Is Mark's Gospel Questionable?

Author: Stephen

Posts

Total: 13
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,595
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
 Forgery of the Gospel of Mark? This controversy has been covered many times over the years.

It is now widely accepted that Mark’s contribution to the four gospels has been added to and rewritten in part if not totally embellished. Synoptic simply means; generally to speak as one. The synoptics relate to Matthew Mark and Luke yet Mark’s gospel omits stories the other so called synoptic gospels mention.
There is no immaculate conception, no virgin birth, no husband Joseph and astonishingly there is no resurrection!
So let us concentrate on just this one aspect that the whole of Christianity is founded on; the promise of the resurrection.

When we read Mark’s gospel today there is in most bibles the familiar ending of Jesus rising from the dead and appearing to his disciples  Mark16:9-20

But it is accepted that the original ending to Mark has no resurrection and it simply ends with the women finding the tomb empty and running away in fear and telling no one and that, as they say is that! Mark16:8

Indeed some bibles still have this abrupt ending at Mark16:8 but those that do have the extended embellished addition will notice that it is usually accompanied the with notes admitting that verses from Mark16:9-20 were added at a much later time and “do not appear in the original manuscript”.

Is this then also why in the bible we won’t read about Jesus the “raising” his great friend Lazarus in either Matthew Mark, Luke but only in John?  
I have read that according to Jewish law that the soul leaves the body after three days and returns to god? But in this story Jesus hangs around down by the river for four days before returning to Bethany to call the "stinking"  Lazarus back to the land of the living.

When these gospels are read even summarily it is not difficult to notice that Matthew is always either taking away or embellishing on the other authors.
A good example can be read here:


The daughter is only “dying” in Mark but stone cold “dead” in Matthew.

The not so “dead” only dying daughter.

Mark 5:23He pleaded earnestly with him, “My little daughter is dying. Please come and put your hands on her so that she will be healed and live.”

Matthew 9:18
While he spake these things unto them, behold, there came a certain ruler, and worshipped him, saying, My daughter is even now dead: but come and lay thy hand upon her, and she shall live.

Note those word again “a certain” ruler.

A women touches Jesus’ cloak

Mark 5:29-31 Immediately her bleeding stopped and she felt in her body that she was freed from her suffering At once Jesus realized that power had gone out from him. He turned around in the crowd and asked,“Who touched my clothes?”
“You see the people crowding against you,” his disciples answered, “and yet you can ask,‘Who touched me?’”

Matthew 9:20-22 And, behold, a woman, which was diseased with an issue of blood twelve years, came behind him, and touched the hem of his garment: For she said within herself, If I may but touch his garment, I shall be whole. But Jesus turned him about, and when he saw her, he said, Daughter, be of good comfort; thy faith hath made thee whole. And the woman was made whole from that hour.

Yes, even his disciples had to question that blinder. Interesting it is that Jesus didn’t know in this instance who had touched him, but can actually read minds in other parts of the bible.

And did you know, that Jesus gave his disciples the power to cast out demons? Matthew 10:1 & Mark 3:15
But by biblical accounts, not all demons!??
Matthew 17:19-20 & Mark 9:29

Yet we are told that the bible is easily understandable, unambiguous#55 and that the gospel authors are crystal clear on what they are conveying..#62
It is not until one realises that “dead” does not mean “dead” and that “demon or devil” does not mean possessed by an evil spirit that one can start to begin to realise what is going on in these ambiguous half stories that make up the gospels.





rosends
rosends's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 806
3
2
6
rosends's avatar
rosends
3
2
6
do you mean "particularly questionable" or just "questionable in terms of authorship" or even "questionable on its face in the same way that all religious texts are questionable"?
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,595
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@rosends
questionable in terms of authorship

Authorship and particularly questionable regarding its reliability.
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 352
Posts: 10,359
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
Sorry, but I am not allowed to think about that.

You are not either. So stop it.
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,002
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@Best.Korea
Matthew Mark Luke and Kim.

The Fab Four.
TWS1405
TWS1405's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,048
3
4
7
TWS1405's avatar
TWS1405
3
4
7
Everything within the Bible and every unpublished gospel (not in the Bible) is and forever shall be...questionable. 
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,595
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@TWS1405
Yep. The bible here is shown to have been added to at a later time which throws doubt on its reliability entirely.
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,595
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
More tampering with Mark's Gospel. Where is Verse 28?


Mark 15:27-30

New International Version
27 They crucified two rebels with him, one on his right and one on his left. 28  29 Those who passed by hurled insults at him, shaking their heads and saying, “So! You who are going to destroy the temple and build it in three days, 30 come down from the cross and save yourself!”


Mark 15:28 New International Version
  28 blank, blank, blank, blank,blank




Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,595
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2


Mark 1:1
The beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God;

Some manuscripts do not have the Son of God.
So again we have a much later insertion of something that was never supposed to be there.


Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,595
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
Well, it appears then that the bible is not so "god breathed" as 2 Timothy 3:16 would want us to believe.

My own suspicion for the tampering of this gospel is that it didn't conform to the requirements in that having Jesus appearing to only women and "saying nothing" to the men in Jesus movement of their experience.
The added verses no doubt conform with the well-known misogynistic opinions of Paul.

Not in the original ancient text are , the telling the other disciples. No Great Commision. No being able to handle serpents and no casting out of demons.

Marks added extra's.

9 [[Now when he rose early on the first day of the week, he appeared first to Mary Magdalene, from whom he had cast out seven demons. 10 She went and told those who had been with him, as they mourned and wept. 11 But when they heard that he was alive and had been seen by her, they would not believe it.
Jesus Appears to Two Disciples
12 After these things he appeared in another form to two of them, as they were walking into the country. 13 And they went back and told the rest, but they did not believe them.

The Great Commission
14 Afterward he appeared to the eleven themselves as they were reclining at table, and he rebuked them for their unbelief and hardness of heart, because they had not believed those who saw him after he had risen. 15 And he said to them, “Go into all the world and proclaim the gospel to the whole creation. 16 Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned. 17 And these signs will accompany those who believe: in my name they will cast out demons; they will speak in new tongues; 18 they will pick up serpents with their hands; and if they drink any deadly poison, it will not hurt them; they will lay their hands on the sick, and they will recover.”
19 So then the Lord Jesus, after he had spoken to them, was taken up into heaven and sat down at the right hand of God. 20 And they went out and preached everywhere, while the Lord worked with them and confirmed the message by accompanying signs.]]

34 days later

PREZ-HILTON
PREZ-HILTON's avatar
Debates: 18
Posts: 2,806
3
4
9
PREZ-HILTON's avatar
PREZ-HILTON
3
4
9
-->
@Stephen
Isn't it more suspicious that the other gospels match so well than it is mark is different in many ways. 

If you have 5 different people writing a witness report to an event, they shouldn't match let alone people witnessing 30 years of events. 

I would think if anything this gives mark more credibility than the rest, particularly since his account mentions less miraculous events. 
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,595
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@PREZ-HILTON
I would think if anything this gives mark more credibility than the rest, particularly since his account mentions less miraculous events. 


That has  always a fair point, Wylted. But when it can be seen that one gospel has clearly been tampered with, then the reliability of the all the gospels should come into doubt and  under further scrutiny.imo
PREZ-HILTON
PREZ-HILTON's avatar
Debates: 18
Posts: 2,806
3
4
9
PREZ-HILTON's avatar
PREZ-HILTON
3
4
9
-->
@Stephen
All history documents need a healthy dose of skepticism.