A Work in Progress Bible Commentary
By: Chip Crush

MARK
CHAPTER 16

Mark 16 concludes this gospel account. There is no dispute over the authenticity of the first 8 verses. It is thought, because of the strange ending in v8, that what follows was added by scribes and copyists to provide a more expected conclusion. The manuscripts differ with regard to the content of v9-20. Many scholars don’t bother to comment on those disputed verses, but I’ll offer a brief opinion here. Let’s take a look:

The Resurrection

1When the Sabbath was over, Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James, and Salome bought spices so that they might go to anoint Jesus' body. 2Very early on the first day of the week, just after sunrise, they were on their way to the tomb 3and they asked each other, "Who will roll the stone away from the entrance of the tomb?"
4But when they looked up, they saw that the stone, which was very large, had been rolled away. 5As they entered the tomb, they saw a young man dressed in a white robe sitting on the right side, and they were alarmed.
6"Don't be alarmed," he said. "You are looking for Jesus the Nazarene, who was crucified. He has risen! He is not here. See the place where they laid him. 7But go, tell his disciples and Peter, 'He is going ahead of you into Galilee. There you will see him, just as he told you.' "
8Trembling and bewildered, the women went out and fled from the tomb. They said nothing to anyone, because they were afraid.

We conclude Mark’s gospel here with the most surprising element, the resurrection of Jesus. While that is clear from the text, Mark doesn’t include any of the details that we might expect, those elements that we find in the other Gospel accounts and throughout the New Testament, instances of Jesus’ appearing to many witnesses. Here, Mark simply acknowledges the facts about the stone being rolled away from the entrance to the tomb and the angel telling of the resurrected Christ. The simplicity of Mark’s account seems to be written to remind believers of what they know to be true, rather than to convince unbelievers.

One of the noteworthy elements here in Mark’s gospel is the instruction from the angel for the women to “go, tell His disciples and Peter” (v7). It is thought that Mark’s gospel is heavily influenced by the testimony of Peter, and so perhaps it’s not surprising that, at this point in the story, Peter would exclude himself from the other disciples. Though he denied that he even knew Jesus, and though he hadn’t been restored by Jesus at this point (John 21:15-24), Peter was a faithful disciple and would prove that in coming years of ministry. He distinguishes himself here in Mark’s account as a reminder that repentance and restoration are available for those who consider themselves to have fallen from grace. The Christian life is filled with ups and downs, and the downs can be truly devastating to our faith. But God will complete the good work that He begins in one of His elect. So be like Peter and repent and return to the service of the Lord. Include yourself among His disciples and prove to yourself that Jesus lives in you.

The final surprise here at the conclusion of Mark’s gospel is the abrupt and rather negative ending. V8 declares, “Trembling and bewildered, the women went out and fled from the [empty] tomb. They said nothing to anyone [for a time], because they were afraid.” This was an emotionally turbulent time for these women, not to mention the apostles holed up in hiding. It was a circumstance that left them temporarily speechless, where no words could describe their thoughts and ponderings. This was a reverential fear, like what Peter, James, and John witnessed at the transfiguration, and it ultimately poured out in glorious joy. But that expression would take some time, as the appearances of the resurrected Jesus would come, and their hope would be realized. But for now, Mark leaves us in their suspenseful fear, and I’ll allow another commentator to explain his thoughts on Mark’s abrupt ending:

“Scholars of the New Testament mainly agree that the last few verses of the Gospel of Mark as we now know it (Mark 16:9-20) were probably added after the Gospel was written in order to make it more complete and to bring it more into alignment with the other accounts of the life of Jesus by adding a few verses about what occurred after the resurrection. This probability need not trouble us. Such a scenario does not mean that the verses added later could not have been inspired. In any case, the additional material is largely taken directly from the endings of the Gospels of Matthew, Luke, and John. That the present ending of Mark probably was added is clear: it does not appear in any of the earliest known manuscripts; it was evidently unknown to early Christian scholars such as Clement of Alexandria and Origen (early third century); and the style of verses 9-20 is nothing like that used throughout the rest of the book. But the fact that early Christians seem to have eventually felt a need to bring Mark’s Gospel to a more understandable close only points up the question we must ask: why did Mark end his Gospel so abruptly? It has sometimes been guessed that Mark may have died or have been otherwise unable to complete his work; but considering that we are only talking about a few short verses this seems unlikely. Recently, scholars such as N.T. Wright have suggested another possibility – that the ending of Mark was intentionally left ‘dangling’ in order that Peter or another eyewitness to the events could verbally add his testimony after the Gospel had been read out in the early churches. The problem with this latter idea is that there is simply no evidence that anything like this happened, either with Mark or with any other book of the Bible. In fact, there is a far more likely reason for the seemingly abrupt ending of Mark. What most discussions of the ‘abrupt’ ending of Mark fail to take into account is that Mark’s Gospel begins as abruptly as it ends. While the other three Gospels all include some background material, Mark’s account regarding Jesus simply starts ‘in mid stream,’ as it were, by beginning with his baptism and continuing through his ministry. The abrupt beginning and ending of Mark compared to the other Gospels suggests that its purpose was never to try to provide a more complete ‘Life of Christ’ in the way that Matthew and Luke do (and that even John approximates by giving us key sections of the story from before Jesus began his ministry to the post-resurrection events). This indicates that the purpose of Mark – which is thought to have been the earliest Gospel written – was not to look at the background to and aftereffects of the life of Christ, but purely to provide a summary of his words and works, his deeds and teachings. This scenario fits well with what we know of the history of Mark’s Gospel. Papias (AD 60-130), the bishop of Hierapolis near Laodicea, tells us: ‘[Mark] accompanied Peter, who accommodated his instructions to the necessities [of his hearers], but with no intention of giving a regular narrative of the Lord’s sayings.’ In other words, rather than making an extended summary of the life of Jesus, the purpose of Mark’s Gospel was, as many modern scholars believe, to provide a manual for disciples – a selective narrative that could be used to teach new believers the Way of Christianity and to help current believers grow in understanding and faith. That Mark begins his Gospel with the baptism of Jesus and ends with his death is probably no coincidence – these are the points where the life of every Christian begins and ends. It is precisely in limiting himself to the part of the story of Jesus that is parallel to the lives of his followers that Mark provides a focused guide for the Christian life. For that purpose, details of the early life or post-resurrection appearances of Jesus were not necessary. So the ending of Mark only seems abrupt when it is compared to the endings of the other Gospel accounts – which is doubtless why, in time, the additional verses were added to Mark’s original ending.”


- - - - The most reliable early manuscripts and other ancient witnesses do not have Mark 16:9-20. - - - -


9When Jesus rose early on the first day of the week, he appeared first to Mary Magdalene, out of whom he had driven seven demons. 10She went and told those who had been with him and who were mourning and weeping. 11When they heard that Jesus was alive and that she had seen him, they did not believe it.
12Afterward Jesus appeared in a different form to two of them while they were walking in the country. 13These returned and reported it to the rest; but they did not believe them either.
14Later Jesus appeared to the Eleven as they were eating; he rebuked them for their lack of faith and their stubborn refusal to believe those who had seen him after he had risen.
15He said to them, "Go into all the world and preach the good news to all creation. 16Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned. 17And these signs will accompany those who believe: In my name they will drive out demons; they will speak in new tongues; 18they will pick up snakes with their hands; and when they drink deadly poison, it will not hurt them at all; they will place their hands on sick people, and they will get well."
19After the Lord Jesus had spoken to them, he was taken up into heaven and he sat at the right hand of God. 20Then the disciples went out and preached everywhere, and the Lord worked with them and confirmed his word by the signs that accompanied it.

As noted in the introduction to this chapter, this final passage of Mark’s gospel is not considered by many to be part of the original text. It is thought that v9-20 were added by scribes to offer a more soothing conclusion that v8 provided. There’s nothing in the text here that confounds Christian doctrine, but neither is there anything that adds significant substance. Perhaps the main problem with considering this passage to be part of the Biblical text is the wide variation between manuscripts. For example, if there were 100 manuscripts and all 100 of them agreed with Mark 16:1-8, but only 20 of them even had v9-20, we might wonder if v9-20 should be included. But what if, out of the 20 that did include v9-20, there were 10 different versions of that passage all scattered in the mix? It would be prudent to read it and move on without digging in too deeply. Before offering my own summary conclusion, I want to include one pastor’s remarks on the subject:

“Even though scholars from across the theological spectrum are now virtually unanimous in understanding the Gospel of Mark as ending at verse 8, most Bible printers and publishers continue to include the extra verses. The ESV does so after a paragraph break and a brief disclaimer. It then puts verses 9-20 inside a set of double brackets. The TNIV goes a step further and shrinks the font and puts the verses in italics. But one way or another, they still appear in most modern versions of the Bible and therefore even if you aren’t ever planning on preaching a sermon on the ending of Mark’s Gospel you need to know how these verses ought to be handled. Towards that end I offer the following 3 suggestions:

  1. Read them but don’t treat them as Holy Scripture

    I think you should treat the longer ending of Mark’s Gospel exactly the way you treat The Didache or The Gospel Of Thomas – interesting but not inspired. Reading the longer ending of Mark is very useful from a historical perspective primarily because it tells us about some of the early theological controversies within the early church. Verses 17-18 for example, appear to be making an argument for a more charismatic understanding of the Christian life and mission. About those verses James Edwards says: ‘The prominence given to charismatic signs in vv. 17–18 stands in stark contrast to the reserve of Jesus in Mark with regard to signs and sensation (cf. 8:11–13).’ Throughout the actual text of Mark’s Gospel Jesus appears to be very cautious with respect to signs and wonders. He heals people because he loves people but almost every time he does he strongly warns them to say nothing to anyone – Jesus is aware that signs and wonders can become a huge distraction. Apparently, not everyone in the early church embraced his sense of caution. We see that certainly reflected in Paul’s concern in 1 Corinthians. Paul wants to deprioritize without delegitimizing signs and wonders. He wants the focus more on love and less on particular gifts of the Spirit. The longer ending of Mark’s Gospel reveals to us that this problem was not isolated to the church in Corinth. Apparently charismatic distortions of the Gospel have existed almost as long as the Gospel itself. That’s good to know. So read the longer endings of Mark’s Gospel but don’t treat them as Holy Scripture. Don’t try and prove your spiritual bona fides by handling poisonous snakes. Don’t insist that everyone who believes ought to be able to speak in tongues. Read the longer ending of Mark as a testimony to some of the things people wanted the Bible to say, that thankfully, it did not.

  2. Don’t deny the problem – and don’t be ignorant of the solution

    If you are going to share the Gospel with people living on planet earth in the internet age you need to be at least somewhat equipped to defend the authority and reliability of the Bible. First year philosophy students and internet aficionados tell a story about the Bible that goes like this: ‘The Bible doesn’t really tell us anything about what God said or what Jesus said or what the Apostle said. Rather it tells us what the early church wanted God, Jesus and the Apostles to have said. These documents after all, had to be copied and reproduced every 20-30 years. Do you really think that they didn’t pull out a few things or put in a few things that served their own agenda? Of course they did. The Bible has evolved over time.’ That’s the story – but like a lot of good stories these days, it has very little to do with the facts. The truth is that the text of the Bible is the most rigorously attested text in the history of human literature. The truth is that when we compare all the thousands of scraps and fragments of the New Testament from all over the Mediterranean, from every stage of the reproduction timeline, there are remarkably few significant textual variants. The one exception to that generally happy rule is the longer ending of Mark’s Gospel. You should know about this problem but you shouldn’t be freaked out by it. You should know that scholars and linguists have known about this issue for over a thousand years. You should know that some of the scribes who made the first copies of the longer ending flagged it as likely unoriginal. Scholars have been investigating these verses ever since. And you should know that scholars from across the theological spectrum – scholars who would deny the historicity of the resurrection and scholars who would affirm it – now agree that verse 8 is in fact the original ending of Mark’s Gospel. There is no serious dissent from that position. Therefore, contrary to what your internet friends may say, this controversy actually proves the opposite of what they contend. It proves that the Christian community has been rigorous, thorough, transparent and dogged in their preservation and reproduction of the original text. Any potential insertions have been flagged, documented, researched, reviewed and if deemed unoriginal removed. Therefore we can be very confident that what we have before us is in fact the unvarnished, unedited, unevolved Word of God. The Bible is a miracle and you don’t need to be ashamed of it.

  3. Love and use what is there

    Whether Mark intended to write more or whether he did write more and it was somehow lost or obscured, the fact is that what God has preserved is entirely adequate for Mark’s purposes. The Gospel of Mark in many ways resembles a well written High School essay. He presents his thesis in the opening verse: The beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God (Mark 1:1). Mark’s goal is to convince us that Jesus Christ is the Son of God. He then begins to assemble and present compelling evidence. He tells us that Jesus forgave sins, fed 5000 people in the wilderness, walked on the water, commanded the wind and the waves, had authority over demons, disease and even death itself. Everything Jesus did and everything Jesus said spoke in favour of his unique identity. Mark also tells us what Jesus said about himself when placed under oath by the High Priest of Israel. The High Priest asked him: ‘Are you the Christ, the Son of the Blessed’ (Mark 14:61)? And Jesus said: ‘I am, and you will see the Son of Man seated at the right hand of Power, and coming with the clouds of heaven’ (Mark 14:62). Mark also recorded for us the words of the Roman centurion. Even though he was not a Christian and not even a Jew and not even up to speed on the things that Jesus had said and done – at the moment of his death he said this: ‘Truly this man was the Son of God’ (Mark 15:39)! And then finally, as if that wasn’t enough, Mark gives us one more thing. He gives us the evidence of the empty tomb. When the women arrive to attend to his body they find the stone rolled away from the tomb and an angel standing guard who tells them: ‘Do not be alarmed. You seek Jesus of Nazareth, who was crucified. He has risen; he is not here. See the place where they laid him’ (Mark 16:6). He has risen. He is not here. See the place where they laid him. The empty tomb is Mark’s LAST WORD on the identity of Jesus Christ. If you don’t believe my contention, if you aren’t satisfied by the words and works of Jesus, if you don’t credit what Jesus said under oath, if you aren’t impressed by the testimony of the Roman soldier then at least consider the evidence of the empty tomb. Consider the word of the angel: ‘He has risen; he is not here. See the place where they laid him’ (Mark 16:6). What do you say about that? How do you argue with an empty tomb?

The empty tomb is Mark’s LAST WORD on the identity and significance of Jesus. If he had ended his story there no one could accuse his Gospel of being incomplete. He has said and done everything he intended to do. He has presented evidence in support of his contention that Jesus Christ is in fact the Son of God. You don’t need to be embarrassed by the ending of Mark’s Gospel. And you don’t need to be embarrassed by the reaction of the women. Many modern readers think that Mark should have had the women dancing or singing or clapping or something more positive than what he tells us. He says that they were terribly afraid. He says that they were trembling and entirely overwhelmed. And that seems weird to us – but maybe it shouldn’t. In the Old Testament when people realized that they had been talking and relating to God they usually behaved like these women – they trembled with fear and with awe. When Samson’s father realized that he and his wife had been speaking to God, he nearly had a heart attack. He said, ‘We shall surely die, for we have seen God’ (Judges 13:22). So maybe the reaction of the women wasn’t weird after all. Maybe it was wise. In Psalm 2 it says: ‘be wise; be warned… Serve the LORD with fear, and rejoice with trembling. Kiss the Son, lest he be angry, and you perish in the way, for his wrath is quickly kindled. Blessed are all who take refuge in him’ (Psalms 2:10–12). The Bible tells us to serve the LORD – to serve the SON – with fear and trembling. To fall down and kiss his feet lest we perish in the way. For his wrath is quickly kindled. Blessed are all those who take refuge in him. So maybe their response wasn’t weird after all. Maybe it was absolutely spot on. Maybe it isn’t Mark’s ending that is odd – maybe it’s us. Maybe we have become a little too comfortable with the person and Majesty of Christ. Maybe we are the ones who need to be wise. Because if Jesus is who he said he was and if he has accomplished what he said he would accomplish then the time is fulfilled, the Kingdom of God is at hand and everyone who is wise unto salvation ought to repent and believe in this Gospel. Because this IS the Word of the Lord. Thanks be to God!”

We can acknowledge that v9-20 appear to be an effort to bring to a conclusion the ministry of Jesus after the empty tomb was witnessed by the women. In v9, Jesus appears resurrected to Mary Magdalene. She tells the disciples, but they don’t believe her (v10-11). In v12-13, Jesus appears to a couple disciples who were walking in the country, but the disciples didn’t believe their testimony either. This, of course, is reminiscent of Luke’s passage on the Road to Emmaus. V14 reveals Jesus’ appearing to all of the disciples, and it contains His rebuke for their failure to believe the others’ testimony. V15-18 is a scribe’s attempt at conveying the Great Commission. It contains some odd elements, such as snake handling and poison drinking without getting hurt. We shouldn’t be surprised when some fringe denominations of Christianity put these elements into practice and find themselves experiencing life threatening situations. V19 explains the ascension of Jesus, and finally v20 reveals the ongoing ministry of the disciples to spread the gospel with the accompanying miraculous signs of Jesus helping them along the way. It’s simplistic, like much of Mark’s authentic words, but the style and vocabulary are clearly not matches. While the passage does appear in most Bibles with the brackets around it and footnotes explaining different views and problems with it, it’s worth a quick read for comparing and contrasting. But we leave it there, rejoice with reverence in Jesus’ resurrection, and move on to the next book, the Gospel of Luke.


Bible text from Gospelcom.net.  Copyright 1973, 1978, 1984 by International Bible Society.

BACK TO MENU   PREVIOUS CHAPTER