The Gospel of Mark as the Sequel to Chronicles: A Theory on the Abrupt Ending of Mark

In case you are not familiar with the questions around the ending of The Gospel of Mark, the quick summary is that it seemingly ends very abruptly. Chapter 16 starts with the women bringing spices to Jesus' tomb, finding it open, being told that Jesus has risen, and then fleeing in trembling and astonishment, and that is very likely where it originally ended. The earliest manuscripts do not include any of the rest of chapter 16, and there are some unique elements in the remaining verses that aren’t found in the other gospels, which is especially unexpected if Matthew and Luke used Mark as a primary source when writing their gospels.

Getting into that material and debate is not my goal here. If you are interested in that, I highly suggest Mike Winger’s treatment of it in his Mark series on YouTube. I don’t fully land where he does on everything, but, like all his stuff, it is a solid, thorough, biblically based, and scholastically informed treatment of the whole debate and I haven’t seen the content better summarized anywhere than there. So go have a watch if you’re interested and then come back and let me convince you why I think the ending is supposed to be abrupt when you’re done.

In short, I theorize that Mark viewed his gospel as a sequel to the Old Testament book of Chronicles and finished his gospel intentionally abruptly in a way that mirrors the end of Chronicles.

Why would Mark be a sequel to Chronicles?

The first question to answer in understanding where this theory even comes from is why the gospel of Mark would ever be considered a sequel to Chronicles.

To answer this question it is important to know that the current ordering of Old Testament books in Christian bibles is not the same ordering of books traditionally used in Jewish communities. Jewish communities often referred to the TaNaK, a three part breakdown of what we consider the Old Testament (Ta - Torah, Na - Nevi'im, K - Ketuvim). While these terms don't perfectly summarize each portion, these three parts are often referred to as the law, the prophets, and the writings.

So while the books of 1st and 2nd Chronicles fall in the middle of the Old Testament as far as most Christians are concerned, Chronicles was generally listed as the last book of the writings (the Ketuvim). So for the Jewish community in Jesus' day, the final book of the TaNaK was Chronicles.

Mark, then, is the first narrative book written of the New Testament. It might have been the first thing written of the New Testament overall, but if not, it was only one of the epistles that is thought to have potentially been written earlier. 

Therefore, for Mark, if he believes the story of Jesus is the continuation and/or fulfillment of the TaNaK, as the first New Testament book written, it would make sense for him to write his gospel as a sequel to the TaNaK, and, more specifically, as a sequel to Chronicles, the last book of the TaNaK.

How does the ending of Mark mirror the ending of Chronicles?

While it is specifically the ending of the two books I am focusing on here, at a high level, Chronicles and Mark follow a similar pattern.

Chronicles

Unlike the books of Kings, which follow the kings of both the northern and southern kingdoms, Chronicles focuses on Judah, the southern kingdom, tracking the line of promise. God had reiterated to David His promise to Abraham, specifying that the promised seed would come through David's line, and Chronicles tracks that promise. Generally downplaying the negative aspects of various kings' reigns, the books of Chronicles look forward to the ultimate fulfillment of God's promised king over Israel. There are some bumps along the way, as you get to the second half of 2 Chronicles, where kings turn to idolatry, but God brings judgment against those kings and sets another descendant of David on the throne who leads the people back to faithfulness each time. This culminates in the great reforms of Josiah, seeking the Lord faithfully, leading the people away from idolatry, repairing the temple, leading the celebration of the Passover, etc.

Even as Josiah is killed in battle at the end of the penultimate chapter of Chronicles, things are looking hopeful for the promises of God for Judah as David's line is leading the country back to faithfulness. But then, all at once, everything comes crashing down in a moment. From the great heights of hope for Israel, the chronicler crashes his reader into the depths of despair. Over the course of a couple paragraphs, 4 kings are deposed, the temple is torn down, and the people are carried off into exile, leaving the reader wondering how God's promise could possibly come to fruition now. But then, the chronicler ends, out of the exile, with a word of hope. Cyrus, king of Persia, at the direction of the Lord, offers the exiles to return and rebuild the temple.

This is how Chronicles runs: It tracks the hope of the fulfillment of God's promise for Israel until it all comes suddenly crashing down in an instant with seemingly no hope of God's promise being fulfilled, but then leaves off with a word of hope that God, against all odds, is not done with His promise yet.

Mark

Mark follows a similar trajectory to Chronicles as it tracks the fulfillment of God's promise of the coming Messiah through the line of David. Mark immediately identifies Jesus as the son of God, and then tracks a handful of miracles that identify him as the promised and prophesied Messiah. Over the course of the gospel account Jesus' fame and following increase and his influence grows, eventually leading to the triumphal entry where Jesus is welcomed into Jerusalem by great crowds proclaiming him to be coming in the name of the Lord, God's Messiah come to sit on the throne of David!

Then, just as Josiah led Israel to great spiritual reformation, so too, after his triumphal entry, does Jesus. He cleanses the temple, teaches against the teachings of the ruling Pharisees and Sadducees, and calls people to love the Lord with all their heart, soul, mind, and strength. But then, as God's promise looks to finally be coming to fruition with the Messiah from the line of David taking the throne and leading Israel to eternal faithfulness in God, everything comes crashing down in a moment. From the great heights of hope for Israel in the Messiah, Mark crashes his reader into the depths of despair as the supposed fulfillment of God's promise is betrayed, arrested, tried, hung on a cross, murdered, and buried. But then, Mark ends, out of the crucifixion, with a word of hope. The women, expecting to anoint Jesus' body, find an empty tomb and a man who tells them He is risen and is going before them to Galilee.

This is how Mark runs: It tracks the hope of the fulfillment of God's promise for Israel in the Messiah until it all comes suddenly crashing down in an instant with seemingly no hope of God's promise being fulfilled, but then leaves off with a word of hope that God, against all odds, is not done with His promise yet.

What is Mark trying to accomplish in doing this?

So, if Mark is actually mirroring Chronicles in the structure, and especially the climax, of his gospel account, what's the point?

Chronicles, in leaving off on the note of hope, declares that God is not done. He made a promise, and no matter what, He can be counted on to fulfill His word. And while the chronicler hasn't seen and can't document that fulfillment, he knows it is coming and God is still at work.

Mark is then picking up what the chronicler looked forward to but never saw. Chronicles leaves off waiting for the coming Messiah, and Mark presents us with that Messiah. We find, in Jesus, the great fulfillment that all of Israel's history was building toward, but it's also not done yet, and I think that is why Mark ends the way he does.

The Jewish expectation of the Messiah was of a reigning king who would sit on the throne of David, defeat all of Israel's enemies, and establish an everlasting kingdom. And Jesus will do that, but not yet. Jesus came first as the suffering servant who died for our transgressions and by whose stripes we are healed, and he will return as the reigning king, but not yet. Just as at the end of Chronicles, God was at work fulfilling His promise, but it was not yet complete, so too at the end of Mark, God is at work fulfilling His promise, but it is not yet complete.

Mark, unlike the chronicler, knew where the story went next, but the Great Commission and ascension aren't the fulfillment, Jesus' second coming is, and that is yet future. So I believe Mark chose to end his gospel account so abruptly to mirror Chronicles and communicate a message of hope to the church: Just as God was not done with Israel back then, neither is He done with His church now, and there will come a day when this story has it's true conclusion as Jesus returns, riding on the clouds of heaven, to take up his rightful throne and establish his kingdom in eternal righteousness, just as God promised to Abraham and to David so many years ago.