Mark 16:9-20


Is Gibson thankful these verses were added to the story? Otherwise he might not have the material for a sequel!

Mark was the first Gospel written, yet the earliest copies did not have an official resurrection account. Mark's gospel ended with the women fleeing the tomb and saying nothing to anyone, “for they were afraid” (16:4-8).

What a cliffhanger!

The later Gospels have more lavish accounts of virtually everything (two different and varied nativities for example), so one would suppose even if someone hadn't embellished a resurrection story to tag onto Mark, the later authors would have filled the void.

So Gibson is happy either way I suppose.

reply

Given Gibson seems to be a staunch believer in the old catholic bible I would guess that anyone familiar with its take on the resurrection would have a good idea of where the film is headed. I've never compared it to the King James version so I'm not sure what take the catholic version has on it.

reply

Having been raised a Protestant I have no idea what the Catholic bible says myself. But no matter the bible, any scholar will tell you that the earliest copies of Mark ended with verse Mark 16:8 (not that the manuscripts were divided into chapters and verses of course). Therefore excluding a resurrection narrative.

Some (not very many) have argued that the ending must have been "lost" or torn from the manuscripts. But that is rejected quite easily by the vast majority of scholars.

Now, I'm not saying that without a tagged-on ending that Mark would be devoid of a resurrection. I believe earlier in the Gospel Jesus is quoted as saying as he would die and rise again, so any reader that came upon the abrupt ending would have assumed that that was what happened. But again, what a cliffhanger!

reply

All I know is the catholic bible has 7 more books... No clue what is in those books or whether they even are part of the new testament or not.

reply