Ending of the Gospel of Mark

[couch_sloth]

The oldest versions of Mark ends at ch. 16, verse 8:
Mary Magdalene, Salome and Mary the mother of James go to Jesus's tomb where they are greeted by a young man dressed in white. The man tells them:

“Do not be alarmed. You seek Jesus of Nazareth, who was crucified. He has risen; he is not here. See the place where they laid him. But go, tell his disciples and Peter that he is going before you to Galilee. There you will see him, just as he told you.” And they went out and fled from the tomb, for trembling and astonishment had seized them, and they said nothing. (Mark 16:6-8)

I wonder if the 'empty tomb story' was fairly new around the time Mark was written; and the gospel ending with "and they said nothing" was just a way of explaining to Christians why they hadn't heard about the empty tomb, until later.
Perhaps among early Christians there was already a disagreement over whether or not Jesus's physical body was resurrected, e.g. as opposed to a more incorporeal resurrection.
So the tale of the empty tomb was added to bolster the idea of a physical resurrection. (?)

 

[funinspace]

Mark is also the shortest of the Synoptic Gospels. It also has none of the stories about Jesus' birth and young life. IMO I think that as Mark had started being pushed as a concrete document, the Jesus story was still somewhat fluid as to what people felt was the True Jesus story. The zombie was still being constructed and only partially fleshed out.

And yes, adding details of a physical resurrection as Luke and Matthew were writren, certainly bolsters the idea of a bodily Jesus and resurrection, as it is fairly obvious that there were Gnostic groups making Jesus more incorporeal.

 

[Lion IRC]

It says..."He has risen".

That's already an extraordinary claim no matter how you word it!
The tomb was empty. The physical body was missing. The well-funded Roman and Jewish authorities in power werent able to adequately debunk the claim. Christianity flourished with exponential growth.

And the person who wrote that Gospel is stating what was already known by many.
So the 'oldest' remnant text - written down quite some time after the event - was written at a time when there were already plenty of early Christians who had already heard the same story.

 

[bilby]

It says..."He has risen".

That's already an extraordinary claim no matter how you word it!
The tomb was empty. The physical body was missing. The well-funded Roman and Jewish authorities in power werent able to adequately debunk the claim. Christianity flourished with exponential growth.

And the person who wrote that Gospel is stating what was already known by many.
So the 'oldest' remnant text - written down quite some time after the event - was written at a time when there were already plenty of early Christians who had already heard the same story.

It is an extraordinary claim.

A missing corpse has any number of possible mundane explanations.

Why would anyone other than the almost terminally gullible conclude that a missing corpse implies that the dead person has returned to life?

 

[Rayschism]

The devil is always in the details.

 

[funinspace]

It says..."He has risen".

That's already an extraordinary claim no matter how you word it!

Yep, that is still quite the claim at the more probable ending of Mark.

The tomb was empty. The physical body was missing.

Yes, that is the story line.

The well-funded Roman and Jewish authorities in power werent able to adequately debunk the claim.

Mark was most probably penned between 66-70 AD, and was written in common Greek. I would say that the "Jewish authorities" were under quite a bit of stress at this point, as the infamous destruction of the temp was looming, never mind the diaspora that followed. And if Mark was penned in Greek, this earliest Gospel formation probably wasn't happening around the "Jewish authorities".

Lacking Roman documents is not really surprising as cults were a dime a dozen in those days. Besides, what in the world would the Romans document about claims hundreds of miles distant, about magical things that happened 3 decades prior? Also, lacking evidence/documents is not the same thing as it not happening. Much like the fact that no documents outside of this new Way's holy writings survived contemporaneously from the time of Jesus.

Christianity flourished with exponential growth.

Early Christian growth is very similar to the growth of the Mormons (LDS), both impressive, but neither extraordinary.

And the person who wrote that Gospel is stating what was already known by many.
So the 'oldest' remnant text - written down quite some time after the event - was written at a time when there were already plenty of early Christians who had already heard the same story.

The problem is that so little is actually known about followers of this new Way in the formative decades from the letters of Paul to the emergence of the synoptic Gospels. Lots of room for the imagination to fill in...

 

[blastula]

Most Jews remained Jews. Judaism didn't disappear when Christianity began.

 

[Learner]

Oh my does that mean the gospel of Mark is not an identical copy of the other three gospels therefore it is an original text - a seperate source by itself? Oh dear the difference .. what a dilema for Christians.

 

[blastula]

Oh my does that mean the gospel of Mark is not an identical copy of the other three gospels therefore it is an original text - a seperate source by itself? Oh dear the difference .. what a dilema for Christians.

Um, Mark is largely identical to Luke and Matthew.

 

[ideologyhunter]

John is the gospel they love above all other Bible books. And it's clearly the most fiction-infused gospel of the bunch.

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

It says..."He has risen".

That's already an extraordinary claim no matter how you word it!
The tomb was empty. The physical body was missing. The well-funded Roman and Jewish authorities in power werent able to adequately debunk the claim. Christianity flourished with exponential growth.

And the person who wrote that Gospel is stating what was already known by many.
So the 'oldest' remnant text - written down quite some time after the event - was written at a time when there were already plenty of early Christians who had already heard the same story.

We know there were plenty of Chrestians around. Christians? Not so much.

 

[iolo]

Most Jews remained Jews. Judaism didn't disappear when Christianity began.

You suppose that to be a likely development? Don't know a lot of humans maybe?

 

[blastula]

What do you mean?

 

[Lion IRC]

It says..."He has risen".

That's already an extraordinary claim no matter how you word it!
The tomb was empty. The physical body was missing. The well-funded Roman and Jewish authorities in power werent able to adequately debunk the claim. Christianity flourished with exponential growth.

And the person who wrote that Gospel is stating what was already known by many.
So the 'oldest' remnant text - written down quite some time after the event - was written at a time when there were already plenty of early Christians who had already heard the same story.

We know there were plenty of Chrestians around. Christians? Not so much.

People of The Way
Nazarenes
Christians/Chrestians

Surely you're not quibbling about pronunciation or Jesus' followers associating Him with the word Christ?

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

We know there were plenty of Chrestians around. Christians? Not so much.

People of The Way
Nazarenes
Christians/Chrestians

Surely you're not quibbling about pronunciation or Jesus' followers associating Him with the word Christ?

Spend some time investigating chrestian vs christian.

 

[Lion IRC]

OK - so it's just banal quibbling.
That's what I thought.

 

[Learner]

Joedad may have a point there Lion. There are other individuals too who call themselves kwistians and chripthians.
It is confusing.

 

[iolo]

What do you mean?

Me? I take it for granted most people would never dream of accepting a new belief, particularly dropping rituals they were brought up on.

 

[Lion IRC]

Joedad may have a point there Lion. There are other individuals too who call themselves kwistians and chripthians.
It is confusing.

Yeah. I jutht don't underthtand

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

Joedad may have a point there Lion. There are other individuals too who call themselves kwistians and chripthians.
It is confusing.

Chrestian and christian are historically distinct. But I'm not holding my breath thinking you might be curious enough to have a look.