and take the risk to do a major change to Mark's gospel?
And the long ending has a few elements common with Luke's gospel.

My conclusion has always been the author of the long ending knew about Luke & John's gospels. And that's the more natural and simple explanation, as I see it.

Cordially, Bernard
Last edited by Bernard Muller on Sat Feb 29, 2020 1:06 pm, edited 1 time in total.
I believe freedom of expression should not be curtailed

Kunigunde Kreuzerin
Posts: 1387
Joined: Sat Nov 16, 2013 2:19 pm
Location: Leipzig, Germany
Contact:

Re: A Proposal that the Longer Ending of Mark is Dependent on the Gospel of Luke

Post by Kunigunde Kreuzerin » Sat Feb 29, 2020 12:26 pm

Ben C. Smith wrote:
Thu Feb 27, 2020 8:54 pm
What speaks for it (besides my previous observations) or against it?
Bernard Muller wrote:
Sat Feb 29, 2020 9:58 am
...
- Later Mary Magdalene
...
My conclusion has always been the author of the long ending knew about Luke & John's gospels. And that's the more natural and simple explanation, as I see it.
In conclusion, I agree with Bernard, but for a different reason. It seems to me that the singling out of Mary in PsMark 16:9 may be easier to understand as a Johannine influence than an independent development from the synoptics (or a synoptic gospel or other sources).

I think that the longer ending is clearly more than a "scribal composition". It is in itself an interesting text from the 2nd century. The author seems to have an increased interest in the powerful overcoming of evil (daemons, bombastic signs, snakes, poison).

User avatar
MrMacSon
Posts: 6247
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 3:45 pm

Re: A Proposal that the Longer Ending of Mark is Dependent on the Gospel of Luke

Post by MrMacSon » Sat Feb 29, 2020 2:48 pm

Bernard Muller wrote:
Fri Feb 28, 2020 9:07 pm
Hi Ben,
Don't you think the author of the long ending (Mk16:9-20) knew also about John's gospel: Mk16:9-11 <=> Jn20:14-18?
Cordially, Bernard
Ben C. Smith wrote:
Fri Feb 28, 2020 10:26 pm
There is definitely a relationship here. I am not (yet) sure in which direction the arrow of dependence points, however.
John 21 has also been proposed as relating to the long end of G.Mark (eg, Evan Powell, “The Unfinished Gospel”, 1994)

[as an aside, apparently Irenaeus mentions Mark 16:19, but doesn’t mention the 21st chapter of John’s gospel? (He mentions John 1-20, but not 21, and Irenaeus says the only ‘fishing’ imagery was in Luke’s gospel further suggesting Irenaeus was totally unaware of John 21).]

User avatar
MrMacSon
Posts: 6247
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 3:45 pm

Re: A Proposal that the Longer Ending of Mark is Dependent on the Gospel of Luke

Post by MrMacSon » Sat Feb 29, 2020 2:49 pm

Kunigunde Kreuzerin wrote:
Sat Feb 29, 2020 12:26 pm
I think that the longer ending is clearly more than a "scribal composition". It is in itself an interesting text from the 2nd century.
Cheers. I agree.

Bernard Muller
Posts: 3423
Joined: Tue Oct 15, 2013 6:02 pm
Contact:

Re: A Proposal that the Longer Ending of Mark is Dependent on the Gospel of Luke

Post by Bernard Muller » Sat Feb 29, 2020 3:39 pm

To MrMacSon,
John 21 has also been proposed as relating to the long end of G.Mark (eg, Evan Powell, “The Unfinished Gospel”, 1994)
The miraculous fishing in John 21 might have been inspired by the one in Luke's gospel. However parts of the long ending is more obviously related to elements of John 20 and Luke 24.

Cordially, Bernard
I believe freedom of expression should not be curtailed

User avatar
Ben C. Smith
Posts: 8075
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: A Proposal that the Longer Ending of Mark is Dependent on the Gospel of Luke

Post by Ben C. Smith » Sat Feb 29, 2020 8:25 pm

Kunigunde Kreuzerin wrote:
Sat Feb 29, 2020 12:26 pm
I think that the longer ending is clearly more than a "scribal composition". It is in itself an interesting text from the 2nd century.
That is my impression as well.
Bernard Muller wrote:
Sat Feb 29, 2020 9:58 am
Hi Ben,
The author of the long ending seems to reconcile Mark with John as follows:
- The women are afraid by what they experienced at the empty tomb and do not tell anyone about it (Mk 16:6, last verse before the long ending).
- Later Mary Magdalene (implied: she returned to the empty tomb) is the first to see the resurrected Jesus and then tell the disciples about it (as per long ending & John's gospel).
Elegant problem solving!
My problem with this is that I am quite certain that the Longer Ending was not composed with the rest of Mark in mind; it was never originally intended as the ending to the text (according to various internal considerations). Therefore, the reconciliation is blunt, not fine: it is simply a matter of appending an already composed summary to an already composed gospel.
ΤΙ ΕΣΤΙΝ ΑΛΗΘΕΙΑ

Post Reply