Mark 16:9-20

“And He said to them, ‘Go into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature.’” (Mark 16:15)

The longer ending of Mark’s Gospel, consisting of verses 9-20, has faced criticism from some scholars who claim it was a later addition to the text. However, the evidence from manuscripts, early Church history, theological consistency, and divine providence strongly supports its authenticity. These verses are not an appendix but a vital conclusion to Mark’s Gospel, affirming Christ’s resurrection and commissioning His followers. This ending is found without brackets in the KJV, NKJV, and MEV; and with brackets in the NASB, ESV, NIV, CSB, and most English versions – testifying to its tenacity.

---

1. Textual Evidence: Widespread Manuscript Support

While the omission of Mark 16:9-20 in two early manuscripts—Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Vaticanus (4th century)—is often cited as evidence against its authenticity, the majority of textual witnesses support it:

• Over 99% of existing Greek manuscripts include Mark 16:9-20. These include Codex Alexandrinus, Codex Ephraemi Rescriptus (5th century), and a wealth of Byzantine manuscripts.¹
• The longer ending is preserved in ancient translations such as the Old Latin, Syriac, Coptic, and Gothic, demonstrating its early and widespread acceptance across geographic regions.²

Church Fathers provide additional early testimony. Irenaeus (c. 130–202) explicitly quoted Mark 16:19, writing, “So then, after the Lord had spoken to them, He was received up into heaven, and sat down at the right hand of God” (Against Heresies, Book 3, Chapter 10).³ Tatian’s Diatessaron (c. 160–175) also includes the longer ending, showing that it was accepted in the Church long before the 4th century.⁴

Moreover, the abrupt ending at Mark 16:8—where the women flee from the tomb in fear and silence—would be highly uncharacteristic of ancient biography. The longer ending resolves this tension, providing the resurrection appearances of Christ and His commissioning of the disciples, consistent with the other Gospels.

---

2. Historical Context: Explaining Variants

The omission of Mark 16:9-20 in a minority of manuscripts can be explained by historical and textual circumstances:

• Damaged Scrolls: Ancient scrolls often lost their final sections due to wear and tear, especially the conclusion.⁵
• Liturgical Preferences: Some early lectionaries favored shorter Gospel readings for public worship, possibly influencing scribal traditions.⁶
• Theological Misunderstanding: Verses like Mark 16:17-18, which describe miraculous signs, may have caused some scribes to hesitate in preserving the passage for fear of misinterpretation.⁷

Despite these factors, the inclusion of Mark 16:9-20 in nearly all manuscript traditions, translations, and patristic citations demonstrates its authenticity and importance.

---

3. Theological Coherence: A Seamless Fit

Critics often claim the longer ending introduces foreign concepts to Mark’s Gospel, yet it aligns perfectly with Mark’s themes and the broader New Testament:

• Resurrection Appearances (16:9-14): The appearances of Jesus to Mary Magdalene, the disciples, and others affirm the central message of the Gospel—Christ’s triumph over death.
• The Great Commission (16:15-16): The command to preach the Gospel to all creation is consistent with the commissions found in Matthew 28:18-20 and Acts 1:8. It also reflects Mark’s focus on discipleship and the expansion of God’s Kingdom.⁸
• Miraculous Signs (16:17-18): The signs mentioned, such as casting out demons, speaking in tongues, and divine protection, are not foreign to Scripture but are corroborated by events recorded in the Book of Acts. For example:
  • Casting out demons: Acts 16:16-18 describes Paul casting out a spirit of divination.
  • Speaking in tongues: Acts 2:4 records the apostles speaking in other languages at Pentecost.
  • Taking up serpents: Acts 28:3-5 recounts Paul being bitten by a viper and suffering no harm.
  • Healing the sick: Acts 5:15-16 shows the apostles healing multitudes in Jerusalem.

These miracles confirm that the longer ending reflects genuine early Christian experiences and is consistent with biblical theology. Without these verses, Mark’s Gospel would end abruptly in fear and silence, leaving readers without the assurance of Christ’s resurrection or His commission to the Church.

---

4. Addressing Stylistic Objections

One of the primary objections to Mark 16:9-20 is that its vocabulary and style differ from the rest of the Gospel. However, this argument is unconvincing for several reasons:

• Stylistic Shifts are Common: Changes in tone and vocabulary are not unusual in ancient literature, especially at narrative transitions or conclusions. For example, Deuteronomy 34 and Acts 28 display similar shifts.⁹
• Oral Tradition Influence: The longer ending may reflect an oral tradition or a liturgical adaptation, which does not diminish its authenticity.¹⁰
• Linguistic Studies: Modern analysis shows that the supposed stylistic differences are not statistically significant enough to rule out Markan authorship or early inclusion.¹¹

---

5. Providential Preservation

The inclusion of Mark 16:9-20 in the vast majority of manuscripts, translations, and early Church usage reflects God’s providence in preserving His Word. As Scripture affirms, “The grass withers, the flower fades, but the word of our God stands forever” (Isaiah 40:8).

If we trust that all Scripture is inspired by God (2 Timothy 3:16) and that He promised to preserve His Word (Matthew 24:35), we must accept the testimony of the early Church, which overwhelmingly recognized Mark 16:9-20 as divinely inspired.

Rejecting this passage undermines the unity and coherence of Scripture, opening the door for critics to question other portions of God’s Word.

---

6. Practical and Spiritual Importance

Mark 16:9-20 is not only authentic but essential for Christian faith and practice:

• The Great Commission: These verses remind believers of their responsibility to preach the Gospel to all nations (16:15).
• Faith and Power: The miraculous signs described in 16:17-18 demonstrate God’s ongoing work through His people, inspiring confidence in His protection and authority.
• Resurrection Hope: The resurrection appearances assure believers of Christ’s victory over death and their future hope in Him.

This passage has shaped Christian worship, evangelism, and theology for centuries, and its removal would leave the Gospel incomplete.

---

7. A Logical Defense

The case for Mark 16:9-20 can be summarized in the following syllogism:

1. If a passage is widely attested in manuscripts, referenced by early Church Fathers, and consistent with biblical theology, it should be considered as authentic.
2. Mark 16:9-20 is widely attested, referenced by early Church Fathers, and consistent with biblical theology.
3. Therefore, Mark 16:9-20 should be considered as authentic.

This logical argument reinforces the overwhelming evidence in favor of the passage.

---

8. Insights from Modern Scholars

Modern scholars have also defended the authenticity of Mark 16:9-20:

• Craig Evans emphasizes the passage’s theological consistency and its acceptance by the early Church.¹²
• James Kelhoffer argues that the inclusion of miraculous signs reflects the practices and beliefs of the early Christian community, supporting the passage’s authenticity.¹³

These insights demonstrate that Mark 16:9-20 stands firmly within the tradition of inspired Scripture.

---

Affirming the Authority of Mark 16:9-20

Mark 16:9-20 is not an appendix or a later addition—it is an inspired, providentially preserved conclusion to the Gospel of Mark. Its textual, historical, and theological evidence overwhelmingly supports its inclusion, and its removal would create an incomplete and inconsistent Gospel.

These verses proclaim Christ’s resurrection, empower His followers, and commission the Church to proclaim the Gospel to all creation. Let us embrace these words with confidence and boldly declare the good news of our risen Lord: “Go into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature.”

---

References

1. Bruce M. Metzger, The Text of the New Testament: Its Transmission, Corruption, and Restoration.
2. Kurt Aland and Barbara Aland, The Text of the New Testament.
3. Irenaeus, Against Heresies, 3.10.
4. Tatian, Diatessaron.
5. Craig A. Evans, “The Ending of Mark’s Gospel: A Textual and Theological Defense.”
6. F. F. Bruce, The Canon of Scripture.
7. James Kelhoffer, Miracle and Mission: The Authentication of Missionaries and Their Message in the Longer Ending of Mark.
8. Craig L. Blomberg, Jesus and the Gospels.
9. Daniel Wallace, “Mark 16:9-20 and Textual Criticism.”
10. E. P. Sanders, The Historical Figure of Jesus.
11. Richard Bauckham, Jesus and the Eyewitnesses.
12. Craig A. Evans, “The Case for the Longer Ending of Mark.”
13. James Kelhoffer, Miracle and Mission.