Mark 8:11-12 The Pharisees came and began to question Jesus. To test him, they asked him for a sign from heaven. He sighed deeply and said, "Why does this generation ask for a miraculous sign? I tell you the truth, no sign will be given to it."

Matt. 16:4 A wicked and adulterous generation looks for a miraculous sign, but none will be given it except the sign of Jonah." Jesus then left them and went away.

John 20:30 Jesus did many other miraculous signs in the presence of his disciples, which are not recorded in this book.

Acts 2:22 "Men of Israel, listen to this: Jesus of Nazareth was a man accredited by God to you by miracles, wonders and signs, which God did among you through him, as you yourselves know."

In this set, Mark's passage in the supposed "odd man out". Is Mark to be set against these other verses? First note the parallel in Matthew 16, in context:

He answered and said unto them, When it is evening, ye say, It will be fair weather: for the sky is red. And in the morning, It will be foul weather to day: for the sky is red and lowering. O ye hypocrites, ye can discern the face of the sky; but can ye not discern the signs of the times? A wicked and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign; and there shall no sign be given unto it, but the sign of the prophet Jonas. And he left them, and departed.

Mark is preserving a shorter version of this episode; does he mean to say that Jesus would not perform any miracles at all? Hardly, since he has Jesus doing them in plenty. A key here is that this account comes right after the miraculous feeding of loaves and fishes -- in other words, Jesus has already performed a honking big sign, and the Pharisees, etc. don't accept it. They doubted not Jesus' ability to do signs, but their origin in God. Note that the Pharisees ask for a sign from heaven (the words "from heaven" were often a circumlocution for "from God"; but this could just as well mean "from the sky" -- Keener, 420) -- not just any old sign. This is the context of Jesus' refusal. The remaining verses are therefore not in contradiction.

Well, the Great Ebonic Plague descends yet again, and Ebon gives himself a hearty pat on the back for calling the reply "fumbling about". Ebon's bull-in-the-china-shop approach completely ignores the context of the account (similar in Matthew and Mark) and once again ends up relying on Ebon's own wooden-literal understanding of a particular sentence. Quoting Ebon, "What the Pharisees wanted is entirely irrelevant. What is at issue here is what Jesus said in response, and he did not say, 'This is an evil generation; they seek a sign from heaven, and it shall not be given to them.' No, he does not; he says no signs - period." I'm sorry, but what the Pharisees say is exceptionally relevant; Ebon may as well argue that one can relevantly answer the question, "What is the capital of Montana?" by answering, "42." We have already pointed that when Jesus comes before the Pharisees and Sadducees he has just completed a series of signs (Matthew 15), thus the request for sign is for something more. They want something that unequivocally identifies Jesus as a man of God, as though the other miracles had not accomplished that. Chapter 12 of Matthew, which Ebon also drags in, has the same pattern. With respect to the parallel passage in Mark (Mark 11), we find that "this generation" is asking for a sign. Plainly, not all of Israel is asking for a sign, but the spiritual leaders (representatives thereof) of Israel are doing so in a particular instance. Thus, when Jesus replies that "this generation" will not receive a sign, he is simply saying that he will not be acceding to their demand. The Greek vocabulary in Mark particularly emphasizes the fact that Jesus was being put on the spot to prove that he had YHWH's approval rather than just being put on the spot for a wow-the-locals miracle. The context of the question determines all, and pretending to be dense to it as Ebon does is not an answer.