What people are saying - Write a review
In this thorough work -- much maligned in the late 1800's, and still today, on "ad style-em" grounds -- John Burgon makes a case for the genuineness of Mark 16:9-20. For much of the book, he is not advancing his own case, but is untying the knots of misinformation which had been tied by previous researchers.
Whether one is persuaded by Burgon or not on the larger question of the source of Mark 16:9-20, his work is clearly the result of hundreds if not thousands of hours of investigation. It must have taken years to acquire the data that is in the appendices alone.
The flaws in some of Burgon's arguments -- such as the view that the Peshitta is a second-century witness (a view that was by no means unique to Burgon in the 1800's) -- are far outweighed by the corrective effect of his criticisms. If more people would simply read and understand this freely available resource, many fewer commentators, professors, and preachers, would be spreading shamefully inaccurate claims about the manuscript-evidence and patristic-evidence regarding this passage.