The Original Ending of Mark by Nicholas P. Lunn (1-Oct-2014) Paperback

by Nicholas P. Lunn

Although traditionally accepted by the church down through the centuries, the longer ending of Mark's Gospel (16:9-20) has been relegated by modern scholarship to the status of a later appendage. The arguments for such a view are chiefly based upon the witness of the two earliest complete manuscripts of Mark, and upon matters of language and style. This work shows that these primary grounds of argumentation are inadequate. It is demonstrated that the church fathers knew the Markan ending from the very earliest days, well over two centuries before the earliest extant manuscripts. The quantity of unique terms in the ending is also seen to fall within the parameters exhibited by undisputed Markan passages. Strong indications of Markan authorship are found in the presence of specific linguistic constructions, a range of literary devices, and the continuation of various themes prominent within the body of the Gospel. Furthermore, the writings of Luke show that the Gospel of Mark known to this author contained the ending. Rather than being a later addition, the evidence is interpreted in terms of a textual omission occurring at a later stage in transmission, probably in Egypt during the second century.

Unknown Binding

First published October 1, 2014

Reviews

[Benjamin · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is an entirely new treatment of a 150-year-old discussion. (For those of you who don't know what I'm talking about, unless you read the KJV, take a look at the footnote that shows up in your Bible at Mark 16:9.) Lunn spends two chapters in the most careful presentation of the manuscript evidence that I have ever seen. If that were all the book did, I think he would in that alone have made a compelling case for the authenticity of the long ending of Mark. But in the following six chapters he deals with issues of language, literary characteristics, thematic and structural issues, and the relationship to the other gospels. When all the evidence is put together, he has made a compelling case that Mark was the author of 16:9-20, and we can read it and study it with all confidence that it is the Word of God.
Some will no doubt object that "the majority of scholars" hold that Mark 16:9-20 is a 2nd-century addition. That may well be the case, but it is not because "the majority of scholars" have studied the issue with the thoroughness and carefulness that Lunn has. Instead, most have skimmed over a couple of the standard treatments and concluded, "Well, if scholar X and scholar Y think Mark 16:9-20 is inauthentic, then it must be."
This is, of course, not an easy read, but it is accessible to any pastor, and before preaching Mark, he owes it to himself and to his congregation to at least work through Lunn's treatise.

[Matthew C. · Rating 5 out of 5]

Let me first disclaim that this is not my field of expertise and that I did not have the Greek language skills to follow all of the arguments. That being said, Lunn has made a forceful case on multiple grounds for reconsidering the present dismissive attitude toward the Longer Ending. Some of the critiques of the book I've read online stop me from being certain about the conclusions, but they are well worth a read and consideration. I especially found helpful the debunking of the alleged "out of character" elements in the LE.