Introductory Issues#

Gospels#

The books called Gospels deal with the life and ministry of Jesus. Unlike modern biographies, however, they lack contemporary historical background, analysis of character and personality, and probing of the inner thoughts of the hero. Nor do the Gospels resemble Hellenistic narratives that merely celebrate the real or supposed acts of ancient miracle-workers. There is much more than narration of miracles in the Gospels. Nor do the Gospels present us with simple memoirs; rather, they give us proclamations and instructions written from theological standpoints.

Evangelists#

The author of a Gospel is called an evangelist, which means a proclaimer of good news, here in written form. Since titles may not have been added to the Gospels till some time after the original writing, we depend mainly on early, external tradition and on internal evidence—that is, evidence within the Gospels—to answer questions of authorship.

Mark and Peter#

Very early in the second century the church father Papias passed on a tradition that Mark accurately wrote down in his Gospel the reminiscences of Peter concerning Jesus’ life and teachings, yet not with the result of a complete, close-knit account; for Peter gave his reminiscences in the form of anecdotes told here and there on various occasions. The early church fathers Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, Origen, and Jerome also support authorship by Mark in association with Peter.

Action#

With little exception, Mark’s Gospel is one of action instead of lengthy discourse. In quick-moving narrative, signaled especially by the adverb “immediately” and its synonyms (all going back to the same Greek word), he relates Jesus’ activities as the mighty and authoritative Son of God.

Arrangement#

Though the order of Mark’s material appears to be broadly chronological, catch words and similarity of subject matter often form the principle of arrangement for individual stories and sayings. For example, Mark 2:1-3:6 contains stories about Jesus’ authority to forgive sins, to eat with tax collectors, to heal on the Sabbath, to allow his disciples to refrain from fasting, and to let them pluck and eat grain on the Sabbath. Apparently Mark strings these stories together because they all deal with Jesus’ authority.

Suggested Purposes#

Modern scholars have suggested a number of different purposes behind the writing of Mark:

• Some think that the evangelist writes to give new converts catechetical instruction. But his failure to give very much of Jesus’ teaching undermines this view.

• Others think that Mark writes his Gospel for liturgical use in church services. But the arrangement and style lack the smoothness and symmetry that characterize liturgical documents.

• Still others think that Mark writes to cover up a failure by Jesus to proclaim himself the Messiah and that Mark subtly removes this embarrassment to Christian belief by inventing the messianic secret, that is, by putting into Jesus’ mouth prohibitions against public revelation of his messiahship to make it appear that Jesus really did teach in private that he was the Messiah though he actually did not.

• Others think oppositely that by inventing a messianic secret Mark was trying to soften the political offensiveness to Roman authorities of a ministry that was overly messianic.

Both of the views that stress a messianic secret depend on hyperskepticism toward Mark’s accuracy of reporting. Most readers will not gain the impression that he is embarrassed either by too little or by too much messianism in the tradition about Jesus. Jesus’ suppressions of publicity seem to have reasons that differ from one occasion to another, none of those reasons pertinent to the situation of Mark and his audience.

• Perhaps Mark writes to encourage persecuted Christians by showing them that Jesus also suffered and died. But why then does Mark devote the bulk of his Gospel to Jesus’ miracles and exorcisms and to the authority with which he teaches and debates? And why does Mark depress and counteract as much as possible the element of suffering in the narrative of Jesus’ arrest, trial, and crucifixion?

Apology#

Crucifixion was reserved mostly for criminals and slaves and had all the connotations of a modern electric chair or gas chamber. It makes best sense to think that Mark writes for the purpose of counteracting the shame of the manner in which Jesus died. This counteraction takes the form of stressing his power to work miracles, to cast out demons, to teach astonishingly, to vanquish opponents in debate, to attract crowds, to predict the future (including his own fate), and to rise from the dead.

Date#

Early Christian tradition shows some uncertainty whether Mark wrote his Gospel before or after the martyrdom of Peter (A.D. 64-67) but generally favors the earlier period. Modern scholars dispute the date of Mark’s writing. Those who regard “the abomination of desolation” in 13:14 as a back reference to the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70 necessarily date the Gospel after that event.

This method of dating presumes that Jesus did not make a genuine prediction of the destruction and overlooks that a number of details in Mark 13 do not match Josephus’s account of the destruction.

Data is lacking to answer firmly the question of date. But if one accepts the phenomenon of predictive prophecy, no compelling reasons exist to deny an early date A.D. 45-60.

Audience and Provenance#

Mark probably writes for a Roman audience. He translates Aramaic expressions for their benefit (3:17; 5:41; 7:34; 14:36; 15:34). Even more indicatively, he explains Greek expressions by their Latin equivalents (12:42; 15:16) and uses a number of other Latin terms. Confirmation comes from the mention in 15:21 of a Rufus who, according to Romans 16:13, lives in Rome (unless the two texts refer to different men with the same name).

Adding external testimony in favor of a Roman origin and address are

• The presence of Mark in Rome (symbolically called “Babylon”) according to 1 Peter 5:13

• The combination of Papias’s statement that Mark was Peter’s interpreter with the early tradition of Peter’s martyrdom in Rome

• The indication in an anti-Marcionite prologue that Mark wrote his Gospel in Italy

• Further statements by Clement of Alexandria and Irenaeus

Structure#

No outline of Mark has commanded widespread agreement, probably because the Gospel echoes a desultoriness in Peter’s telling of anecdotes concerning Jesus. The most that we can detect with confidence is a loose arrangement of materials governed mainly by:

• the initiatory character of John the Baptist’s ministry and its locale in the wilderness at the Jordan River

• the charismatic character and Galilean locale of the bulk of Jesus’ ministry

• the transitional character and Trans-jordanian route of his journey to Jerusalem

• the finality of his death and resurrection and their locale at Jerusalem.

The Ending of Mark#

The question of Mark’s ending does not affect any major doctrine of the Christian faith. Biblical inspiration is certainly not at issue, only what was the original text of the Bible as opposed to later additions by copyists.

The earliest and most trustworthy manuscripts of the New Testament had not yet been discovered in 1611, so that the translators of the King James Version, which contains the long ending and to whose influence more recent translations bow unfortunately often, did not know that the long ending was textually doubtful, indeed, inadmissible.

Summary#

The evangelist John Mark wrote to tell the good news of Jesus Christ. Very early tradition has it that Mark got his information from the Apostle Peter’s preaching. He may well have written at an early date in Rome.

His narrative is loosely arranged and fast-paced, emphasizing the mighty deeds of Jesus, the authority of his teaching, and his predictive power. The narrative starts with Jesus’ introduction onto the public stage by John the Baptist, proceeds to Jesus’ activities in Galilee, and reaches a climax in a disproportionately long section devoted to the events of a final week in Jerusalem. A discovery of Jesus’ tomb, empty because of resurrection, ends the narrative so far as we have it, though the original ending is very possibly lost.

In any case, the resurrection of Jesus joins other features of Mark to erase the shame of crucifixion and thus commend the gospel of Jesus Christ to non-Christians.