The Resurrection and the Ending of Mark’s Gospel

At this time of year, we occasionally see documentaries on TV about the resurrection. This usually includes brief snippets of interviews with various scholars, often with a cross-section of those who believe and disbelieve the gospel accounts of the ressurection of Jesus.

And one point that is often made by the skeptics is usually presented along the following lines: “Mark’s gospel, which is the earliest, doesn’t actually report the resurrection. The church added that bit on much later.” The implication is that honest Mark tells it like it is – Jesus died and that was that, but Luke and Matthew wanted a happy ending for their story, so they fabricated the story of the resurrection, and someone much later “fixed” Mark by adding a resurrection to that too.

To someone not familiar with the gospels this sounds like a major embarrassment for Christians – a coverup of epic proportions. But in fact, this accusation is at best a half-truth. Here are a few brief points in response, should you encounter this line of argument this Easter.

1. Gospel of Mark is not the earliest resurrection account anyway

Mark may indeed be the earliest gospel. It commonly gets dated by scholars around AD60-70, although there is no logical reason why it could not have been written much earlier. If however that date is correct, then 1 Cor 15:3-6 is in fact the earliest recorded account of the resurrection, dated in the mid 50s. And it is quite clear from reading the chapter that Paul is recounting an already well established tradition concerning Jesus’ resurrection appearances. If someone made up the resurrection stories, they must have done so long before Mark’s gospel was written.

2. Gospel of Mark is climaxing towards resurrection

Any suggestion that Mark didn’t know about the resurrection is quite frankly preposterous. The structure of the gospel is in fact built around a series of predictions Jesus makes about his impending death and resurrection:

And he began to teach them that the Son of Man must suffer many things and be rejected by the elders and the chief priests and the scribes and be killed, and after three days rise again. (Mark 8:31 ESV)

and then…

They went on from there and passed through Galilee. And he did not want anyone to know, for he was teaching his disciples, saying to them, “The Son of Man is going to be delivered into the hands of men, and they will kill him. And when he is killed, after three days he will rise.” (Mark 9:30-31 ESV)

and in the next chapter:

saying, “See, we are going up to Jerusalem, and the Son of Man will be delivered over to the chief priests and the scribes, and they will condemn him to death and deliver him over to the Gentiles. And they will mock him and spit on him, and flog him and kill him. And after three days he will rise.” (Mark 10:33-34)

From these verses alone it should be obvious that Mark intends us to expect a resurrection at the end of his gospel. In the very first verse, Mark 1:1, he makes it clear that he thinks that Jesus is not merely a great man, but the “Christ” (Messiah) and the “son of God”. He calls his story a “gospel” – a message of good news, not a tragedy. So he is not going to end it with a defeated, discredited hero. Also, Mark has clearly not planned for a surprise ending. He lets us know up front to expect a resurrection. And in fact, that is precisely what we get…

3. The Gospel of Mark does report the resurrection

Even though the original ending (presuming there was one) does not report the resurrection appearances of Jesus to his disciples, it is not missing the resurrection itself. In fact, by the time the early manuscripts abruptly end at Mark 16:8, we have seen that the stone has been rolled away from the tomb (v4), the body is gone (v6), an angel announces that Jesus has risen from the dead (v6), and predicts that he will appear to his disciples in Galilee (v7).

And looking up, they saw that the stone had been rolled back–it was very large. And entering the tomb, they saw a young man sitting on the right side, dressed in a white robe, and they were alarmed. And he said to 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. But go, tell his disciples and Peter that he is going before you to Galilee. There you will see him, just as he told you.” (Mark 16:4-7 ESV)

So I find the suggestion that Mark’s gospel does not report the resurrection to be extremely disingenous when it comes from scholars who know full well that this section was part of the original gospel.

4. The original ending of Mark almost certainly included resurrection appearances

I recognise that there is scholarly debate as to whether Mark’s original gospel did in fact end so abruptly at 16:8. It may be that there was some reason it couldn’t be finished. I do not find that idea that it was a deliberate “cliff-hanger” ending to be convincing (there is some good material on this in James Edward’s Pillar Commentary on Mark, and R T France takes a similar stance in his New International Greek Testament commentary).

So if there was an original lost ending, possibly due to the final page coming loose from a codex, it almost certainly included the resurrection appearances in Galilee, as prophesied by the angel.


Whether or not you are a believer in the resurrection, you have to accept that Mark was, and that he wanted to bear witness to it in his gospel account. I may post another time on what we are to make of the ending of the gospel of Mark that we do have, as it raises other interesting questions, but I will leave it there as this post is long enough already. Have a happy Easter.

Book Review – The Ordinary Hero (Tim Chester)

I’ve just finished my fourth Tim Chester book now, and have to admit up front that I am becoming a big fan of his writings. Here’s my other reviews of his books…

This one, his latest, subtitled “Living the Cross and Resurrection”, seeks to show how the pattern for Christian living is modelled on the cross of Jesus, and our hope for the future is based on the resurrection. The book is broken up into five main sections.

The first section seeks to explain the message of the cross, how it demonstrates God’s love for us, and gives us a new status. He shows how an appreciation of the cross gives us humility and confidence, as we look at God and ourselves in the light of the cross.

The second section then expands on how we live the way of Jesus, which is the way of the cross – a life characterised sacrifice, submission, self-denial, service and suffering. A powerful chapter entitled “Everyday Martyrdom” illustrates very practically what it means to follow the way of the cross each day. Counter-intuitively for our culture, this way of self-denial is actually the way of joy.

The way of the cross impacts on both our big life choices and our small daily actions. It really does include both martyrdom and washing up.

The third section, explores the pattern of the cross and resurrection – suffering followed by glory. There is no route to glory that avoids the cross, and so all evangelism must include the call to follow the way of the cross. Although our mission takes place in the power of the Spirit, it is to be characterised by humility, service and love.

It is in this section that some of his slightly controversial material is to be found. He is strongly critical of the desire to win the world by appearing successful, large, or powerful, and much of what he argues for in these chapters cuts right across the grain of what you might hear in many contemporary evangelical and charismatic churches, especially within the “church growth” movement. In fact, if anything, he seems to be suggesting that being small and weak are an integral part of our witness to the way of the cross.

The fourth section is on the power of the resurrection – power to be weak. Again, this may not be what you are used to hearing, with most teaching on power being related to how we overcome and are victorious in life. Tim Chester points out how often New Testament verses that promise power immediately go on to talk about suffering. We have power to suffer, power to be weak. It is not power for victory over suffering, but power to follow the way of the cross. Again, he is critical of the modern church that has taken its model of leadership from the world, rather than following the pattern of the cross.

The fifth section deals with the promise of the resurrection and hope. Here, he includes a very helpful chapter clearing up some common misconceptions of “heaven”. Our hope is not to go to heaven, but for a future when heaven will come down to earth. Our hope is for a future world characterised by justice, love and joy. This is a world worth living and dying for. It is a world taking risks for. We are to consider ourselves pilgrims, and store up heavenly treasure by being generous with earthly treasure.

Already Not Yet?

There are a few points that will make for difficult reading for charismatic evangelicals such as myself, as he is critical of “power evangelism”, and charismatic “highs and healings”. The difficulty lies in answering the question “to what extent can or should we expect the age to come to break into the future”? Chester does admit to there being a foretaste of what is to come, but seems to have a much lower expectation of God’s power to heal, or even his willingness to relieve us from present suffering, or to bless us in any way that is earthly. I do feel that there are many in charismatic circles who have an “over-realised” eschatology, assuming that we can just claim freedom from suffering and sickness automatically. But I do not believe that there is any problem in our desiring to see signs of the kingdom. As Chester himself acknowledges, the resurrection is not just a future hope, but a present experience.


Despite my slight reservations that he might underplay some of the blessings we can now enjoy through the Spirit, I would say this is another gem of a book from Tim Chester. Seeing the way of the cross as the pattern for the Christian life is thoroughly biblical and it is a tragedy that much of the church has marginalised this message. Also, the call to be a people of hope, based in the resurrection, is too rarely heard, resulting in Christians who live for this age that is passing away, rather than for eternity.