Today, one story did present itself for Christian comment.
Trump’s ‘spiritual advisor’, Paula White, chose to mark Holy Week 2026 by publicly comparing the President of the United States to the Son of God. A number of high profile evangelical Christian leaders were there in the room, applauding White’s comments.
Paula White Compares Trump to Jesus – YouTube
No words.
If you’ve visited my blog before, you probably know that I describe myself as a contemplative evangelical. I’ve written elsewhere about what that means to me, but put simply, the word ‘evangelical’ simply means that I regard the teachings of Scripture (both Old and New Testament) to be the essential core and basis of my faith. That being the case, you may wonder why I am starting this series on the resurrection with the appearance to Mary, the Mother of Christ. I can’t offer you a bible reference, because this incident doesn’t appear anywhere in Scripture.
The answer is simple. I have been exploring the ‘contemplative’ side of my faith using (not for the first time) the Spiritual Exercises of St Ignatius of Loyola, who, in common with the widely accepted teaching of the Catholic Church, believes that the first appearance of Christ in his resurrection was to Mary, the Mother of Jesus.
Later in this series, we’ll see that there is a similar tradition that Christ appeared to Joseph of Arimathea (the similarity is that again this ‘incident’ is not reported in the Bible). Whilst they are not in Scripture, these are deeply held beliefs within the Catholic and Orthodox traditions, and so I’m exploring the background and why they are regarded as so significant. I found myself sufficiently interested in the teaching to spend some time reading about it.
Stories of the appearance of Christ to his mother date back to the earliest Church traditions and appear in writings from the 2nd – 4th Centuries. The story reoccurs in earliest writings of both Catholic and Orthodox traditions. It was most strongly supported in the writings of Saint Vincent Ferrer (1350-1419), whose Easter sermons strongly advocate the first appearance to Mary, but are largely based on assumptions about the depth of relationship which should exist between mother and son.
‘If indeed, someone were overseas, and his mother had unnderstood that he had died, and he nevertheless healthy returned and would visit first other friends, and only last came to his mother, this would not be a good son, nor would he seem to have honoured his mother.’ (St Vincent Ferrer, quoted at www.ewtn.co.uk/article-after-his-resurrection-Jesus-appeared-first-to-mary-his-mother-mary-say-the-saints/)
Other writings point to the merits of Mary’s faith, pointing at moments such as the annunciation (Luke 1:26-38)
Perhaps surprisingly, the strongest modern influence comes from comments by Pope John Paul II who wrote ‘it is legitimate to think that the Mother was probably the first person to whom the risen Jesus appeared.’ (General Audience, Vatican, May 21 1997).
Let’s be clear – Mary is one of the most important characters in the Gospels. As protestants, we tend to be a bit reticent to talk about Mary. We rightly admire her readiness to trust God in our advent services, but rarely mention her during the rest of the year. Yet she had a unique position, being there at the very beginning and at the very end of Christ’s life on earth.
Of course, we are uncomfortable because we have been warned against the ‘worship’ of Mary, mother of Christ, but in reality, in most Catholic traditions at least, Mary is venerated rather than worshipped. I’m not going to go into that too much here, but there is a huge difference.
Whilst I think that, from a protestant perspective, the veneration of Mary sometimes looks like worship, it seems to me that in our rush to distance ourselves from idolotary we can overlook the extraordinary importance of Mary and her role in the birth, life and death of Jesus.
So, before we get carried away with criticism, we need to remember that Scripture is clear that the resurrection period was 40 days long (Acts 1:3). Yet we have very few scriptural records of the appearances of Christ. In 1 Corinthians 15 , the Apostle Paul mentions a time when Christ appeared to more than 500 people at the same time, although this extraordinary incident is not recorded in any of the Gospels (1 Corinthians 15:3-8). The Road to Emmaus is mentioned only in Luke, and the appearance to Thomas is found only in John. So, it is reasonable to question whether the Gospels give us the complete story of the resurrection period?
John reminds us that not everything Jesus ever did is recorded in the Gospels (John 21:25), and it seems to me that this probably applies to his whole time on earth, including the resurrection period. That being the case, it is feasible that Mary did experience the presence of her son in his resurrection, and in human terms it would seem to be unfair if she didn’t. However, as an evangelical, I believe that we need to be constantly careful in our interpretation of Scripture, and particularly mindful of the risks of adding to the story (Deut 4:2; Galatians 1:9).
End Piece
For myself, I believe that we have much to learn from contemplative reflection on the life of Mary, Mother of Christ. From the annunciation, through to her desperate and lonely vigil at the foot of the cross, Mary is a huge (and often overlooked) witness to the whole life of Christ. Yet in common with most biblical character, we know frustratingly little about her. Having said that, if I am to hold to the belief that the Bible is the core of my beliefs, I have to be deeply skeptical of the introduction of any teaching about the life and resurrection of Christ which are not wholly based on Scripture.
We need to be constantly careful in our interpretation of Scripture, and particularly mindful of the risks of adding to it, either literally of by implication (eg Deut 4:2; Galatians 1:9). In doing so we mislead ourselves and others. This responsibility weighs particularly heavily on those who lead or teach. I have no doubt that Christ appeared in his resurrection many times, and to many different people. It would be particularly special if amongst them was his mother, Mary. The Bible doesn’t say that the resurrected Jesus didn’t meet Mary, but importantly, be in no doubt that it doesn’t say that he did.
‘Every word of God is flawless; He is a shield to those who take refuge in Him. Do not add to his words, or he will rebuke you and prove you a liar.’ Proverbs 30: 5-6.
The story of the resurrection is central to Christian faith. It is at the core of the Gospel. Writing to the Corinthian Church, where there were many voices questioning the resurrection, the Apostle Paul writes, ‘If Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile, and you are still in your sins.’ (1 Corinthians 15:17).
In recent posts, we’ve looked at the tomb, the fact that the body of Christ was placed inside, and that in spite of the presence of guards, the tomb was opened during the early hours of Sunday morning. We noticed that the Jewish leaders went to considerable lengths to control the narrative, claiming that the body had been stolen during the night (Matthew 28:12-15), even though this contradicted the witness testimony of the guards. (If the guards story wasn’t correct, why did they abandon their post – which could easily (under Roman law) have led to their own execution). Now. I’m going to look at the series of reported encounters with the risen Christ. One of the first things we might notice is that there are relatively few of them, which make it all the more important that we understand what each of them tells us about the risen Christ.
Recently, spent some time following the ‘contemplative’ path with St Ignatius of Loyola, In this series of posts, I’ve chosen to follow his pattern of the thirteen appearances, or ‘apparitions’, of Christ as outlined in his guided reflection in Week 4 of his ‘Spiritual Exercises’ (i) on the ‘Resurrection of Christ the Lord’.
Richard Jackson: Horsham,West Sussex
(i) St Ignatius of Loyola, The Spiritual Exercises, , p69-72, E-Saint Library Edition (2010)
In my last post, we were reflecting on the burial of Jesus in a garden tomb owned by Joseph of Arimathea, a member of the Jewish council, who placed a large stone across the entrance to the tomb. We noticed that the Jewish leaders were in no doubt that the body was still in the grave when the Roman soldiers or temple guard arrived to secure the tomb.
Around dawn on the Sunday morning Mary Magdalene, some of the other women, and then the disciples, discovered that the stone had been moved and the tomb was now empty.
‘Early on the first day of the week, while it was still dark, Mary Magdalene went to the tomb and saw that the stone had been removed from the entrance.‘ John 20:1
So, our next reflection is, who moved the stone?
The stone has been rolled away
The Sabbath lasted from 6pm on Friday evening until 6pm on Saturday. By that time it was dark, so it seems entirely reasonable that the women waited until dawn on Monday before heading to the tomb to anoint the body for burial. Mark’s Gospel tells us that as they approached they were anxious. ‘They had been saying to one another, “Who will roll away the stone for us from the entrance to the tomb?” ‘(Mark 16:3) As we know, by the time they arrived, the tomb was opened – the stone had been moved. By who? How?
The Guards Story
There’s no indication that, when she arrived at the tomb, Mary encountered the guards. In fact, by the time Mary was arriving at the tomb, the guards were in the city, throwing themselves on the mercy of the Jewish leaders. We are left to assume that these soldiers were the source of the story which comes to us in Matthew’s Gospel that in the early morning there had been a violent earthquake, during which an angel appeared and rolled away the stone. Since none of teh other gospels mention the earthquake, it seems likely that whatever happened was localised – confined to the area of the tomb itself. In their terror, the guards were unable to move and became ‘like dead men‘. (Matthew 28:2-4). Whatever happened, these hardened men were sufficiently terrified to abandon their post and admit that they had lost the body.
The Jewish Leaders Version
The Jewish leaders would have been horrified when they heard the story of the guards. Jesus had spoken about his resurrection, and their greatest fear was that stories that he had risen would start circulating. Their solution is crude. Bribe the guards to tell a different story – that the disciples had broken in and stolen the body. We saw in the last post that the leaders broke their own commandments by violating the sabbath. On hearing the story of the guards, we now see them indulging in bribery, deceit and lies to control the narrative
12 When the chief priests had met with the elders and devised a plan, they gave the soldiers a large sum of money, 13 telling them, “You are to say, ‘His disciples came during the night and stole him away while we were asleep.’ 14 If this report gets to the governor, we will satisfy him and keep you out of trouble.” 15 So the soldiers took the money and did as they were instructed. And this story has been widely circulated among the Jews to this very day.’ (Matthew 28: 12-15)
The Women’s Version
We’ve already noted that from Matthews’s version, we can assume that the guards were in the city by the time the women arrived (Matthew 28:11). There is no mention of the story of the guards in the other gospels, which rather affirms that neither the women or the disciples witnessed either the earthquake or the supernatural removal of the stone. It’s probable that they knew nothing about the guards or their story. We have already noted the concerns of the women on the way to the tomb about how they could remove the stone, yet by the time they arrived, the tomb was open and accessible.
Who moved the stone
In our last post we noted that the actions of the teachers of the Jewish leaders tend to support the idea of resurrection which they sought to deny. Now, we notice that the only explanation of the removal of the stone is provided by the guards. Who moved the stone? The guards offer an answer. Their testimony is that the ground shook, and they witnessed the stone being moved by an angel. They were sufficiently frightened to abandon their post (a decision which could have brought them the death penalty) and rush into the city.
End Piece
So, who moved the stone? Let’s assume for one moment that the story of the removal of the stone which is attributed to the guards is correct. This would mean that the first witnesses to the resurrection of Jesus were not the disciples, or the women, but the guards.
Everyone involved in this story, the women, the disciples, the Jewish leaders, and obviously the guards, believed that something extraordinary, something supernatural, had happened. Yet it was the Jewish leaders, in their determination to discredit Jesus, who paid generously for the silence of the guards, and to promote a false narrative, that the body had been stolen. Once more, the actions of the leaders of Israel tend to support the truth of the resurrection.
Richard Jackson: Horsham,West Sussex
62 The next day, the one after Preparation Day, the chief priests and the Pharisees went to Pilate. 63 “Sir,” they said, “we remember that while he was still alive that deceiver said, ‘After three days I will rise again.’ 64 So give the order for the tomb to be made secure until the third day. Otherwise, his disciples may come and steal the body and tell the people that he has been raised from the dead. This last deception will be worse than the first.”
65 “Take a guard,” Pilate answered. “Go, make the tomb as secure as you know how.” 66 So they went and made the tomb secure by putting a seal on the stone and posting the guard.
This is the first of my reflections on the resurrection of Jesus. Before looking at the resurrection experiences, I found myself thinking about the burial of Christ. For the resurrection to be true, it’s critical that the body of Jesus was still inside the tomb by the time the grave was secured by the Roman soldiers. I think that this passage gives us confidence that this was the case.
This part of the story appears only in Matthew’s Gospel, but we’re going to see that it fits perfectly in stories of the death and burial of Christ in all the Gospels. As ever, we need to get into the context of the reading. The first three words are really important. ‘The next day…’.
Let’s look at some context.
Jesus is Dead
Jesus died on Friday at around 3pm in the afternoon (Matthew 27:46) The Jewish day starts and ends not at midnight, but at 6pm. The sabbath starts at 6pm on Friday afternoon, by which time all of the Jewish characters in this story should be at home, observing the sabbath commandments. Lots of things happen between 3pm and 6pm.
At some point, after the first shock of witnessing the brutal death of Christ, after the long period of darkness and the last agonised cry (Matthew 27: 45-50), after the earthquake, the torn curtain in the Temple, and extraordinary supernatural events (Matthew 27:51-53), Joseph of Arimathea goes to Pilate and asks for the body of Jesus.
Pilate will then have sent someone to check that Jesus was actually dead (Mark 15:44). We know that one of the soldiers pierced the side of Christ (John 19:34). These people knew about death. We should not be in any doubt: Jesus was dead. Pilate released the body. The distance between Golgotha and Pilate’s palace was not great, but nonetheless, this process, carrying of messages backwards and forwards, took some time. In this passage, time matters.
Jesus is Buried
We know from that Joseph goes with Nicodemus to Golgotha and takes possession of the body of Christ. They take Christ to the new tomb and prepared him for burial (John 19: 38-42) before rolling the stone across the mouth of the tomb (Mark 15:46) and heading home in time for the start of the sabbath. At 6pm, the disciples, the women, Joseph and Nicodemus, will be at home, observing the sabbath. Mary Magdalene watched as the tomb was closed (Matthew 27:61), and then herself headed home for the start of the sabbath.
Guarding the Tomb
Whatever we might think of the Jewish leaders, they were not stupid. We’ve already mentioned that Mary watched as a large rock was placed across the entrance. Now I’m speculating (by which I mean that this isn’t reported in the Gospels) when I say that it seems inconceivable that the Jewish leaders did not also have someone standing, watching what was going on. They would want to be in no doubt where the body had been placed, and would surely they ensure that someone kept watch while they rushed off to Pilate to ask for military guard.
So, back to those first few words of this section. ‘The next day, that is after the day of preparation, the Chief Priests and Pharisees gathered before Pilate.’
Breaking the Sabbath
I want you to notice two things. First, the ‘day after the day of preparation’ can only mean that this happened after 6pm, on the Sabbath. Second, that means that the Jewish leaders were breaking critical rules of their own Law by visiting the gentile Roman Consul after 6pm on the Friday – because it is now the Sabbath.
‘If they did that,it is clear to see how radically they broke the sabbath law.’ (Wm. Barclay, ‘Gospel of Matthew, Vol 2, St Andrew Press, p437)
If they were sufficiently desperate to take that risk, it is once again inconceivable that they had not taken the precaution of sending someone to sit in the garden and keep an eye on the tomb.
Pilate authorises the guard, who are deployed to keep watch over the tomb. They return to the garden, with the guards. It could be as late as 7pm or 8pm on the Sabbath. It seems to me that they know that the body is still inside, because they have been watching. With full confidence that the body of Jesus is still within, they seal the tomb (Matthew 27:66).
End Piece
When the body was later found to be missing, the Jewish leaders bribed the soldiers to tell a story that the body had been stolen during the night. Importantly, they never allege that the body was stolen before the guard arrived. Surely this because they knew that the body was still there in the tomb when the guard arrived. They knew that Christ was inside that tomb when they, themselves, placed their seal on the tomb.
It is the Jews themselves who made sure that the tomb was secure.
In their determination to prove that Jesus would not rise from the dead, the Jewish leaders inadvertently add weight to the supposition that he did.
Unpick this part of the story and we should be in no doubt. Christ was dead. Christ was buried. His body was secure in the grave, sealed and guarded by a squad of Roman soldiers.
‘They had not realised one thing.- that there was not a tomb in th eworld which could imprison the risen Christ. Not all the plans in the world could bind the risenn Lord. Anyone who seeks to put bonds on Jesus Christ is on a hopeless assignment.’ (Wm. Barclay, ‘Gospel of Matthew, Vol 2, St Andrew Press, p438)
Richard Jackson: Horsham,West Sussex
Since completing my journey through Mark’s Gospel, I’ve spent the last couple of months reflecting on the resurrection. My next few posts will be the start of a series of reflections which explore the evidence of the resurrection as we find it in the Gospels and Acts of the Apostles.
We could probably agree that the story of the resurrection of Jesus is central to Christian faith. It is at the core of the Gospel. If you take away the resurrection, you are left with very little. Jesus is reduced to a mere historical figure, a good man who lived, and died 2000 years ago. Without resurrection, Christian faith isn’t just diminished, it falls apart. The Apostle Paul writes, ‘If Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile, and you are still in your sins.’ (1 Corinthians 15:17).
So let’s think about the resurrection. Along the way, we will need to make a choice. The empty tomb. Resurrection? Believe it or not.
Richard Jackson: Horsham,West Sussex
A long time ago, we began to think that my mother was unwell. At first, it was unclear what was going on. She just wasn’t herself. She was anxious and forgetful, but she had recently lost her husband and stress can cause that. Of course, we all forget things, but she started losing things more often than most of us and saying odd things. Her conversational ‘filter’ would slip and cause embarrassment to those who were with her. She had a tendency to make contradictory statements, and there was a degree of paranoia which would sometimes undermine her thinking and her decision making.
She developed a tendency to become disorientated and confused. There were occasional problems with her speech – long moments of silence as she searched for a word. She misunderstood situations. She began to lose concentration. More than once she set off to meet someone and then forgot where she was going and why. On one occasion, whilst driving from Hertfordshire to Suffolk, she ended up on the M6 near Coventry, seriously off course and lost. Yet when challenged, by me and by her doctor, she could appear to be completely rational and in control.
Then, there were a couple of minor accidents. One afternoon, whilst visiting friends, she caused considerable damage to someone else’s car (and her own) and simply walked away, apparently unaware of any responsibility for what she had done. As a family, we recognised that my Mother’s ability to see and manage the risks of her own actions was diminished. to the point that intervention was necessary. It was time to have the conversation about the car.
We all know that, in the wrong hands, a car is a potentially lethal weapon. It fell to me to tell my mother that we, her family, felt that it was time to stop driving. She was angry. Very angry. Of course we all understood that this was a big step but it was harder because she couldn’t see the problem. Ultimately, I had to take away the keys. I had to take away the car. I did it for her own safety, and for the sake of innocent people who might be injured or worse because of her diminished judgment. To let her continue having control of a lethal weapon would have been unkind to her and put lives at risk.
Shortly after, my Mother was formally diagnosed with dementia. It became clear that her condition had been developing over a number of years in plain sight, and was now unmissable. Now, many years later, aged 95, my mother is in full time care in a wonderful residential facility in Hertfordshire.
Risk of Inaction
Dementia is an awful disease. Most people who are on the path will deny their diagnosis and be resistant to controls being placed on their behaviour. Unchecked, their behaviour can be extremely problematic and even harmful to themselves and to others.
Turning a blind eye to someone suffering from this dreadful disease is unhelpful and dangerous. Inaction carries serious risks for the individual and often for others. Sometimes, for the good of the victim, and for others around them, especially the vulnerable, others have to step in. Uncomfortable decisions need to be made.
Apropos nothing,
The President of the United States is the Commander in Chief of the most powerful armed forces in the world. He has control of the most lethal armaments available to mankind.
The 25th Amendment of the US Constitution allows for the removal of a President if, in the view of two thirds majority of both Congress and the Senate, he is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office.
Wake up America. Before someone innocent gets hurt.
Ash Wednesday is the first day of Lent. Whilst Lent is important to every Christian, Ash Wednesday isn’t really part of my tradition, although several Churches in my home town in the UK will be holding ashing services today. Ash dust will be placed in the sign of the cross on the forehead of the believer. What’s it all about?
Ashing is a reminder of our own mortality. It is intended to ‘ground’ us, reminding us of our total reliance on God as we start the Lenten journey.
Like it or not, in western culture the subject of our own mortality is largely taboo. It hasn’t always been that way. Throughout history, for people of all ages, death was very much part of life. Death was invariably sudden, unexpected and often catastrophic to the wellbeing and stability of families and communities. Life was harder, and life expectancy of ordinary people was significantly shorter than we enjoy today. Of course in many parts of the world, especially in developing countries, little has changed.
Ashes are an acknowledgment of our own mortality, ”For dust you are, and to dust you will return.‘ (Genesis 3:19). They are a sign of contrition, even mourning, for our own sin. They are a reminder that we are called to life with Christ for eternity, not just for our time in this world. The ashen cross is symbolic of our determination to return to Him and to follow wholeheartedly.
Whether or not you mark Ash Wednesday by bearing the sign of the cross on your forehead, take this moment to reflect. Take the time to consider how you can intentionally use these 40 days of Lent to draw closer to Jesus – to humble yourself before God. Scripture promises that as you do so, He will lift you up – He will draw closer to you. (James 4:8-10)
Repent, and believe in the Gospel.
Remember that you are dust, and to dust you shall return.
Having taken a couple of days in Sydney to recover from jet lag, it seemed good to start the reflective part of my trip to Australia and New Zealand by visiting St Andrews Cathedral for evening prayer. I obviously expected a quiet and reflective service, in the refined atmosphere of a Cathedral. Something of a surprise, then, to find that before i could even get to the Cathedral precinct, I had to cross a police line. Next, I had to make my way through a large and vociferous crowd who were surrounding the Cathedral, raising their voices in objecting to the presence in Sydney of President Herzog of Israel. When following Jesus, always expect the unexpected!
It was good to be welcomed by Sandy Grant, Dean of the Cathedral, as in the background, a speaker was demanding an end to the ongoing Israeli abuses in Gaza and the West Bank, a matter close to my own heart.
With the Cathedral PA system turned up to the max, Evening Prayer continued as planned, with a congregation of sixty or more, led by Jonathan Adams, the Precentor. The cheering and chanting continued outside, along with the persistent thrumming of the police helicopter, at times just a few hundred feet above the Cathedral.
The point is that I went to St Andrews Cathedral expecting a familiar, peaceful and contemplative experience – a moment of contemplation and encouragement as I begin my personal journey of retreat over the next few weeks. In the event, I received much more than that. I found something much deeper, much more profound. I sensed God’s presence, not because of my expectations, but in spite of them.
As I made my way out of the Cathedral after the service, through the growing and increasingly noisy crowd, and escorted through the police line, I was reminded that when we seek God, he meets us on His terms, not ours. He meets us in His way, and not always in the way we had expected. The real lesson for me, was in the reminder I am called to be in some way His presence in this world. I was reminded that our faith is utterly inseparable from the world around us.
This was the first day of my personal journey of retreat in Australia and New Zealand. I encountered the God who gave me much more than I had asked or imagined (Ephesians 3:20).
I’ll take that.
Richard Jackson: Horsham,West Sussex
I am hugely grateful for the commitment and courage of the Dean, Precentor, Cathedral Team and the people of St Andrews for keeping the Cathedral open and going ahead with an open service of Evening Prayer on a day when it would have been easy to cancel the event or move it to a private space.
There are a huge number of ancient manuscripts of Mark’s gospel. In the oldest available versions, the gospel ends at verse 8 with news of the resurrection being brought to the disciples by the women, omitting the long ending recorded in these verses.
In simple terms, the last twelve verses of Chapter 16 are regarded by many biblical scholars as ‘extra verses’ which do not form part of the original Gospel. Some theologians argue that these verses have, at some point, been added, no doubt with good intention, in order to bring the ending of Mark’s Gospel to a ‘better’ ending, more closely into line with Matthew and Luke.
On the other hand, others believe that it is the omission of these verses in those manuscripts we currently regard as the oldest which is the error. They argue that verses 9-20 are part of the original gospel, deliberately omitted for reasons now lost in antiquity.
The arguments deepen further with some theologians arguing in favour of ending at verse 13.
Whatever you think about these ‘extra’ verses, they are commonly referred to as ‘the long ending of Mark’.
9 When Jesus rose early on the first day of the week, he appeared first to Mary Magdalene, out of whom he had driven seven demons. 10 She went and told those who had been with him and who were mourning and weeping. 11 When they heard that Jesus was alive and that she had seen him, they did not believe it.
12 Afterward Jesus appeared in a different form to two of them while they were walking in the country. 13 These returned and reported it to the rest; but they did not believe them either.
14 Later Jesus appeared to the Eleven as they were eating; he rebuked them for their lack of faith and their stubborn refusal to believe those who had seen him after he had risen.
15 He said to them, “Go into all the world and preach the gospel to all 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 drive out demons; they will speak in new tongues; 18 they will pick up snakes with their hands; and when they drink deadly poison, it will not hurt them at all; they will place their hands on sick people, and they will get well.”
19 After the Lord Jesus had spoken to them, he was taken up into heaven and he sat at the right hand of God. 20 Then the disciples went out and preached everywhere, and the Lord worked with them and confirmed his word by the signs that accompanied it.
Many, many hours have been expended by scholars and theologians on the study of these last verses of Mark’s Gospel. Their inclusion in or omission from the Gospel has been a matter of controversy throughout Church history.
To be honest I have spent more hours researching these verses than I have most of my other posts, but like many people, including many scholars and reputable preachers more qualified than me, I have no idea whether any or all of these verses form part of the original. Many commentators, including such great names as Calvin, simply present these verses as part of the Gospel text. Others, including Sproul, raise the question of the place of these verses in the Gospel, but go on to analyse the anyway.
I am not sure that the technical arguments which underly this debate are particularly helpful to us, and will seem tedious and confusing to many. For me, they raise more questions than answers. In any case, most of the text is replicated in other Gospels. There is no reason to doubt, for example, that Christ gave the Great Commission. The question is simply whether it is rightly placed here in the words offered by Mark. The exception is the handling of poisonous snakes and drinking of poisons. These references may have been important at some point in the past, but neither are tests which I would recommend to test the efficacy of one’s faith.
I’m fascinated by some of the arguments I have read, and left confused by others. In short, after several re-writes, I’ve decided not to summarise any of them here, but rather to signpost below to a few of the more accessible sources for those who are interested and would like to know more.
Mark Winger: 100+ Hours of Research Review of arguments in favour of inclusion and omission of these verses
John MacArthur: Sermon ‘A Fitting End to Mark’s Gospel’(Favours Omission of verses)
Ryle, pp265 – 272 (Favours inclusion of verses)
Wiersbe, pp184 – 187 (Favours inclusion of verses)