Mark 16:14-20 - Is it a parable?
An examination of the Revivalist understanding
By Drew Dixon

Two very simple reasons why it not a parable 

In the four articles that follow, I go into some depth to show that the RCI explanation of Mark 16 is incorrect. Before that, I would like to offer two very simple reasons why this is so, a sort of pre-article summary.

1.

Every item listed in Mark 16 is already a supernatural occurrence. Each 'event' required the intervention of God. Quite simply, this nullifies the possibility of Mark 16 being a parable. Jesus did not use supernatural events to explain supernatural events. That is simply not how a parable works and to assume so misses the whole point and intent of Jesus teachings.

2.

Marks gospel concludes with the following verse:-.

20And they went forth, and preached every where, the Lord working with them, and confirming the word with signs following. Amen.

The author of Mark sees absolutely no reason to further explain what form these signs were that followed the preaching of the Gospel. To him it would seem, they were simply the signs that had been designated in the previous verses. As Mark was written after the time of Acts and Pentecost, the author is quite comfortable in his reflection upon the events that took place and that they were simply the signs already mentioned. He did not see any need to expound upon their hidden 'spiritual fulfilment' for clarity (because there was none). 

The signs he spoke of were simply the signs that took place. The Bible also confirms this. One could also point to the fact that it seems to be the Apostles and their ministry that is the focus.

[<<Back - Introduction] [Mark 16 Contents] [Next - Part 1 >>]

[Main Menu]    [Article List ]   [Topic List]    [British Israel]    [Acts]