The Gospel According to Mark: "The Amazing Jesus"

John MacArthur recently preached from Mark 16:8-20, , making it the last sermon in his 43 year ministry in which he has preached all the way through the New Testament, verse by verse, book by book; a great model for expository preaching. (exposing the meaning of the text, in its context, preaching through each book from beginning to end, verse by verse, chapter by chapter.) I highly recommend his other sermons, all available there at www.gty.org

He gives a good summary of the confidence we have from all the many extant Greek manuscripts that we do have about the Bible, specifically focusing on the New Testament; and by comparing all of them, we can tell where a scribe made an error or added something in (as in Mark 16:9-20; I John 5:7-8 (KJV) - "the Comma Johannine"). No textual variant affects any doctrine in the word of God, the Scriptures.

A good introductory book on the reliability on the NT is F. F. Bruce's The New Testament Documents: Are They Reliable? He answers yes.

http://www.amazon.com/New-Testament-Documents-They-Reliable/dp/0802822193

"I like Mark's ending!" John MacArthur (speaking on verse 8, where the women are amazed, trembling, astonished, and afraid at the empty tomb and the resurrection and what the angel said to them.)

Verses 5-8 are key, and include the amazement, the crucifixion, the empty tomb, and the angel's statement: "Do not be amazed; you are looking for Jesus the Nazarene, who has been crucified. He has risen; He is not here; behold, here is the place where they laid Him."

Whatever criticism Muslims and skeptics and atheists have about Mark 16:9-20, the crucifixion and the resurrection are still affirmed as true, even without verse 9-20. Chapter 15 - Crucifixion, 16:1-8 - Empty Tomb, resurrection, women who are eyewitnesses of the empty tomb. "He has been crucified." This is historical fact. The Qur'an has that embarrassing verse of 4:157 of denying historical fact.

MacArthur has a great approach to handling the long version of Mark, 16:9-20, and that this section is not in the oldest extant Greek manuscripts. He shows how verses 9-20 were cobbled together from the other 3 gospels and Acts, and added onto Mark.

v. 9 - summary from Luke 8:1-3

v. 10 - from John 20:18

v. 12 - summary from Luke 24:13-32

v. 13 - from Luke 24:36-38

v. 15 - summary from Matthew 28:19

v. 16 - different way of saying John 20:23

v. 17-18 - from Luke 10, Matthew 10, tongues in the book of Acts, and Acts 28:3-6 (God protected Paul from the harm of the snake bite; but there is no text of anyone drinking poison as in Mark 16; and there is no command to pick up snakes in a worship service context as they do in some churches in the Appalachian Mountains of USA. )

I would add this about the summary of verse 19. McArthur points out that Irenaeus quoted Mark 16:19 around 180-200 AD.

v. 19 - John 20:17; Luke 24:51; Acts chapter 1; Luke 22:69; Acts 7:55 ff; Romans 8:34; Ephesians 1:20; Colossians 3:1; Heb. 1:3; Heb. 8:1; 10:12; 12:2; I Peter 3:22; Psalm 110:1)

MacArthur focused on verse 8, the Amazement, astonishment, fear, and being astounded all through the book of Mark: (which points to the probability that that was Mark's real ending.)

Mark 1:22

Mark 1:27

Mark 2:12

Mark 4:41

Mark 5:15

Mark 5:33

Mark 5:42

Mark 6:51

Mark 9:6

Mark 9:15

Mark 9:32

Mark 10:24

Mark 10:32

Mark 11:18

Mark 12:17

Mark 15:5

Mark 16:5

Mark 16:8

MacArthur ends with joyful exuberance quoting from the hymn: (text and music by Charles H. Gabriel)

"I stand amazed in the presence of Jesus the Nazarene, and wonder how He could love me, a sinner, condemned, unclean! O How wonderful, O How marvelous, and my song shall ever be, O How wonderful, O How marvelous, is my Savior's love for me!"

Indeed, Jesus is Amazing!

Good Evidence for Historical Reliability for 2 Peter as written by Peter Himself

2 Peter is constantly being attacked by Muslims and liberals and skeptics as not an authentic book of the NT and not written by Peter, the disciple of Jesus Christ. Shabir Ally makes this one of his main points in debates. We believe that 2 Peter was inspired by God, God-breathed ( 2 Timothy 3:16-17) and written by the apostle Peter around 64-66 AD, before his martyrdom by Nero, and we have good and reasonable evidence to back up that faith.

Dr. James White has a little article with an excellent graphic of an ancient manuscript of P-72
which has both I and 2 Peter (and Jude) in it. One of the pages of this manuscript shows the end of 1 Peter and the beginning of 2nd Peter and this manuscript called P-72 is dated at around 200 AD. That is very good early dating for a copy of one of the most attacked books of the NT by skeptics, atheists, and Muslims and others, sometimes by good scholars. (the Muslims like to use Bruce Metzger as authoritative evidence that 2 Peter was not written by the apostle Peter. But many other conservative scholars and all Christians who believe in inerrancy believe that 2 Peter is "God-breathed" and was written by Peter. ( 2 Timothy 3:16-17; 2 Peter 1:20-21)

Dan Wallace makes an excellent case for Peter himself being the author of 2 Peter, before his death at the hands of Nero sometime around 64-65 AD. Dan Wallace on 2 Peter.
-->I Peter was authored by Peter, but Silvanus actually wrote it for Peter, because Silvanus' Greek was excellent. ( I Peter 5:12) This also explains why the Greek of I Peter is so excellent and the Greek of 2 Peter is not as polished. It is reasonable, based on the evidence that Peter, a Hebrew Galilean, wrote 2 Peter, and used Silvanus as his secretary or amanuensis for I Peter.

Dr. White did us a great service by blowing up the lines of this manuscript so we can see the Granville-Sharp rule and the use of scribes in those days to save space by using a short-hand for God's name, called using the "nomina-sacra" (Sacred Name). God, (Theos) θεος is shortened. ιησου χριστου (Jesus Christ) is also shortened here.



Here is a clearer typed out Greek text line of the part that Dr. White has blown up for us:


--> λαχουσιν πειστιν εν δικεοσυνη του θυ̅ ημων και σωτηρος ιη̅υ χρ̅υ
It says, "to those who have received a faith by/in the righteousness of the God of ours and savior Jesus Christ." It is saying that Jesus Christ is both "God and Savior".
_ _ _ _
You can see the θυ and ιηυ and χρυ more clearly now. (with the lines over them indicating they are abbreviations for the "sacred name" (nomina sacra). θυ is the "nomina-sacra" short for "Theos" θεου (Theou is the genitive form of Theos) and ιηυ is short for Ιησου (easou = Jesus) and χρυ is the short form for Christ ( χριστου). (with the lines over the last letters indicate these are nomina-sacra.) [as I preview this, the lines are not coming out over the letters I want them to; so I needed to point that out. Blogger moved the lines to the far left.]

-->
Dr. White explains the Granville-Sharp rule.
This a clear teaching of the Deity of Christ, "the God of ours and Savior, namely Jesus Christ". when only the first noun has the definite article ( του = tou = "the") it points to the definite article functioning for both "God and Savior". Titus 2:13 also has this Granville Sharp construction, more evidence of the Deity of Christ - "our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ".
By the way, did you know that Granville Sharp, the man whom this Greek syntax structure was named after, not only was an excellent scholar, and studied the Greek text, but also helped William Wilberforce get the slave trade abolished in England? A true Christian, both in mind and heart and life and action. Certainly, these are fruits of the Holy Spirit!

From the Wikipedia article about Granville Sharp:
"One of Granville's letters written in 1778 (published in 1798), propounded what has come to be known as The Granville Sharp Rule (in actuality only the first of six principles involving the article that Sharp articulated):

“When the copulative kai connects two nouns of the same case, if the article ho, or any of its cases, precedes the first of the said nouns or participles, and is not repeated before the second noun or participle, the latter always relates to the same person that is expressed or described by the first noun or participle ...”^[4]

This rule, if true, has a profound bearing on Unitarian doctrine, which led to a ‘celebrated controversy’, in which many leading divines took part, including Christopher Woodsworth.
Daniel B. Wallace says about Sharp:

“His strong belief in Christ’s deity led him to study the Scriptures in the original in order to defend more ably that precious truth ... As he studied the Scriptures in the original, he noticed a certain pattern, namely, when the construction article-noun-και-noun involved personal nouns which were singular and not proper names, they always referred to the same person. He noticed further that this rule applied in several texts to the deity of Jesus Christ.”^{[5] "}

Turretinfan also has an excellent article on 2 Peter showing that some ancient Christians had Bibles and how the α on the page stands for 1st Peter and the β (beta or letter B, used for 2nd) shows where 2nd Peter starts.

Here is an interesting web-site [August 8, 2013 - Addendum:  I just noticed, that, unfortunately, all of those excellent clear photos of many Greek manuscripts is no longer there. ]  that shows very clear photos of many of the ancient Greek manuscripts that give us more and more evidence for the reliability of the NT. It has the same photos of 1 and 2 Peter that Dr. White showed and even more extensive.

And here is an excellent lecture on the reliability of the NT from scholar Peter Williams.

And here is another lecture by Dr. White on the general reliability of the NT.

The Bible has not been hopelessly corrupted. Puny man cannot change the word of God. For Muslims: "No one can change the word of Allah"! The Injeel is reliable! The Bible is reliable. And we are honest and open about the few textual variants. And 2nd Peter was written by Peter, a disciple of Jesus the Messiah, and eye-witness of His life, miracles, teachings, death, resurrection, and ascension.

Evidence for Jesus' Trial and Death as real history

HT: Justin Taylor's blog

The Presuppositional Method of Apologetics is not against using historical evidences.
We are to use these evidences also in apologetic outreach. One of the main points of the Presuppositional Apologetic approach, as I understand it, is that bare evidences are not enough to convince the sinner's darkened mind and hard heart to repent. (The "Noetic effects of sin") God has to change the heart, even after all the evidence is presented and argued for. The sinful heart of man is dead in sin; a slave to sin; and the effects of sin on the mind feed more rebellion and anger at God and His holiness and sovereignty, even after good evidence is presented; unless the Spirit of God does His work on the heart.

This video shows the oldest NT fragment, called P52, The John Rylands fragment from John 18:31-33 and on the back John 18:37-38. (Dated by many scholars as early as 120 AD) It was discovered in Egypt in 1920.

It confirms for us the trial of Jesus, the gospel of John as a whole, Pontius Pilate, and the reasons why Christ came and was to die by crucifixion.

This is very interesting that the oldest manuscript we have is about Jesus' and His statement about Truth (Arabic - Al Haqq الحق ; Farsi - حقیقت "Haqeeqat" and حق "Haqq" and راستی "Rasti"); and about His trial before Pontius Pilate and the reference to His death (John 18:32) "the kind of death He was to die". This is strong evidence against the Qur'an, Surah 4:157, which denies that Jesus was crucified and that Jesus died on the cross.

Even liberals and skeptics like John Dominic Crossan, Bart Ehrman, Marcus Borg, and John Shelby Spong know that Jesus really lived in history and died on the cross, under Pontius Pilate as procurator of Judea while Tiberias was Caeasr of Rome, by the instigation of Caiaphas, the high priest and the Jewish council, the elders, scribes, Pharisees, and Saducees; and when Herod was a puppet king of the Jews under Roman rule.

Again, it is ironic that Muslims believe in the miracle and supernatural work of Allah, and that Jesus was born of the virgin Mary (see Qur'an 3:44-48; 19:19-21); and yet deny real history. The liberals believe the evidence and history, but deny the miraculous events like the virgin birth and the resurrection of Christ from the dead. True believers believe in both the historical truth and reality and that God actually did the miracles in history that the Bible records for us.

John 18:31-33

31 So Pilate said to them, "Take Him yourselves, and judge Him according to your law." The Jews said to him, "We are not permitted to put anyone to death,"

32 to fulfill the word of Jesus which He spoke, signifying by what kind of death He was about to die.

33 Therefore Pilate entered again into the Praetorium, and summoned Jesus and said to Him, "Are You the King of the Jews?"

On the Back of the Fragment - John 18:37-38

37 Therefore Pilate said to Him, "So You are a king?" Jesus answered, "You say correctly that I am a king For this I have been born, and for this I have come into the world, to testify to the truth Everyone who is of the truth hears My voice."

38 Pilate said to Him, "What is truth?" And when he had said this, he went out again to the Jews and said to them, "I find no guilt in Him.

In Evangelism and missions efforts with Muslims, it is important to know historical evidences for the crucifixion of Jesus, because Muslims attack and deny the historical reality of the crucifixion.

It is very interesting that the oldest Greek manuscript is from the Gospel according to John, since most liberal scholars don't believe the apostle John actually wrote the Gospel of John; and they did not believe John was written in 90 AD or earlier (there is good evidence that John was also written before 70 AD. Even a liberal scholar, John A. T. Robinson, in Re-dating the NT, believed that the Gospel of John was written before 70 AD.) Before this fragment was found, liberals theorized that John was written much later in the second century.

Archeology confirms the Bible and its truth and its historical reality!

It is also very interesting that this fragment, coming to us by the Providence of God; is about Jesus trial and the statement about the kind of death He was going to die (by crucifixion) is a great evidence against Muslim attacks.

John 19:1-7 tells us later, that the Jewish leaders wanted Jesus put to death for blasphemy, "because He made Himself out to be the Son of God".

6 So when the chief priests and the officers saw Him, they cried out saying, "Crucify, crucify!" Pilate said to them, "Take Him yourselves and crucify Him, for I find no guilt in Him."

7 The Jews answered him, "We have a law, and by that law He ought to die because He made Himself out to be the Son of God."

Mark 14:61-64
also confirms this for us. They asked Him, "Are You the Messiah, the Son of the blessed one?" This shows the Jews knew that the OT taught that the Messiah would be the Son of God. (Psalm 2:1-12; Proverbs 30:4)

But He kept silent and did not answer Again the high priest was questioning Him, and saying to Him, "Are You the Christ, the Son of the Blessed One?"

And Jesus said, "I am; and you shall see THE SON OF MAN SITTING AT THE RIGHT HAND OF POWER, and COMING WITH THE CLOUDS OF HEAVEN."

Tearing his clothes, the high priest said, "What further need do we have of witnesses?

"You have heard the blasphemy; how does it seem to you?" And they all condemned Him to be deserving of death." (Mark 14:61-64)

Mark was probably written between 48-55 AD; Matthew 50-55 AD; and Luke 60 AD; and although most scholars believe John was written around 80-90 AD, there is good evidence that it also was written before 70 AD.

Here is another excellent video on the historical evidences for Jesus, as attested by Tacitus the Roman historian, Josephus, the Jewish historian, and Pliny the Younger and his correspondence with the Roman Emperor Trajan.



HT: Lane's channel

Part 2 of this at Lane's channel is also excellent, with evidence from the early church fathers about Jesus from Clement, Ignatius, Polycarp, Justin Martyr, Tertullian, Irenaeus, and others.

So, we see in Scripture that we must equip ourselves in the apologetic issues that come up in our evangelism and missions efforts, ready to give answers for people who ask questions and ask us about the hope within us. I Peter 3:15

And being ready in apologetics, Peter says, first, "set Christ apart in your hearts as Lord" or "sanctify the Lord Christ in your hearts" or "treat Christ with honor and fear as the Lord in your hearts", in the same way that the Father is Lord (Yahweh) and holy, and we should treat Him as holy and fear Him, in the same way, treat Christ with the same respect. That is what the quote from Isaiah 8:12-13 is alluding to in I Peter 3:13-15. It points to the Deity of Christ. Fear and respect Christ as Lord-God before fearing man. Holiness in our lives, the fear of the Lord, and apologetics will prepare us for evangelism with Muslims.

Notice also the context of persecution, in I Peter 3:13-18; and in the rest of the book in I Peter 1:6-7; 2:12-15; 2:18-25; 4:1-2; 4:12-19; 5:9-10.

Prayer:
"O Lord, God Almighty in heaven, You are holy! - may Your name be treated as holy, since You are already Holy! May Your name be treated holy, first in my own life, and in my attitudes and thoughts and actions; and then may Your name be treated as holy among all the nations; May Your kingdom come and be spread on earth, may Your will be done here on earth as it is in heaven. Give me the grace to fear You and treat You as holy today in all I do. I need You Lord! Glorify Your name!" Amen

see also
Matthew 6:9-10
Leviticus 10:1-3
Deuteronomy 32:51
I Peter 3:13-18
Isaiah 8:12-13

In sharing the gospel with Muslims about the crucifixion, using the lamb sacrifice substitution truth from Abraham, see my previous article here

Praise God for Tyndale House and the scholars and others who have put together these excellent videos