Mark’s Gospel is comprised of the notes he took of Peter’s preaching as he compared Matthew and Luke’s Gospels.
Dennis Barton offers the most rational explanation that fits most easily to the facts we know.
Quote:
2. The Last Verses of Mark
Mark`s Gospel breaks off abruptly at 16: 8, before continuing with twelve more verses. This break involves ending with an enclitic form of Greek grammar, and this is inappropriate for the ending of a paragraph, never mind a book. Many suggestions have been put forward in explanation of these additional verses. As mentioned in our Chapter VII, Orchard suggested that they might have been notes for a further talk which was not delivered.
My suggestion is as follows: The audience listening to Peter would have already known the information provided in Matthew’s Gospel. But for most of them the gospel of Luke contained new material.
As Orchard has pointed out, Peter stopped at the point his personal eyewitness of the earthly life of Christ ended ((RO 271-8)). Also, Peter had not commented on all the new interesting pieces of information provided by Luke. So I suggest that the audience would have asked questions, and these last verses record the answers supplied by Peter.
To illustrate: As the ‘he’ of verse 9 does not refer to the young man in verse 5, one would have expected to read ‘Jesus’. But if the name of the Lord had been contained in a question, the use of ‘he’ would be correct.
Matthew in 28: 1-10 says that Mary Magdalene was, with another woman, the first to see Jesus, and Luke 24: 10 confirms this. But earlier Luke had mentioned a woman of the same name, ‘a Mary who is called Magdalene’, who had been possessed by seven devils (Luke 8: 2). We should not be surprised if someone, noting her history, asked if this was the same person. Peter replies that it was (Mark 16: 9). He then confirms that Luke was also correct when he wrote that it was she who told the Apostles.
Matthew had not reported that Christ had appeared to two men walking, but Luke gives this incident much space (Luke 24: 13-31). Should the audience accept this story as true? As Peter was not one of the two, he was unable to confirm all the details, but he does confirm that Christ did appear to two disciples walking in the countryside (Mark 16: 12).
Luke then tells the story of Christ appearing to the eleven (24: 33-36). Yet Matthew has not mentioned this. Was it true? Peter, being there, is able to confirm that it was (Mark 16: 14).
Matthew says followers of Christ were to teach and baptise (28: 19), but Luke says they are to preach penance and forgiveness (Luke 24: 47). Was there a discrepancy here? Peter explains how baptism follows on from successful preaching (Mark 15: 15-16).
In his second volume, Luke says that Paul was able to cast out a devil (Acts 16: 18). There was no mention of this power in Matthew. So was it true? Peter, not being present at the incident, could not confirm it, but gives it credibility by saying Christ had foretold that such happenings would occur (Mark 16: 17).
In Acts 2: 4 and 10: 46, Luke reports Peter as having been present on two occasions when speaking in tongues had taken place. Matthew had not reported these events. Peter is able to confirm them in his response to the question about casting out the devils (Mark 16: 17).
The audience had read in Acts 28: 5, that Paul was impervious to the poison of a snake. Matthew had not recorded such an incident. Could it be true? Not being present at the incident, all Peter can do is again refer to the words of Christ. We then read of a similar question regarding the laying on of hands. He answers (Mark 16: 18) in the same way.
Luke in 24: 51 and Acts 1: 9 describes how Christ ascended to heaven. As Matthew had not described this, the audience would have found it of great interest. Peter, having been an eyewitness, was able to confirm and slightly embellish the account of Luke. (Mark 16: 19).
A person’s style of speaking will be different when answering questions from when he is giving a talk. The different style of these final verses has often been noted. We often see a copy of a talk circulated without the answers to questions. Then, after a time, an edition including the answers is published. Sometimes it is the first issue which has the answers but they are omitted in the second
3. Two Editions
I suggest that the second edition of Mark’s Gospel was published with/without the answers. Some early copies of Mark’s Gospel have been found with the twelve verses missing. Peter approved both editions and the one including the answers became part of the bible we use today.
If the above suggestions are accepted it points to Acts, as well as Luke’s gospel, having been seen by some of the audience prior to or during the period of the talks. In addition to Mark, the audience is likely to have included Paul, his guard, Luke, Linus, Cletus, Clement of Rome, Alexander, Rufus and Hermas.
End Quote.
To read more of Dennis Barton’s work see
As to why we have two endings in Mark, may i suggest reading
How the Gospels Were Written - By Dennis Barton – Free Pamplet
churchinhistory.org/s3-go…w-and-when.htm
John
