“FIVE VIEWS OF Mark 16:16”
INTRODUCTION
1. There is a statement of Jesus that is so plain, and yet so controversial…
a. That you rarely hear it referred to by denominational preachers, whether it be in their churches or on TV or the radio
b. That when they do, they feel it necessary to give an explanation that goes against the clear statement of Jesus
2. I have reference to the words of Jesus as found in Mark 16:16… “He who believes and is baptized will be saved; but he who does not believe will be condemned.”
3. To illustrate what I said earlier, let’s take a look at four different views of this verse as taught by men, and then contrast those views with the one plainly stated by Jesus and supported by His apostles in their teaching and preaching… [The first view is one held by those who do not profess to be Christians, but for the purpose of our lesson should be considered. In essence, they would say…] I. HE WHO BELIEVES AND IS BAPTIZED “WILL NOT” BE SAVED
A. TWO SEPARATE GROUPS HOLD THIS VIEW…
1. ATHEISTS – who do not believe in God, heaven or hell, or salvation of any kind
2. JEWS, MUSLIMS, HINDUS, etc. a. Who believe in God (or gods)
b. But who do not believe that salvation is to be found in Jesus c. And that to believe and/or be baptized is contrary to the will of God B. BUT THOSE WHO ACCEPT JESUS AND THE AUTHORITY OF HIS APOSTLES REJECT SUCH A VIEW… 1. There IS a God who offers salvation (contrary to the views of atheists) – 1Ti 2:3-4 2. Salvation DOES come only through Jesus (contrary to the Jews, Muslims, Hindus, etc.) – 1Ti 2:5-6; Jn 14:6 [Though I doubt any present actually hold to this view, there are some who do, and it only begins to illustrate how some are willing to deny the plain statement of Jesus. Consider a second view…] II. HE WHO “DOES NOT BELIEVE” AND “IS NOT BAPTIZED” WILL BE SAVED A. THIS VIEW IS HELD BY “UNIVERSALISTS”… 1. Who believe that God will save everyone eventually 2. To support their view, they will isolate some verses like 1 Ti 2:6 B. BUT THOSE WHO KNOW THE TEACHINGS OF CHRIST AND PAUL LIKEWISE REJECT SUCH A VIEW… 1. Jesus Himself told that there would be few who would be saved – Mt 7:13-14 2. Paul warned of those who would not be saved, but would face the wrath of God – Ep 5:5-6 [Most “Bible-believing, professing Christians” would never treat Mark 16:16 the way the first two views do. But as we consider two more views, we may start hitting closer to “home”. But please understand…that we do so, desiring to “speak the truth in love”; and we pray that your love for the truth is such that you are willing to serious consider what follows (cf. Ac 17:11). The third “view” then…] III. HE WHO “DOES NOT BELIEVE” AND “IS BAPTIZED” WILL BE SAVED A. THIS VIEW IS HELD BY MOST WHO PRACTICE “INFANT BAPTISM”… 1. By “baptizing” (actually sprinkling, not immersing) infants incapable of faith… a. They (esp. Catholics) indicate that faith is not essential to salvation b. Some (esp. Lutherans) try to get around this by saying that God imparts saving faith to the infant so baptism can still save 2. By sprinkling or pouring instead of immersion, they also indicate Jesus did not mean what He said (the reason “BAPTIZED” above is in quotes) B. BUT SPEAKING THE TRUTH IN LOVE, WE MUST POINT OUT… 1. That faith is a necessary prerequisite… a. For baptism – Ac 8:35-37 b. For salvation – Ro 10:9-10 2. That sprinkling or pouring is NOT Bible baptism… a. The Greek word used in the Bible is “baptizo”, and it means “to immerse” b. This is why baptism is described in the Bible as a “burial” – cf. Ro 6:3-4; Col 2:12 c. Sprinkling or pouring was substituted in the place of baptism (immersion) hundreds of years after Christ and His apostles d. By keeping the “tradition of men” by sprinkling or pouring, we fail to keep the “command of God” concerning baptism – cf. Jesus’ condemnation of displacing God’s commands by traditions of men, Mt 15:3-9 3. That baptizing infants is without scriptural precedent a. There are no commands or examples of infant baptism b. Since the prerequisites of faith (Mk 16:16; Ac 8:37) and repentance (Ac 2:38; 17:30) are beyond the infant’s capability, they are not suitable candidates for baptism [I am confident that those who hold to the view of sprinkling infants are honest and sincere. But despite their honest sincerity, they are just as guilty of twisting the words of Jesus as are the atheists, unbelieving Jews (and Muslims, Hindus, etc.) and the universalists. But there is another view sincerely held by many, and that is…] IV. HE WHO BELIEVES AND “IS NOT BAPTIZED” WILL BE SAVED A. THIS VIEW IS HELD BY THOSE WHO BELIEVE IN SALVATION BY FAITH “ONLY”… 1. That one is saved BEFORE baptism 2. That baptism is not essential to salvation — This view is held for all practical purposes by most members of various denominations B. BUT JESUS AND HIS APOSTLES CLEARLY TAUGHT DIFFERENTLY… 1. That faith “alone” cannot save a. As declared by Jesus – cf. Mt 7:21; Lk 6:46 b. As taught by His apostles – cf. Ro 6:17-18; He 5:9; Jm 2:14,17,20,24,26; 1Pe 1:22; 1Jn 2:3-5 2. That baptism IS essential to salvation a. According to Jesus – Jn 3:5; Mk 16:16; Mt 28:18-20 b. According to His apostles – Ac 2:38; 22:16; Ga 3:26-27; Co 2:12-13; Tit 3:5; 1Pe 3:21[Again, I believe that those who hold this view (including personal relatives) are sincere, and are not knowingly twisting the words of Jesus. Yet, I cannot help but think of such people as Paul thought of his brethren in the flesh (cf. Ro 10:1-3). This leads us to the fifth and final view, one that I believe we are compelled to accept…] V. HE WHO BELIEVES AND IS BAPTIZED WILL BE SAVED A. THIS VIEW TAKES THE WORDS OF JESUS AT FACE VALUE… 1. No explanations are necessary 2. Jesus says what He means, and means what He says B. WE HAVE ALREADY SEEN PREVIOUSLY THAT THE BIBLE TEACHES… 1. That one must “believe” – cf. Ac 8:36-37 2. That one must be “baptized” to enjoy the forgiveness of sins – cf. Ac 2:38; 22:16CONCLUSION 1. Which of the five views of Mark 16:16 do you hold to? a. He who believes and is baptized “will not” be saved? b. He who “does not believe” and “is not baptized” will be saved? c. He who “does not believe” and “is baptized” will be saved? d. He who believes and “is not baptized” will be saved? e. He who believes and is baptized will be saved? — It should be clear that there is only view which is in harmony with Jesus’ words, as there is only one which does not involve “tampering” with the clear statement of Jesus! 2. But perhaps more importantly, with which of these views is your life consistent? a. One may hold intellectually to the FIFTH view… 1) But act as though they believed the SECOND view 2) How? By never confessing faith in Christ and being baptized! b. One may hold intellectually to the FIFTH view… 1) But act as though they believed the THIRD view 2) How? For though they may have been “baptized”, they are not living the life of faith required of one in Jesus! c. One may hold intellectually to the FIFTH view… 1) But act as though they believed the FOURTH view 2) How? For while believing in Jesus, they have never submitted to being baptized! Only those who have come to Jesus in faith and ACTED in harmony with His teachings can have the assurance of salvation. The words of the Bible are clear… “Then Peter said to them, ‘Repent, and let every one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.'” “And now why are you waiting? Arise and be baptized, and wash away your sins, calling on the name of the Lord.” – Ac 2:38; 22:16

​BY WAYNE JACKSON
To the church of God in Corinth, Paul wrote the following words.
“But unto us God revealed them through the Spirit: for the Spirit searches all things, yes, the deep things of God. For who among men knows the things of a man, except the spirit of the man, which is in him? Even so the things of God no one knows, except the Spirit of God” (1 Corinthians 2:10-11).
Four times in this text Paul uses the term “things.” Once it is employed comprehensively, “all things.” Once it is used of the “things of a man,” and twice there is reference to the “things of God.” The “things of God” are identified in the final sentence of verse 9; they are “whatsoever things God prepared for them that love him.”
This is within a context in which the apostle discusses “wisdom,” a concept very popular with the Greek mind (cf. 1:20). The Greeks gloried in wisdom (1:22). But the apostolic argument is this: God’s will for man is not to be discovered in human wisdom; rather it is accessed by divine words—the gospel (cf. 1:21 ASVfn).
There is a passage in one of Plato’s Dialogues in which he quotes Socrates as saying that we do not know “how to behave toward the gods and towards men”; someone, with a “special interest” will have to come to us and remove “the darkness” (Alcibiades II.150). From this background let us note some truths explicitly affirmed, or implied, in 2:11-12.
Lessons to Learn
First, no one knows the heart of a man except the spirit of the man within him. (a) There is a spirit “in” man—Paul was no materialist. (b) No man can know the spirit of another man unless that person reveals the contents of his mind. There are no “mind-readers.” (c) The thoughts of one’s mind are made known by words.
Second, the things of God are not accessed naturally. Rather, the Holy Spirit, who “searches” all things, even the deep things of God, has revealed these matters to humanity. “Searches” is a figure of speech suggesting intimate knowledge of every detail (cf. Romans 8:27).
These sacred “things” of God are embodied in “words” (v. 13), not in dreams, visions, or other non-verbal modes of communication. One cannot know of Christ’s birth, teaching, miracles, death/resurrection, ascension, etc., apart from the “words” that convey the information regarding these historical events. These are objective truths that necessitate objective revelation.
Third, the “words” that reveal the marvelous “things of God” are those matters, declares Paul, which “we speak.” The “we” represents those of the apostolic age who were empowered by the Spirit of God to supernaturally impart the treasures of the gospel. “Words” were the vehicles of sacred communication (cf. 1 Thessalonians 2:13). Any view of the scriptures that fails to acknowledge that their “words” ultimately are the “words of God,” is false. The Lord guided the inspiration process so that precisely his message was conveyed to the apostolic writers—no more, no less. The documents containing these “words” were collected eventually into a single volume—the New Testament. There is no accessing of the will of God apart from the New Testament record.
Fourth, the “things of God” are those things that were prepared by the Lord for those who “love” him (v. 9c). Thus, the “things” are bestowed neither universally nor unconditionally. And “love” is not a mere emotion that is divorced from response. As Jesus said: “If you love me, you will keep my commandments” (John 14:15; cf. 1 John 5:3; 2 John 6).
This text from the first Corinthian epistle is rich indeed. It is very unfortunate that it has been misunderstood by so many in the religious community.
SCRIPTURE REFERENCES
1 Corinthians 2:10-11; Romans 8:27; 1 Thessalonians 2:13; John 14:15; John 5:3; 2 John 6

John King
There is an old saying that those who do not learn from the mistakes of the past are doomed to repeat them. I would add that those who do not learn from the mistakes of the present are doomed to commit them, also.
Consider this: Teachers, today, are expected both to teach and to raise our children. Such things as family values, courtesy, work ethics, and many other responsibilities of parents now fall on the shoulders of educators. Parents feel that the paying of school taxes relieves them of much responsibility.
Similarly, in Ephesians 6:4, Paul says that fathers are to raise their children in the “nurture and admonition of the Lord.” Parents always have had the individual responsibility of teaching their children the word of God. However, this responsibility has been “bought off” also. Today, many parents hold the congregation responsible for educating their children. I once heard a parent state, “My kids have been coming to this congregation for several years and haven’t learned a thing.” A responding elder reminded them that the congregation was just supplemental Bible study and that the main classroom was at home.
Again, similarly, how many Christians have “bought off” their individual responsibilities by the hiring of a preacher? In the New Testament, I see congregations being started by Paul and others. Paul then moved on, sometimes leaving a helper behind for a short time only. Then, the congregation with its elders would grow and prosper through their own efforts. We do not read of located preachers as we have today.
I am sure we preachers today have a role to play in the kingdom of God, but I am equally sure that we cannot be used to relieve Christians of their personal responsibilities.

​

James E. Farley
Jesus and His apostles and prophets performed many signs, wonders, and mighty deeds. They were all for the primary purpose of confirming the Word: for proving that these men were who they said they were, and that their message was truly from God. (Mark 16:15-20; Hebrews 2:1-4). Jesus and the early disciples were compassionate people and were often moved by the sicknesses, death, and troubles of people of their day. Often the miracles worked by them benefited these people greatly: the blind received their sight, the deaf could hear, the lame could walk, people were raised from the dead, people were fed, etc. However, even when our Lord or His apostles worked beneficial miracles on behalf of hurting people, still the primary purpose of the sign or miracle was confirmation – to prove they were from God and were doing God’s bidding.
In Mark chapter two, we have the record of four faithful friends carrying their sick friend to Jesus and working very hard to get this “one sick of the palsy” to the Lord. When Jesus saw their faith (vs. 5), which was certainly evidenced by their actions (Compare James 2:14-26, especially verse 18), He said, “Son, thy sins be forgiven thee.” (Mark 2:5). Some of the scribes then reasoned in their hearts, “Why doth this man thus speak blasphemies? Who can forgive sins but God only?” They were right. Only God can forgive sins, and Jesus then proceeded to prove or confirm that He is God! He asked, “Whether is it easier to say to the sick of the palsy, Thy sins be forgiven thee; or to say, Arise, and take up thy bed, and walk?” He did not give them time to answer that question, but said, “But that ye may know that the Son of man hath power on earth to forgive sins, (he saith to the sick of the palsy,) I say unto thee, Arise, and take up thy bed, and go thy way into thine house. And immediately he arose, took up the bed, and went forth before them all; insomuch that they were all amazed, and glorified God, saying, We never saw it on this fashion.” (Mark 2:9-12). Our Lord confirmed that He is who He says He is, and He did it with miracles. (Compare again Mark 16:15-20; Hebrews 2:1-4)
On another occasion, John’s disciples came from him asking Jesus, “Art thou he that should come? Or look we for another?” (Luke 7:19-20). How did the Lord answer them? The Word says, “And in that same hour he cured many of their infirmities and plagues, and of evil spirits; and unto many that were blind he gave sight. Then Jesus answering said unto them, Go your way, and tell John what things ye have seen and heard; how that the blind see, the lame walk, the lepers are cleansed, the deaf hear, the dead are raised, to the poor the gospel is preached …” (Luke 7:21-22). The answer? YES, I AM HE, AND THESE MIRACLES PROVE IT! Signs and miracles were primarily for confirmation. Peter says he was proven to be Messiah by “miracles and wonders and signs, which God did by him in the midst of you, as ye yourselves also know …” (Acts 2:22).
Some men came to Ephesus claiming to be apostles, and the church of Christ there put these to the test as per 1 John 4:1. They proved with this trial that these men were not apostles at all, but were liars, and our Lord commended the church there for doing so. (Revelation 2:2) Have you ever wondered what that test might have been? We do not have to wonder, for Paul reveals it to us. When some were doubting his apostleship, Paul wrote, “I am become a fool in glorying; ye have compelled me: for I ought to have been commended of you: for in nothing am I  behind the very chiefest apostles, though I be nothing. Truly the signs of an apostle were wrought among you in all patience, in signs, and wonders, and mighty deeds.” (2 Corinthians 12:11-12). What were the “signs of an apostle”? Miracles! They were primarily for confirmation. –

BY WAYNE JACKSON
“I do not understand why ministers will teach that one passage in the Bible is ‘literal,’ while they say that another one is ‘figurative.’For instance, in one of your articles you argue that the ‘days’ of the creation week are literal (twenty-four hour days).On the other hand, you say that the ‘1,000 years’ mentioned in Revelation, chapter 20, is ‘figurative.’Why do you go back and forth from literal to figurative?”
Your question is a very reasonable one and we are happy to clarify this matter.
The Scriptures abound with a great variety of figures of speech.In 1899, E.W. Bullinger produced a massive work of more than 1,100 pages dealing with biblical figures of speech. Therein he classified some 200 different figures, many of which were subdivided into different variations, so that the total number catalogued finally was more than 500 (Bullinger, Figures of Speech Used in the Bible, Grand Rapids: Baker, p. ix).
A Figure Defined
A figure of speech occurs when a word, phrase, or sentence is employed in a sense other than the usual or literal sense it has naturally.The purpose behind the use of a figurative expression is to intensify the idea being conveyed.The figure adds emphasis, feeling, and color to the thought presented.It is a mistake to assume that when a figure of speech is utilized the force of the statement or argument is weakened; actually, just the reverse is true.
It is very important, however, to be able to distinguish the figurative from the literal.A failure to discern the difference, in various biblical contexts, has resulted in much error.
How to Identify Figurative Language
Just as “beauty” is said to be “in the eye of the beholder,” unfortunately the identification of figurative language in the Scriptures is sometimes “in the eye” of the interpreter.By this we mean there is considerable confusion in the religious world in the matter of distinguishing between literal and symbolic terminology.There are, however, some common sense principles which may (and must) be employed in the identification process.
Words must be interpreted literally unless the sense implies an impossibility.
For example, John closes his Gospel account with the declaration that should all the deeds of Jesus, during his earthly ministry, be fully recorded, not even the world itself could hold the books that might catalog them (Jn. 21:25).This language is acknowledged as “hyperbole”,“hyperbolic”.
A hyperbole (meaning “to throw above”) is an exaggeration for the purpose of emphasis.John’s design was to show that the miracles delineated in his inspired narrative were merely representative of what the Savior did; the list of only seven signs that the apostle mentioned was far from exhaustive.
Words must be interpreted literally unless the sense implies a contradiction.
In the book of Revelation, the final abode of the redeemed is depicted as a “holy city” (cf. Heb. 11:10,16).One of the features of that city was its wall, that rested on “twelve foundations,” upon which were written the names of the “twelve apostles” (Rev. 21:14).The numeral “twelve,” as used here, cannot be literal, for there were thirteen apostles (the original twelve, minus Judas, plus Matthias, plus Paul).The number “twelve” came to be used as a symbol of the apostolic group, even when the number “twelve” was not precise.After Judas died, yet before Matthias was chosen, Jesus (following his resurrection) appeared to “the twelve” (1 Cor. 15:5).“Twelve,” therefore, in Revelation 21:14 is employed symbolically for the apostolic company, without literal, mathematical precision.
Words must be interpreted literally unless the sense implies an absurdity.
The Scriptures use the term “face” dozens of times in a figurative sense, e.g., face of the deep (Gen. 1:2), face of the earth (Gen. 1:29), face of the ground (Gen. 2:6), etc.Obviously, to press the word “face,” in a literal sense, would imply an absurdity with reference to the sea, the earth, etc.Clearly, then, these uses are figurative.
The nature of a biblical book may provide a clue, suggesting that the student is to watch for an abundance of figures of speech.
This is true of certain Old Testament books, such as portions of Ezekiel, Daniel, and Zechariah.But there is no clearer example of this than that of the concluding book of the New Testament, Revelation.
The apocaplyptic document begins with the notation that Christ “signified” the message, via his messenger, to the apostle John (1:1).The verb “signified” derives from semaino, which in early Greek meant “to show by a sign, indicate, make known, point out” (Liddell-Scott, A Greek-English Lexicon, Oxford: Clarendon, 1869, p. 1448).
Vincent cites John’s use of the term in his Gospel (12:33) where Jesus, in symbolic fashion, identified the method of his death by means of the expression “lifted up,” which hinted of the crucifixion (cf. also Jn. 21:19).He further notes that the term “signified” is “appropriate to the symbolic character of the revelation” (Word Studies in the New Testament, Wilmington, DE: Associated Publishers, 1972, p. 564).
What About the “Days” of Genesis?
Now regarding the original question, how is one able to say that the “days” of the creation week are literal days, while the “1,000 years” of Revelation 20:1ff represents a figure of speech?  The answer is this: by the respective contexts of the two portions of Scripture, and the language considerations found therein.
The “days” of the creation week are divided into periods of light and darkness (vv. 4-5).The “days” are distinguished from “years” (v. 14). And the “days” are subsequently defined by Moses as the same type of “day” as the Sabbath which the Hebrews were required to observe (Ex. 20:11).There are other reasons for the view that the creation days must be literal, but this should suffice for the present.  See our “Archives” section for June 15, 2000 (The Creation “Days” —Literal or Figurative.
Regarding the “thousand years” of Revelation 20, it should be observed that the opening of the book itself provides caution that this is a document characterized by symbols (see “signified” – 1:1).  In addition, the “thousand years” of Revelation 20 is nestled in the midst of a number of other dramatic figures —a pit, a great chain, the dragon/serpent, thrones, a beast, a mysterious “mark,” resurrections, etc. Why should the pit, chain, dragon, etc., be viewed as figures, and yet the “thousand years” be singled out as literal?That defies common sense.
The fact is, the numeral “thousand” is found more than twenty times in Revelation, and not once is it employed in a literal sense.  In Chapter 20, the most likely interpretation of the number is that of “completeness.”  As William Milligan observed:
“‘[T]he thousand years’ mentioned in the passage express no period of time?. They embody an idea; and that idea, whether applied to the subjugation of Satan or to the triumph of the saints is the idea of completeness or perfection” (An Exposition of the Bible, Hartford, CT: S.S. Scranton, 1903, Vol. VI, p. 913).
There are, therefore, sound exegetical reasons for making a distinction between the literal “days” of Genesis 1, and the figurative “years” of Revelation 20.
SCRIPTURE REFERENCES
John 21:25; Hebrews 11:10, 16; Revelation 21:14; 1 Corinthians 15:5; Genesis 1:2; Genesis 1:29; Genesis 2:6; John 21:19; Revelation 20:1; Exodus 20:11; Revelation 20; Genesis 1

​