Yesterday I recorded and today posted WM # 65: Review: Kruger on Mark's Ending. Ok, I know what you're thinking: Another WM on Mark's Ending? Yes, that's right. The last few episodes were given to sermon reviews (by Hardy and Purswell). This one is a seminary lecture on the Ending of Mark by Dr. Michael J. Kruger of Reformed Theological Seminary of Charlotte, NC. You can listen to the original lecture under review here. Kruger is a respected NT scholar who specializes in canon studies. He also has an interesting blog called Canon Fodder. His presentation on the Ending of Mark is more even-handed than many. He does, at least, make mention of William Farmer's defense of Mark 16:9-20 as original. In the end, however, he rejects the authenticity of Mark 16:9-20 and attributes its authorship to a "rogue" scribe. He also makes some interesting comments on what he sees as a "positive" side of the supposed patchwork ending of Mark, allegedly cobbled together from the resurrection narratives in Matthew, Luke, and John. According to his analysis, if this were the case it would support the early Christian consensus on the four-fold Gospel (!). He also has some interesting comments on inerrancy, suggesting that rejection of Mark 16:9-20 does not challenge the doctrine of inerrancy since it assumes that Mark did not write it. But isn't this the very heart of the question? Is Mark 16:9-20 part of the inspired Word of God?
No comments:
Post a Comment