In Mark 16:9-20, Codex Sinaiticus & Codex Vaticanus do not have the long ending - Daniel Wallace
Is Mark 16:9–20 really part of the Bible?
100+ hours of research. Is the longer ending of Mark authentic?: The Mark Series pt 69 (16:9-20)
In Mark 16:9-20, Scribes wrote a 'longer ending' to New Testament Bible - Bart Ehrman
Bart Ehrman - Mark 16:9-20 is fake
These THREE Manuscripts are WEIRD at Mark 16:9-20 | Defending the Long Ending of Mark | Part 2
How can you trust the New Testament when the original manuscripts are different?
What about the ending of Mark’s Gospel?
Mark 16:9-20 Replaced on Codex Sinaiticus? Lets Talk Evidence. Part 4/6
08 Deleted on Purpose?
Is Mark 16:9-20 Really Not in the Oldest Manuscripts?
Mark 16:9-20, 11 verses are missing in earliest manuscripts. Scribes added them later-Daniel Wallace
The Oldest New Testament | The Discovery of the Codex Sinaiticus
If you were to compare Codex Sinaiticus with today's Bible how similar would it be?
The Authenticity Of Mark 16:9-20
DR. SCOT MCKENDRICK on the CODEX VATICANUS -- is it really a fourth century manuscript?
The Ending of Mark - N. T. Wright
The Fitting End to Mark’s Gospel (Mark 16:9-20)
Mark 16:9-20 & the Abrupt Ending - Part 2
Is Codex Sinaiticus The Oldest New Testament Manuscript?
