Should Mark 16:16 Not Be In The Bible ?

Because Mark 16:16 teaches so clearly that baptism is necessary to salvation, many say Mark 16:9-20 is not in two of the three oldest manuscripts (Sinaitic and Vatican), so Mark 16:16 shouldn’t be part of the Bible, and therefore cannot be used as proof that baptism is necessary to salvation.

I don’t believe that for one minute!:

● The passage in question is in one of these three oldest manuscripts (the Washington).

● It is quoted by men such as Irenaeus and Hippolytus two to three centuries before these oldest manuscripts were written.

● There were at least ten translations done before these oldest manuscripts were written, all of which contain the passage in question.

● The Vatican manuscript ends at Hebrews 9:14. Do these naysayers reject this whole section of scripture also?

I Peter 1:25 says “the word of the Lord endureth for ever.” God does take care of his word.

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: