Mark 16:1-8

The context

These verses are the resurrection narrative in the earliest recoverable form of Mark, and they end the Gospel abruptly. Three women come at dawn with spices, find the stone rolled away and a young man in white, and are told that Jesus has risen and is going ahead to Galilee. They flee in terror and say nothing.

What it establishes

The passage reports an empty tomb, an announcement of resurrection, and a commission to tell the disciples and Peter. It also records fear and silence as the first response, which is not the sort of detail a story would invent about its own witnesses.

What it does not establish

It does not narrate any appearance of the risen Jesus. Mark's earliest ending has the announcement but no encounter, and the longer ending that supplies appearances is a later addition. Nor does the passage explain the silence; whether the ending is deliberate or accidental is disputed among interpreters.

Short note, first pass, October 2026. Corrections welcome.

Cited in these answers

• Aren't naturalistic explanations for the resurrection stories more probable than the resurrection itself, since they appeal only to elements common to our experience, whereas the resurrection must appeal to God?
• Given that the gospel accounts were written by BIASED Christians, their content can’t be accorded much legitimacy. Some sources had Al Gore inventing the ‘Internets’, too.

Part of Scripture, Opened — the exegetical layer behind every citation on this site. Scripture quotations are from the ESV.