Some thoughts on Mark 16:16-18 and how it affects us today

by Peter E. Lewis

In my book The Ending of Mark’s Gospel I argued that his gospel did not end with ‘for they were afraid’ (Mark 16:8b), but the consensus of biblical scholars today is that Mark did not write Mark 16:9-20 as the ending of his gospel. Modern translations of the New Testament usually include 16:9-20 but with a note such as in the New International Version: ‘The most reliable early manuscripts and ancient witnesses do not have Mark 16:9-20.’

Stylistic Evidence: In a 1971 article, J.K. Elliot pointed out that the aorist tense of the verb ‘to go’ in verse 10 was different from Mark’s normal style, which used the present tense.

Many scholars have concluded that Mark 16:9-20 could not be the original ending because verses 16, 17 and 18, which are about baptism and signs such as speaking in tongues, are obviously from the later church. These verses are not only different from the rest of Mark 16:9-20 but from the whole gospel.

Moreover, the writing style of 16:9-20 seems to be different from Mark’s style elsewhere, and as Mary Magdalene had been mentioned in Mark 16:1 it is difficult to explain why in Mark 16:9 her name is followed by the words, ‘out of whom Jesus had driven seven demons.’

However, a sound argument can be made for Mark 16:9-20 without verses 16, 17 and 18 being the original ending on the last page of the codex. Because a group of Christians did not like what was written on the last and/or first page, they removed the whole outer leaf of the codex.

Some years later they, or another group who knew the original ending, decided to put it back after Mark 16:8, likely because it included the resurrection of Jesus, and they took the opportunity to list five signs that confirmed the Lord’s word, in keeping with what was originally written at the very end of Mark’s gospel: ‘The Lord worked with them and confirmed his word by the signs that accompanied it.’ (Mark 16:20b)

The Five Signs (Mark 16:17-18)

1. Driving out demons in the name of Jesus.
2. Speaking in tongues.
3. Picking up snakes.
4. Drinking poison.
5. Placing hands on sick people.

Christians speaking in tongues (glossolalia) are criticized by St Paul in his first letter to the Corinthians (1 Cor. 14:19). He does not encourage it: ‘In the church I would rather speak five intelligible words to instruct others than ten thousand words in a tongue.’ Glossolalia was becoming widespread, and it was likely at this time that the five signs were inserted into the original ending.

As the early church became organized, baptism became a requirement for membership, but nowhere in Mark’s gospel does Jesus say that believers should be baptized. His saying in Mark 16:16 that believers must be baptized to be saved indicates that verse 16 was inserted by the early church along with the signs.

Although the whole outer leaf was removed, only the last page was re-inserted. The early church could not allow the virgin birth to be negated; although the original beginning is unknown, it likely described Jesus’ birth as natural because the Holy Spirit enters into him at his baptism (Mark 1:10).

When the scribe re-inserted the text, he likely added the phrase ‘out of whom Jesus had driven seven demons’ after Mary Magdalene in Mark 16:9. In Jewish thinking, the number seven indicated fullness or completeness. This was a way to justify her as a witness in a patriarchal society; the scribe had to suggest that any defect in her female nature had been removed by Jesus himself.

This addition actually supports the belief that Mark wrote: ‘He appeared first to Mary Magdalene.’ This was an embarrassment for the early church. In Luke’s gospel, when the men from Emmaus report to the eleven, they are told Jesus appeared to Peter (Luke 24:34), and Mary is not mentioned. In Matthew, he appears to the eleven in Galilee (Matthew 28:16-17), and again there is no mention of her.

Most of the male followers of Jesus were misogynous. Sadly, that attitude has persisted into the modern era, where conservative Christians still do not allow women leadership roles. Progressive Christians, who fully embrace each other whether male or female, black or white, gay or straight, should be grateful to that scribe who suppressed his misogyny and copied what Mark had written in Mark 16:9b, albeit with a proviso.

Manuscript Evidence: The argument for the insertion of Mark 16:16-18 is supported by Codex Vaticanus (4th century). It does not have Mark 16:9-20, but there is a space after Mark 16:8. While the space is not large enough for the text with verses 16, 17 and 18, the text fits in easily without them.

To learn more about the research behind this analysis:

Purchase Peter E. Lewis' Book on Amazon

January 2026