The Other Side of the Evidence
Last week we examined the case for the shorter ending of Mark. This week we hear the other side. While two famous 4th-century manuscripts (Vaticanus and Sinaiticus) omit Mark 16:9–20, the vast majority of the manuscript tradition includes it. The longer ending is present in uncials A, C, D, W, Delta, and Theta, in the entire Byzantine text tradition, and in virtually every ancient translation: the Syriac, the Latin, the Coptic, the Armenian, and the Gothic version of Bishop Ulfilas. In sheer numerical terms, the manuscripts that include 16:9–20 outnumber those that omit it by an enormous margin.
The Fathers Quoted It as Scripture
The earliest patristic evidence predates our oldest manuscripts by two centuries. Around AD 150, Irenaeus of Lyon explicitly quoted Mark 16:19 in his work Against Heresies (3.10.6), proving that the longer ending was circulating as part of Mark’s Gospel within living memory of the apostolic generation. By AD 170, Tatian had incorporated it into his Diatessaron, a harmony of the four Gospels used widely in the Syrian church. Critics often cite Eusebius of Caesarea as rejecting these verses, yet Eusebius, after noting their absence in certain copies, devoted considerable space to demonstrating that the contents of 16:9–20 are perfectly consistent with the other Gospels. As Burgon observed: why would Eusebius defend the theology of a passage he considered fraudulent?
Does the Greek Really Sound Different?
The most common modern objection is that the vocabulary and style of 16:9–20 do not match the rest of Mark. The table below sets each objection beside its rebuttal.
| The Objection | The Response | Parallel |
|---|---|---|
| 16:9–20 reads like a rushed summary, not Mark’s usual vivid storytelling | Mark 1:9–20 does the same thing: baptism, temptation, preaching, and the calling of four disciples in twelve rapid-fire verses | The Gospel opens and closes in the same condensed, summary style |
| Poreuomai (“to go”) appears three times but is absent from the rest of Mark | The word appears rarely in all the Gospels; its concentration in a short passage is not statistically unusual | Mark uses many words only once or twice; rarity is not proof of foreign authorship |
| 16:9 uses prōtē sabbatou instead of Mark’s mia sabbatōn (16:2) | The latter phrase occurs only once in each of the four Gospels; a single occurrence does not establish a binding pattern | A rare phrase does not equal a different author (Burgon) |
| “The Lord Jesus” (ho Kyrios Iēsous) in 16:19 is unique in Mark | The ascension is a unique event; a unique title for a unique moment is appropriate, not suspicious | Luke also reserves special titles for climactic moments |
The Church’s Confession
Whatever one concludes about authorship, the longer ending has been received and confessed as the authoritative Word of God by the historic Church. It has been appointed as the Holy Gospel for the Feast of St. Mark in the ancient lectionaries. The Lutheran Confessions treat it as Scripture: the Book of Concord cites Mark 16:15 (“Go into all the world and proclaim the Gospel”) and Mark 16:16 repeatedly as foundational doctrine. The Greek of 16:16
“The one who has believed and has been baptized will be saved; the one who has disbelieved will be condemned”
forms the bedrock of the Church’s theology of Holy Baptism. These verses are not a footnote in the confessional tradition; they are woven into its core.
The congregation does not need to choose between the two handouts. The shorter ending reveals the theological brilliance of Mark’s narrative: faith before sight, the bare Word of Christ as the only proof the believer needs. The longer ending reveals the Church’s confession: that Christ is risen, that he commissions his people to carry the Gospel to every creature, and that Baptism saves. Both readings proclaim the same risen Lord. The question is not whether Christ rose from the dead. The question is how you will respond to the fact that he did.