Mark Chapter 16 verse 9 Holy Bible

ASV Mark 16:9

Now when he was risen early on the first day of the week, he appeared first to Mary Magdalene, from whom he had cast out seven demons.
read chapter 16 in ASV

BBE Mark 16:9

Now when he came back from the dead early on the first day of the week, he went first to Mary Magdalene, from whom he had sent out seven evil spirits.
read chapter 16 in BBE

DARBY Mark 16:9

Now when he had risen very early, the first [day] of the week, he appeared first to Mary of Magdala, out of whom he had cast seven demons.
read chapter 16 in DARBY

KJV Mark 16:9

Now when Jesus was risen early the first day of the week, he appeared first to Mary Magdalene, out of whom he had cast seven devils.
read chapter 16 in KJV

WBT Mark 16:9


read chapter 16 in WBT

WEB Mark 16:9

Now when he had risen early on the first day of the week, he appeared first to Mary Magdalene, from whom he had cast out seven demons.
read chapter 16 in WEB

YLT Mark 16:9

And he, having risen in the morning of the first of the sabbaths, did appear first to Mary the Magdalene, out of whom he had cast seven demons;
read chapter 16 in YLT

Pulpit Commentary

Pulpit CommentaryVerse 9. - Now when he was risen early on the first day of the week, he appeared first to Mary Magdalene, from whom he had cast out seven devils. St. Luke (Luke 8:2) mentions that "seven devils had gone out of her;" and St. Mark repeats it here, to show the power of love and penitence, that she was the first to be permitted to see the risen Savior. The vision of the angel had scared her, and she said nothing; but the actual sight of her risen Lord gave her confidence, and she went immediately, in obedience to his command, and told the disciples (see John 20:11-18). She had lingered about his tomb; her strong affection riveted her to the spot.

Ellicott's Commentary

Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers(9-20) Now when Jesus was risen early.--See Notes on Matthew 28:16-20. The history of the verses that follow is in every way remarkable. They are not found in two of the oldest MSS.--the Sinaitic and the Vatican--are marked as doubtful in many others, and are wanting in some versions. In some of these (e.g., in the Vatican MS.) there is a blank space left between Mark 16:8 and the beginning of St. Luke, as though the writer had suspended his work and waited for materials. The absence was noticed by Jerome, who says that "nearly all the Greek texts omit them." Eusebius states the same fact as true of "the correct MSS.;" and no reference is made to them in the tables of parallel passages which were constructed for reference by Eusebius and Ammonius. On the other hand, they are referred to by Irenaeus (about A.D. 170), and are found in the Alexandrian and Cambridge MSS., and in twelve other uncials which are nearly (some say, quite) as old as the two which omit them. When we turn to the internal evidence we find that the narrative, which up to this point had followed closely in the footsteps of St. Matthew, now becomes a very condensed epitome of St. John's record of our Lord's appearance to Mary Magdalene (Matthew 20:11-18), of St. Luke's account of the journey to Emmaus (Luke 24:13-35), of the appearance to the ten disciples in John 20:19-25 and Luke 24:36-43, of the mission of the eleven reported in Matthew 28:16-20, of the Ascension as given by Luke 24:50-53. Two explanations of these facts are possible. (1) We may suppose that the writer of the Gospel wrote two copies of it, leaving one unfinished, ending at Mark 16:8; that this passed into the hands of persons by whom it was copied as complete, and so became the archetype of the MSS. in which the verses are wanting; while those that contain the subsequent verses were made from a more perfect text, written by St. Mark himself. (2) That the Gospel, having been originally completed by the writer, was in some way, by accident or design, mutilated; that as such it was reproduced faithfully by some transcribers, while others thought it better to give it a completion of some kind, by condensing what they found in the other Gospels. Of the two hypotheses the latter seems the more probable. It seems better, looking to these facts, to reserve notes, for the most part, for the Gospels in which the narratives appear in what was probably their original and certainly their fuller form. . . .