16:9-20 Should these verses be considered inspired or have they been added to Mark's text later, and are not valid teaching, as some claim?
16:9-20 Should these verses be considered inspired or have they been added to Mark's text later, and are not valid teaching, as some claim?
These verses are just as genuine as the rest of the New Testament scripture.
By all accounts they have only been omitted from two of the oldest Greek manuscripts but are included in all the others. It is ludicrous to question their authenticity or authorship when they conform to the rest of New Testament teaching. Mk 16:9-11 are confirmed by Mt 28:1-10 and Lk 24:10-11 (cp Mk 16:9-11 with Mt 28:1-10; Lk 24:10-11); V12-14 are confirmed by Mt 28:16-17; Lk 24:13-43 and Jn 20:21-23 (cp Mk 16:12-14 with Mt 28:16-17; Lk 24:13-43 and Jn 20:21-23); V15-16 are confirmed by Mt 28:18-20; Lk 24:44-48, and Jn 20:21 (cp Mk 16:15-16 with Mt 28:18-20; Lk 24:44-48; Jn 20:21); Mk 16:19-20 are confirmed by Lk 24:50-51; Ac 1:9-11, 5:12 and Eph 4:7-10 (cp Mk 16:19-20 with Lk 24:50-51; Ac 1:9-11, 5:12; Eph 4:7-10).
Everything that Mk 16:9-20 teaches is taught as the inspired word of God everywhere else in scripture. Thus Mk 16:9-20 must also be considered inspired.