part i. pp. introduction to the gospel of mark. 1st lesson

Part I:Part I: Introduction to Mark’s Gospel:Introduction to Mark’s Gospel:Is The Second GospelIs The Second Gospel

A Secret Christian CodeA Secret Christian Code ? ?

Adult Bible Lesson. Antioch Bible Baptist Church Adult Bible Lesson. Antioch Bible Baptist Church

February 19, 2006 (Original). Revised, July, 2011.February 19, 2006 (Original). Revised, July, 2011.

Park Central Baptist Church (Dallas, Texas)Park Central Baptist Church (Dallas, Texas)

Presenter: Joseph David Rhodes, M.A., M. Div. Presenter: Joseph David Rhodes, M.A., M. Div.

Part I: Part I: Introduction to Mark’s Gospel:Introduction to Mark’s Gospel:Is The Second GospelIs The Second Gospel A Secret Christian Code A Secret Christian Code ? ?

I. Introduction: I. Introduction: Why is the Study Why is the Study of Mark Important ?of Mark Important ?

Popular non-Christian and cultic works challenge Popular non-Christian and cultic works challenge the accuracy of the history of the New Testament the accuracy of the history of the New Testament and Christian belief:and Christian belief:

۞ The Book of MormonThe Book of Mormon۞ The The Nag Hammadi WritingsNag Hammadi Writings from Egypt from Egypt (1947) [ Gnostic Apocalypses, Gospels, Epistles,(1947) [ Gnostic Apocalypses, Gospels, Epistles, etcetc.. ]. ]. ۞The Fifth GospelThe Fifth Gospel (( Robert Funk, “ The Jesus Robert Funk, “ The Jesus

Seminar ” ).Seminar ” ).۞ The Da Vinci CodeThe Da Vinci Code ( Dan Brown’s “novel”). ( Dan Brown’s “novel”).

The Status of Mark’s GospelThe Status of Mark’s Gospel

“ “ Very possibly the oldest written account of Jesus’ minis-Very possibly the oldest written account of Jesus’ minis-try that we possess, the Gospel of Mark is a vivid and fast-try that we possess, the Gospel of Mark is a vivid and fast-paced writing that holds the interest of the popular reader paced writing that holds the interest of the popular reader and biblical scholar alike. When Christians first began and biblical scholar alike. When Christians first began discussions about drawing up a list of writings that would be discussions about drawing up a list of writings that would be regarded as authoritative for the Christian faith ( . . . middle of regarded as authoritative for the Christian faith ( . . . middle of the second century ) the Gospel of Mark was among the the second century ) the Gospel of Mark was among the writings selected for inclusion in this list and is today, of writings selected for inclusion in this list and is today, of course, still regarded as one of the four ‘canonical,’ or course, still regarded as one of the four ‘canonical,’ or authoritative, written portraits of Jesus in the New Testament. authoritative, written portraits of Jesus in the New Testament. ””

Prof. Larry Hurtado, Prof. Larry Hurtado, Mark, A Good News Commentary,Mark, A Good News Commentary, p. x.p. x.

II. II. Some Interesting Facts About Some Interesting Facts About MarkMark Mark is Mark is the shortestthe shortest of the four Gospels. In one of the four Gospels. In one recent edition of the recent edition of the Greek New TestamentGreek New Testament it has it has only 31 pages as compared to 51 for only 31 pages as compared to 51 for MatthewMatthew , 54 , 54 for for LukeLuke, and 40 for , and 40 for JohnJohn..

It has less unique material about Jesus than any It has less unique material about Jesus than any other Gospel:other Gospel:

– 92 % of Mark’s material is paralleled in Matthew.92 % of Mark’s material is paralleled in Matthew.– 48 % of Mark’s material is paralleled in Luke.48 % of Mark’s material is paralleled in Luke.– About 95 % of Mark is found in Matthew About 95 % of Mark is found in Matthew and and Luke.Luke.

It contains less of Jesus’ actual teaching than the It contains less of Jesus’ actual teaching than the other Gospels.other Gospels.

II. II. Some Interesting Facts About Some Interesting Facts About Mark Mark ((22))

IfIf the Gospel’s original ending was at 16:8 rather the Gospel’s original ending was at 16:8 rather than later, it records no explicit resurrection than later, it records no explicit resurrection appearances [ The ending - the last twelve verses appearances [ The ending - the last twelve verses has been the most controversial part in textualhas been the most controversial part in textualstudy in the last several centuries .]study in the last several centuries .]

Mark’s Greek seems to be rougher and simpler than Mark’s Greek seems to be rougher and simpler than either Matthew’s or Luke’s.either Matthew’s or Luke’s.

Mark has the highest number of candid statements Mark has the highest number of candid statements about the humanity and self-imposed limitations of about the humanity and self-imposed limitations of Jesus and all too human dullness of the disciples.Jesus and all too human dullness of the disciples.

During the most of Christian history, Mark has been During the most of Christian history, Mark has been least popular of the Gospels, but popularity does not least popular of the Gospels, but popularity does not equal inspiration or value.equal inspiration or value.


The Gospel of Mark has vividness of description that is The Gospel of Mark has vividness of description that is consistent with its being an eyewitness account; details that are consistent with its being an eyewitness account; details that are unnecessary to the flow of the narrative are included in the unnecessary to the flow of the narrative are included in the gospel. Examples include the following: gospel. Examples include the following:

The Gospel of Mark is non-literary, having a simple and The Gospel of Mark is non-literary, having a simple and popular style; it has affinities with the spoken Greek as revealed popular style; it has affinities with the spoken Greek as revealed by the papyri and inscriptions. Moreover, the gospel has a by the papyri and inscriptions. Moreover, the gospel has a Semitic flavor to it. By this is meant that Semitic syntactical Semitic flavor to it. By this is meant that Semitic syntactical features influence the form of the Greek. For example, features influence the form of the Greek. For example, corresponding to Hebrew and Aramaic syntax, frequently verbs corresponding to Hebrew and Aramaic syntax, frequently verbs are found at the beginning of a sentence in the Gospel of Mark. are found at the beginning of a sentence in the Gospel of Mark. Two other examples of a Semitic syntactical feature is the Two other examples of a Semitic syntactical feature is the abundant presence of abundant presence of asyndetaasyndeta, the placing of clauses together , the placing of clauses together without the use of conjunctions, and parataxis, the joining of without the use of conjunctions, and parataxis, the joining of clauses with the conjunction clauses with the conjunction kaikai ("and") (imitative of the ("and") (imitative of the waw-waw-conjunctiveconjunctive in Hebrew and Aramaic). (There are many other in Hebrew and Aramaic). (There are many other alleged examples of Semitisms in the Gospel of Mark.) What alleged examples of Semitisms in the Gospel of Mark.) What can you infer about the author from these stylistic features of can you infer about the author from these stylistic features of the Gospel of Mark?the Gospel of Mark?

II. II. Some Interesting Facts About Some Interesting Facts About Mark Mark ((22)) The Gospel of Mark has vividness of description The Gospel of Mark has vividness of description

that is consistent with its being an eyewitness that is consistent with its being an eyewitness account; details that are unnecessary to the account; details that are unnecessary to the flow of the narrative are included in the gospel. flow of the narrative are included in the gospel. Examples include the following: Examples include the following:

James and John leave their father in the boat James and John leave their father in the boat with the servants when they heed Jesus' call to with the servants when they heed Jesus' call to follow him (1:20).follow him (1:20).

James and John go with Jesus and the rest into James and John go with Jesus and the rest into the house of Simon and Andrew (1:29). the house of Simon and Andrew (1:29).

Jesus takes Peter's mother-in-law by the hand Jesus takes Peter's mother-in-law by the hand and raises her to her feet (1:31). and raises her to her feet (1:31).

It is explained that on the evening of the It is explained that on the evening of the Sabbath, when the sun has set, that the sick are Sabbath, when the sun has set, that the sick are brought to to Jesus to be healed (1:32).brought to to Jesus to be healed (1:32).


The Gospel of Mark has vividness of description The Gospel of Mark has vividness of description that is consistent with its being an eyewitness that is consistent with its being an eyewitness account; details that are unnecessary to the account; details that are unnecessary to the flow of the narrative are included in the gospel. flow of the narrative are included in the gospel. Examples include the following: Examples include the following:

It is explained that in the morning, long before It is explained that in the morning, long before daylight, that Jesus gets up and goes out (1:35). daylight, that Jesus gets up and goes out (1:35).

There are so many people crowded into the house There are so many people crowded into the house that there is no room even near the door (2:2). that there is no room even near the door (2:2).

The paralytic is carried by four men and the roof The paralytic is carried by four men and the roof is dug out in order to lower the paralytic down is dug out in order to lower the paralytic down (2:3-4).(2:3-4).

Jesus looks around at his critics with anger (3:5). Jesus looks around at his critics with anger (3:5).

Jesus sits in a boat in the water and teaches the Jesus sits in a boat in the water and teaches the crowd of people on the shore (4:1).crowd of people on the shore (4:1).


Still More Examples of the Vividness and Still More Examples of the Vividness and Eyewitness Character of Mark’s Gospel:Eyewitness Character of Mark’s Gospel:

Jesus is asleep on a cushion in the stern of the Jesus is asleep on a cushion in the stern of the boat (4:37-38). boat (4:37-38).

There are about two thousand pigs into which There are about two thousand pigs into which Jesus sends the legion of unclean spirits (5:13).Jesus sends the legion of unclean spirits (5:13).

Jesus instructs the people to sit down upon the Jesus instructs the people to sit down upon the green grass in groups of hundreds and fifties green grass in groups of hundreds and fifties (6:39-40).(6:39-40).

Jesus puts his fingers in the ears of the deaf and Jesus puts his fingers in the ears of the deaf and dumb man, touches the man's tongue with saliva, dumb man, touches the man's tongue with saliva, looks to heaven with a deep sigh and says looks to heaven with a deep sigh and says "Ephphatha" (7:33)."Ephphatha" (7:33).


Even More Examples of the Vividness and Even More Examples of the Vividness and Eyewitness Character of Mark’s Gospel: Eyewitness Character of Mark’s Gospel:

◊◊ Jesus spits on a blind man's eyes and laying his Jesus spits on a blind man's eyes and laying his hands; the blind man is described as gradually hands; the blind man is described as gradually regaining his sight (8:23-25).regaining his sight (8:23-25).

Peter asks Jesus whether he should build shelters Peter asks Jesus whether he should build shelters for Jesus, Moses and Elijah (9:5).for Jesus, Moses and Elijah (9:5).

Jesus takes children into his arms, blesses them Jesus takes children into his arms, blesses them and lays his hands on them (10:16).and lays his hands on them (10:16).

The blind man who is healed in Jericho is The blind man who is healed in Jericho is identified as the son of Timaeus (10:46).identified as the son of Timaeus (10:46).

Jesus is crucified at the third hour (15:25).Jesus is crucified at the third hour (15:25).

Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James and Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James and Salome bring spices to the tomb very early, Salome bring spices to the tomb very early, before the sun has risen (16:2).before the sun has risen (16:2).

III.III. Mark in the Early ChurchMark in the Early Church..

IfIf Mark was the original “Gospel”, Matthew & Mark was the original “Gospel”, Matthew & Luke must have used it as a source of their Luke must have used it as a source of their information (Cf. “The Synoptic Problem.”). Most information (Cf. “The Synoptic Problem.”). Most Conservative Biblical scholarship has variously Conservative Biblical scholarship has variously dated Mark from the 40s to the 60sdated Mark from the 40s to the 60s. .

IfIf some very recent study is to be accepted some very recent study is to be accepted (C. Evans, D. Dormeyer, James Crossley), Mark was (C. Evans, D. Dormeyer, James Crossley), Mark was written as a bold Christian challenge to the Roman written as a bold Christian challenge to the Roman Emperor Caligula’s self-deification and his threats to Emperor Caligula’s self-deification and his threats to the Jewish people. the Jewish people.

III.III. Mark in the Early Church (2).Mark in the Early Church (2). On the other hand, On the other hand, ifif the more traditional date of the more traditional date of

the late 50s or early 60s is valid, then the circum-the late 50s or early 60s is valid, then the circum-stances of the Gospel’s publication may involve stances of the Gospel’s publication may involve Nero’s insanity and the plunge of the leadership Nero’s insanity and the plunge of the leadership of imperial Rome into civic chaos. of imperial Rome into civic chaos.

In either case, one of the key purposes of Mark’s In either case, one of the key purposes of Mark’s Gospel was to challenge Gospel was to challenge thethe claimclaim that Caesar was that Caesar was a god with the revelation that Jesus, the suffering a god with the revelation that Jesus, the suffering servant, servant, waswas GodGod. His kingdom would indeed thus . His kingdom would indeed thus eternally outlast the cruel oppressive empires of eternally outlast the cruel oppressive empires of the Caesars and all human rulers.the Caesars and all human rulers.

A. A. The Testimony of The Testimony of PapiasPapias (ca. 130-140A.D.). (ca. 130-140A.D.). Papias, a Papias, a direct disciple of John of Zebedee):direct disciple of John of Zebedee):

And the Elder used to say this: “ Mark, having become And the Elder used to say this: “ Mark, having become Peter’s interpreter, wrote down accurately everything he Peter’s interpreter, wrote down accurately everything he remembered, though not in order, of the things either said remembered, though not in order, of the things either said or done by Christ. For he neither heard the Lord nor follow-or done by Christ. For he neither heard the Lord nor follow-ed him; but afterward, as I said, followed Peter, who adapt-ed him; but afterward, as I said, followed Peter, who adapt-ed his teachings as needed but had no intention of giving ed his teachings as needed but had no intention of giving an ordered account of the Lord’s sayings. Consequently, an ordered account of the Lord’s sayings. Consequently, Mark did nothing wrong in writing down some things as he Mark did nothing wrong in writing down some things as he remembered them, for he made it his one concern not to remembered them, for he made it his one concern not to omit anything which he heard or to make any false state-omit anything which he heard or to make any false state-

ment in themment in them..11

11TT hehe Fragments of PapiasFragments of Papias cited ca. 325 A.D. by Eusebius, cited ca. 325 A.D. by Eusebius, Ecclesias-Ecclesias-ticaltical HistoryHistory, 3.39.15. Cf. Michael W. Holmes, (ed.) , 3.39.15. Cf. Michael W. Holmes, (ed.) The Apostolic The Apostolic FathersFathers. 2nd Edition. Translation by J.B. Lightfoot and J.R. Harner. . 2nd Edition. Translation by J.B. Lightfoot and J.R. Harner. (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Book House, 1990), p. 316.(Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Book House, 1990), p. 316.

B. Other Early Church Testimonies to Mark’s B. Other Early Church Testimonies to Mark’s Authorship and Purpose in Writing His Gospel.Authorship and Purpose in Writing His Gospel.

۞ A Testimony From An Early Heretic / Enemy A Testimony From An Early Heretic / Enemy of Faith – MARCION:of Faith – MARCION:

۞ The Gnostic errorist Marcion rejected the The Gnostic errorist Marcion rejected the Gospel according to Mark as too earthy and Gospel according to Mark as too earthy and historical to support his distorted view of historical to support his distorted view of Christ. His highly deformed list or canon of Christ. His highly deformed list or canon of the New Testament (c.a. 145 A.D.) also the New Testament (c.a. 145 A.D.) also lacked John and Matthew (while retaining a lacked John and Matthew (while retaining a mutilated version of Luke’s evangel).mutilated version of Luke’s evangel).

B. Other Early Church Testimonies to B. Other Early Church Testimonies to Mark’s Authorship and Purpose in Mark’s Authorship and Purpose in

Writing His Gospel. (2).Writing His Gospel. (2).

2.2. Justin Martyr (100 ? -177 A.D.) Justin Martyr (100 ? -177 A.D.) However, the star orthodox “ Apostolic Father ” However, the star orthodox “ Apostolic Father ”

Justin Martyr (ca. 155-60 A.D.), mentioned that the Justin Martyr (ca. 155-60 A.D.), mentioned that the Memoirs of PeterMemoirs of Peter contained the description of contained the description of James and John as both “ named Boanerges, James and John as both “ named Boanerges, which means ‘ sons of thunder.’ ” This phrase is which means ‘ sons of thunder.’ ” This phrase is only found in Mark’s Gospel ( 3:17).only found in Mark’s Gospel ( 3:17).22

22 Justin Martyr, Justin Martyr, Dialogue with TryphoDialogue with Trypho, 106, cited by James A. Brooks in , 106, cited by James A. Brooks in his commentary, his commentary, Mark, New American Commentary Mark, New American Commentary (Nashville, TN.: (Nashville, TN.: Broadman Press, 1991), p. 18. See also Henry Chadwick, Broadman Press, 1991), p. 18. See also Henry Chadwick, The Early The Early Church. Church. O. Chadwick, ed. O. Chadwick, ed. The Pelican History of the Church IThe Pelican History of the Church I (Har- (Har-mondsworth, Middlesex: Pelican Books, 1967), ch. 4, pp. 74-77.mondsworth, Middlesex: Pelican Books, 1967), ch. 4, pp. 74-77.

3. 3. A famous Christian apologist of the later A famous Christian apologist of the later second century, Irenaeus of Lyons, wrote in ca. 180 second century, Irenaeus of Lyons, wrote in ca. 180 A.D. his opinion that Mark, who was Peter’s disciple A.D. his opinion that Mark, who was Peter’s disciple and interpreter, wrote his particular Gospel and interpreter, wrote his particular Gospel afterafter

Peter’s death. [?]Peter’s death. [?]33

[Cf. Note from Walter A. Elwell and Robert W. Yarbrough, [Cf. Note from Walter A. Elwell and Robert W. Yarbrough, Encountering the New Testament: A Historical and Encountering the New Testament: A Historical and Theological Survey Theological Survey (Grand Rapids, MI.: Baker Books, 1998), (Grand Rapids, MI.: Baker Books, 1998), p.89. [ Eusebius’ H.E., VI, 14,6-7]. There is an ambiguity here p.89. [ Eusebius’ H.E., VI, 14,6-7]. There is an ambiguity here in the word “departure.”in the word “departure.”

33From his book, From his book, Against HeresiesAgainst Heresies, 3.1.1 cited by James , 3.1.1 cited by James Brooks, Brooks, Ibid.Ibid.

4. Other Witnesses (170 – 430 A.D.): Mark as 4. Other Witnesses (170 – 430 A.D.): Mark as disciple of Peter and author of the “ Second disciple of Peter and author of the “ Second Gospel” or “ Third” One?Gospel” or “ Third” One?

Tatian, in Harmony of the Gospels, the Tatian, in Harmony of the Gospels, the DiatessaronDiatessaron ( 170 A.D.). ( 170 A.D.).

Clement of Alexandria – claimed that both Clement of Alexandria – claimed that both Matthew and Luke had written Gospels with Matthew and Luke had written Gospels with geneologies before Mark. But Mark wrote in geneologies before Mark. But Mark wrote in Rome during Peter’s lifetime.Rome during Peter’s lifetime.44

4 Clement, in his Clement, in his HypotyposesHypotyposes, makes this claim, cited in Eusebius, in , makes this claim, cited in Eusebius, in EEcclesiastical Historycclesiastical History, 6,14.5-7. See the edition translated by C.F. Cruse, 6,14.5-7. See the edition translated by C.F. Cruse (Peabody, Mass. Hendrickson Publishers, 1998), pp. 204-5. [Reprint of(Peabody, Mass. Hendrickson Publishers, 1998), pp. 204-5. [Reprint of 1850 edition]. 1850 edition].

4. Other Witnesses (170 – 430 A.D.): Mark as 4. Other Witnesses (170 – 430 A.D.): Mark as disciple of Peter and author of the “ Second disciple of Peter and author of the “ Second

Gospel” or “ Third” ?Gospel” or “ Third” ?

Tertullian (ca. 210 A.D.) said that Mark was an Tertullian (ca. 210 A.D.) said that Mark was an “ “ apostolic man ” who acted as Peter’s inter-apostolic man ” who acted as Peter’s inter-

preter and aid, who also edited a Gospel.preter and aid, who also edited a Gospel.55

Origen, the 3rd century Christian Bible scholar Origen, the 3rd century Christian Bible scholar (d. 254), wrote that “ The Second [Gospel] is (d. 254), wrote that “ The Second [Gospel] is according to Mark, who did as Peter instructed according to Mark, who did as Peter instructed him. ”him. ”66

55Tertullian, Tertullian, Against MarcionAgainst Marcion, 4.25, cited by James Brooks, , 4.25, cited by James Brooks, Mark, Op. Mark, Op. Cit.Cit.

66Quoted in Eusebius, Quoted in Eusebius, Ecclesiastical HistoryEcclesiastical History 6.25.5. 6.25.5.

44. . Several Other Witnesses from 170 – 430 A.D. Several Other Witnesses from 170 – 430 A.D. to Mark as disciple of Peter and the author of to Mark as disciple of Peter and the author of the “ Second Gospel” or “ Third” ? (2).the “ Second Gospel” or “ Third” ? (2).

Evidence from the so-called “ Anti-Marcionite Prologue ”, Evidence from the so-called “ Anti-Marcionite Prologue ”, (early 4(early 4thth century) which is also found in several early century) which is also found in several early

manuscripts of the Latin manuscripts of the Latin VulgateVulgate (6th to 8th centuries). In (6th to 8th centuries). In these sources Mark is depicted as both a protégé of Simon these sources Mark is depicted as both a protégé of Simon Peter and later the bishop of Alexandria. It is said that he Peter and later the bishop of Alexandria. It is said that he wrote his gospel account while in Italy. wrote his gospel account while in Italy.

The learned Bible scholar and translator, Jerome (d. 420 The learned Bible scholar and translator, Jerome (d. 420 A.D.), also stated that Mark was the interpreter of Peter and A.D.), also stated that Mark was the interpreter of Peter and pastor in Alexandria.pastor in Alexandria.77

77Jerome, Jerome, Commentary on MatthewCommentary on Matthew, Prologue 6, cited by James Brooks, p. 18. It will be , Prologue 6, cited by James Brooks, p. 18. It will be remembered that, acting by a papal order from Pope Damasus, Jerome translated theremembered that, acting by a papal order from Pope Damasus, Jerome translated the Bible from the Hebrew and Greek to create the Latin Bible from the Hebrew and Greek to create the Latin VulgateVulgate and standardize the Old and standardize the Old Latin versions of the Bible from the 2nd to 4th centuries.Latin versions of the Bible from the 2nd to 4th centuries.

44. Several Other Witnesses from 170 – 430 A.D. to Mark as a . Several Other Witnesses from 170 – 430 A.D. to Mark as a disciple of Peter and the author of the “ Second Gospel” or disciple of Peter and the author of the “ Second Gospel” or the “ Third” One? (3).the “ Third” One? (3).

Finally, bishop Augustine of Hippo (370-430 A.D.) Finally, bishop Augustine of Hippo (370-430 A.D.) firmly believed that the proper order of the writing firmly believed that the proper order of the writing of the Gospels was of the Gospels was Matthew, Mark, LukeMatthew, Mark, Luke, and , and JohnJohn. . In his estimation, “ Mark followed him [Matthew] In his estimation, “ Mark followed him [Matthew] closely and appears to be his imitator or closely and appears to be his imitator or abstractor. ”abstractor. ”88

88Augustine, Augustine, Agreement of the GospelsAgreement of the Gospels,1.2.4 See Augustine’s works,1.2.4 See Augustine’s works

in the standard editions of Philip Schaff’s edition of the in the standard editions of Philip Schaff’s edition of the Post-NicenePost-Nicene

FathersFathers or the or the Loeb Classical LibraryLoeb Classical Library..

C. The Gospel of C. The Gospel of Mark Mark in the Middle in the Middle Ages ( 5th to 14th Centuries).Ages ( 5th to 14th Centuries).

Strangely, Mark’s Gospel was the least quoted by Strangely, Mark’s Gospel was the least quoted by later ancient and Medieval Christian writers or it is later ancient and Medieval Christian writers or it is very difficult to tell if it is being specifically cited very difficult to tell if it is being specifically cited whenever parallels were quotedwhenever parallels were quoted..

Prof. James Brooks notes that “ No one appears to have Prof. James Brooks notes that “ No one appears to have written a Commentary on the Gospel of Mark until the late written a Commentary on the Gospel of Mark until the late fifth century when Victor of Antioch did so . . . It was never fifth century when Victor of Antioch did so . . . It was never placed first in the ancient manuscripts of the New Testa –placed first in the ancient manuscripts of the New Testa –

ment, and sometimes it was third or fourth rather than ment, and sometimes it was third or fourth rather than second.”second.”99

99 James A. Brooks, James A. Brooks, Op. Cit.,Op. Cit., p. 19. p. 19.

IV.IV. Modern Study of Mark (1850 - ca. 2000). Modern Study of Mark (1850 - ca. 2000). Rapid Changes and Paradigm Shifts – Rapid Changes and Paradigm Shifts – What What Kind of Code is a GospelKind of Code is a Gospel ? ?

A.A. Mark’s status changed with “critical” Biblical Mark’s status changed with “critical” Biblical studies of the Synoptic relationships (studies of the Synoptic relationships (i.e.,i.e., how to how to solve the “ Synoptic Problem” ?).solve the “ Synoptic Problem” ?).

B. B. H.J. Holtzmann and othersH.J. Holtzmann and others proposed the late proposed the late 19th century liberal theological position that Mark 19th century liberal theological position that Mark was was thethe really “historical” Gospel – the basis of really “historical” Gospel – the basis of dozens of rationalistic/ liberal “ lives of Jesus” dozens of rationalistic/ liberal “ lives of Jesus” (e.g., the famous “ Markan hypothesis”).(e.g., the famous “ Markan hypothesis”).

IV.IV. Modern Study of Mark ( 1850 –Modern Study of Mark ( 1850 –ca. 2000). ( 2. = Examples ).ca. 2000). ( 2. = Examples ).

This heady trend came to an abrupt halt then This heady trend came to an abrupt halt then with the monumental work of the late Dr. Albert with the monumental work of the late Dr. Albert Schweitzer in his Schweitzer in his Quest for the Historical JesusQuest for the Historical Jesus(1906, 1910) who revealed that liberal scholars (1906, 1910) who revealed that liberal scholars got back from Mark (and other Gospels) only got back from Mark (and other Gospels) only their own preconceptions, i.e., Jesus was mere-their own preconceptions, i.e., Jesus was mere-ly a . . . “liberal” first century ethical and relig-ly a . . . “liberal” first century ethical and relig-ious teacher. ious teacher.

Modern Study of Mark ( 1850 –Modern Study of Mark ( 1850 –ca. 2000). ( 2. = Examples ).ca. 2000). ( 2. = Examples ).

Schweitzer also had demonstrated (to his Schweitzer also had demonstrated (to his own satisfaction!) that there was not own satisfaction!) that there was not enough historical material for the Gospels enough historical material for the Gospels to be “biographies” of Jesus. The First to be “biographies” of Jesus. The First “Old” Quest for Jesus died. The liberal “ “Old” Quest for Jesus died. The liberal “ Jesus ” was a Myth of 19Jesus ” was a Myth of 19thth century century Evolutionism and the theory of Social Evolutionism and the theory of Social Progress. Progress.

D. D. Other liberals (frequently German and French uni-Other liberals (frequently German and French uni-versity professors) endeavored to further undermine versity professors) endeavored to further undermine the historicity of Mark. Some examples were:the historicity of Mark. Some examples were:

William WredeWilliam Wrede – who proposed – who proposed the “theory of the Messianic the “theory of the Messianic Secret ” in about 1901.Secret ” in about 1901.

The rise of “ Form Criticism” The rise of “ Form Criticism” with such as K.L. Schmidt, with such as K.L. Schmidt, Martin Dibelius, and Rudolf Martin Dibelius, and Rudolf Bultmann from about 1910-1945.Bultmann from about 1910-1945.

D. Other liberals endeavored to further D. Other liberals endeavored to further undermine the historicity of Mark (2).undermine the historicity of Mark (2).

Thus, the thematic unity and the geographical-Thus, the thematic unity and the geographical-historical skeleton [framework] of the first three historical skeleton [framework] of the first three Gospels - especially Mark’s Gospel - was fully Gospels - especially Mark’s Gospel - was fully dissolved in literary and critical analysis of so-dissolved in literary and critical analysis of so-called “ pericopes ”. Each Gospel then became called “ pericopes ”. Each Gospel then became a collage of many “layers” of early and later a collage of many “layers” of early and later “Church traditions,” “reflections”, “legends,” “Church traditions,” “reflections”, “legends,” etc.etc. etc. etc. ad infinitum ad nauseumad infinitum ad nauseum..

D. Other liberals ( frequently German and French D. Other liberals ( frequently German and French university professors) endeavored to further university professors) endeavored to further undermine the historicity of Mark. Some examples undermine the historicity of Mark. Some examples were: (2) [ Continued ]were: (2) [ Continued ]

Particularly radical was the school of Rudolf Particularly radical was the school of Rudolf Bultmann (a liberal !!! German Lutheran) whose Bultmann (a liberal !!! German Lutheran) whose application of Form-Criticism moved him toward application of Form-Criticism moved him toward also complete skepticism about all the historical also complete skepticism about all the historical facts of the Gospel including Jesus’ virgin birth, His facts of the Gospel including Jesus’ virgin birth, His miracles, and the Resurrection. The number of miracles, and the Resurrection. The number of “authentic” deeds and sayings of Jesus became “authentic” deeds and sayings of Jesus became minimal and the view of Christian belief became minimal and the view of Christian belief became uncertain and highly “existential.”uncertain and highly “existential.”

D. Other liberals (frequently German and French uni-D. Other liberals (frequently German and French uni-versity professors) endeavored to further under-mine versity professors) endeavored to further under-mine the historicity of Mark. Some examples were: (3) [ . . . the historicity of Mark. Some examples were: (3) [ . . . Continued ]Continued ]

Some of Bultmann’s students (Gunther Bornkamm, Some of Bultmann’s students (Gunther Bornkamm, Gerhard Ebling, Ernst Kasemann, etc.) reacted quite Gerhard Ebling, Ernst Kasemann, etc.) reacted quite strongly against this strait-jacket of rationalism and anti-strongly against this strait-jacket of rationalism and anti-supernaturalistic presuppositions as did some outstanding supernaturalistic presuppositions as did some outstanding British and American Bible scholars (C.H. Dodd, W. Davis, British and American Bible scholars (C.H. Dodd, W. Davis, James Barr, H.H. Rowley, W. Albright, G.E. Wright, etc.) James Barr, H.H. Rowley, W. Albright, G.E. Wright, etc.)

Thus, by the late 1950s and early 1960s, there was a slight Thus, by the late 1950s and early 1960s, there was a slight shift in scholarship and the Second or “New Quest” for the shift in scholarship and the Second or “New Quest” for the Historical Jesus began with Gunther Bornkamm, E. Historical Jesus began with Gunther Bornkamm, E. Stauffer, J.M. Robinson, and others such as Wolfhart Stauffer, J.M. Robinson, and others such as Wolfhart Pannenberg (Erlangen University).Pannenberg (Erlangen University).

D. Other liberals (frequently German and French D. Other liberals (frequently German and French university professors) endeavored to further university professors) endeavored to further undermine the historicity of Mark. Some examples undermine the historicity of Mark. Some examples were: (4) [ Continued . . .] [ Evangelical Reaction]were: (4) [ Continued . . .] [ Evangelical Reaction]

. . .. . . From all this furor, both liberal and conservative From all this furor, both liberal and conservative scholars began (in some cases) to take the Gospels on scholars began (in some cases) to take the Gospels on their own terms as well-crafted proclamations of the life, their own terms as well-crafted proclamations of the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ and birth of the death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ and birth of the Church (Donald Baille, F.F. Bruce, William Barclay, Oscar Church (Donald Baille, F.F. Bruce, William Barclay, Oscar Cullmann, R.H. Fuller, T.W. Manson, J. Moltmann, Leon Cullmann, R.H. Fuller, T.W. Manson, J. Moltmann, Leon Morris, Morris, et alet al.). Meanwhile, from the late 1940s onwards, .). Meanwhile, from the late 1940s onwards, evangelical scholarship began to slowly become the new evangelical scholarship began to slowly become the new leaders of genuine Biblical study because of its firm leaders of genuine Biblical study because of its firm commitment to the Divine inspiration of the Bible and the commitment to the Divine inspiration of the Bible and the unique Deity of Jesus Christ and His atoning death. Both unique Deity of Jesus Christ and His atoning death. Both America and Britain have experienced something of a America and Britain have experienced something of a strong Evangelical revival in strong Evangelical revival in scholarshipscholarship from the 1970s from the 1970s until the 1990s.until the 1990s.

Part IA:Part IA: Introduction to Mark’s Gospel:Introduction to Mark’s Gospel:[ (Slide 25) End of Part I.1A. ][ (Slide 25) End of Part I.1A. ]

۞ Is The Second Gospel Is The Second Gospel A Secret Christian CodeA Secret Christian Code ? ?

No, Not According to the External No, Not According to the External Historical & Textual Evidence !!!!!!!!!!!!Historical & Textual Evidence !!!!!!!!!!!!

Is The Second Gospel A Secret Is The Second Gospel A Secret Christian Code?Christian Code? No. It is a No. It is a GospelGospel ! !

Next: Some Interpretative Theories ofNext: Some Interpretative Theories of Mark’s Mark’s Gospel, the Synoptic Problem,Gospel, the Synoptic Problem, Markan Priority, Markan Priority, the Authorship of thethe Authorship of the Book, Its Geographical Book, Its Geographical Provenance andProvenance and Date, and Miscellaneous. Date, and Miscellaneous.

Part IB: IPart IB: Introduction to Mark’s ntroduction to Mark’s Gospel: Gospel: Theories & Historical FactsTheories & Historical Facts

E. About Fifteen Keen Theories On Origin and E. About Fifteen Keen Theories On Origin and Meaning of Mark’s Gospel ( ca. 1952-1989). Meaning of Mark’s Gospel ( ca. 1952-1989). What Kind of Code Is this What Kind of Code Is this KATA MARKONKATA MARKON ? ?

S.F.G. Brandon (Manchester University, S.F.G. Brandon (Manchester University, U.K.): Jesus was a U.K.): Jesus was a ZealotZealot and Mark’s and Mark’s Gospel, penned after 70 A.D. is a “cover-Gospel, penned after 70 A.D. is a “cover-up.”up.”1010

1010Cf. Cf. The Fall of Jerusalem and the Christian ChurchThe Fall of Jerusalem and the Christian Church (2nd Edition; (2nd Edition; London: SPCK,1957). Professor Brooks observes, however, that the London: SPCK,1957). Professor Brooks observes, however, that the Gospels reveal that Jesus tended to avoid the title “ Messiah” early on Gospels reveal that Jesus tended to avoid the title “ Messiah” early on just to prevent this kind of misappropriation and misapplication of His just to prevent this kind of misappropriation and misapplication of His message (message (Mark, NACMark, NAC, p. 20). Some ardent readers of theology may also , p. 20). Some ardent readers of theology may also recall the much more notorious thesis of Hugh Schonfield in recall the much more notorious thesis of Hugh Schonfield in The The Passover PlotPassover Plot : : New Light on the History of Jesus New Light on the History of Jesus (New York: Bantam (New York: Bantam Books, 1966).Books, 1966).

E. About Fifteen Keen Theories On Origin and E. About Fifteen Keen Theories On Origin and Meaning of Mark’s Gospel (ca. 1952-1989). What Meaning of Mark’s Gospel (ca. 1952-1989). What

Kind of Code Is this Kind of Code Is this KATA MARKONKATA MARKON ? ?

P. Carrington & M.D. Goulder (P. Carrington & M.D. Goulder (ProfsProfs., Cambridge ., Cambridge University): Jesus was like an ancient AnglicanUniversity): Jesus was like an ancient Anglican “ “Liturgist” and the Gospels were Early PublicLiturgist” and the Gospels were Early Public

Lectionaries.Lectionaries.1111

1111Cf. P. Carrington, Cf. P. Carrington, The Primitive Christian Calendar: A Study in the The Primitive Christian Calendar: A Study in the Making of the Markan Gospel Making of the Markan Gospel (Cambridge: Cambridge University (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1952) and M.D. Goulder, Press, 1952) and M.D. Goulder, The Evangelist’s Calendar The Evangelist’s Calendar (London: (London: SPCK, 1978) which focused on Mark as guide for baptismal liturgy. A SPCK, 1978) which focused on Mark as guide for baptismal liturgy. A similar thesis was propounded by B. Standaert in similar thesis was propounded by B. Standaert in L’Evangile selon L’Evangile selon Marc: Composition et Genre Litteraire Marc: Composition et Genre Litteraire (Nijmegen: Stichtig (Nijmegen: Stichtig Studentenpers, 1978). Aside from an obvious problem of anachronistic Studentenpers, 1978). Aside from an obvious problem of anachronistic emphasis, the Gospels and Epistles were not generally emphasis, the Gospels and Epistles were not generally readread publicly publicly as Scripture until at least the 2nd century ! as Scripture until at least the 2nd century !

E. What Kind of Code Is this E. What Kind of Code Is this KATA KATA MARKONMARKON ? (2) . . . . [Continued] ? (2) . . . . [Continued]

William MarxsenWilliam Marxsen : Mark was a Theological : Mark was a Theological RedactionRedaction : It was written in 66 A.D. to warn : It was written in 66 A.D. to warn the Jerusalem Christians to flee the doomed the Jerusalem Christians to flee the doomed city and wait for the Lord’s return in city and wait for the Lord’s return in Galilee.Galilee.1212

1212In In Mark the Evangelist: Studies in the Redaction History of the Mark the Evangelist: Studies in the Redaction History of the Gospel.Gospel. Trans. By J. Boyce. (Nashville: Abingdon, 1969). This theory Trans. By J. Boyce. (Nashville: Abingdon, 1969). This theory has some obvious prophetic problems and it is incomplete as an has some obvious prophetic problems and it is incomplete as an

explanation for a full Gospel purpose.explanation for a full Gospel purpose.


H. RiesenfeldH. Riesenfeld: A Much More Conservative Ap-: A Much More Conservative Ap-proach. [A proach. [A Redaction StudyRedaction Study] Prof. Riesenfeld ] Prof. Riesenfeld demonstrates how a Disciple of Jesus reflected demonstrates how a Disciple of Jesus reflected the post-Easter discipleship. (Mark focused on the post-Easter discipleship. (Mark focused on Christology and the preaching [Christology and the preaching [kerygmakerygma] and the ] and the didache didache [[teachingteaching] of Jesus for the second ] of Jesus for the second Christian generation).Christian generation).1313

1313Cf. Riesenfeld’s later volume of his collected essays, Cf. Riesenfeld’s later volume of his collected essays, The Gospel TraditionThe Gospel Tradition. E.T. . E.T. (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1970), esp. ch. 3. Riesenfeld, a Scandanavian (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1970), esp. ch. 3. Riesenfeld, a Scandanavian Lutheran, followed here the lead of Cambridge writer C.H. Dodd and also the Lutheran, followed here the lead of Cambridge writer C.H. Dodd and also the Oxford Bible scholar Robert H. Lightfoot, whose Oxford Bible scholar Robert H. Lightfoot, whose History and Interpretation in History and Interpretation in the Gospelsthe Gospels (Oxford University Press, 1934) anticipated many contemporary (Oxford University Press, 1934) anticipated many contemporary conservative evangelical views. His view was that Mark was a creative conservative evangelical views. His view was that Mark was a creative theologian who took Peter’s oral recollections and interpreted their meaning theologian who took Peter’s oral recollections and interpreted their meaning for his generation. See his mature reflections in for his generation. See his mature reflections in The Gospel Message of Mark The Gospel Message of Mark (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1950).(Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1950).


Charles H. DoddCharles H. Dodd: Mark’s Gospel – A Reflection of : Mark’s Gospel – A Reflection of the Apostolic Preaching of Acts and Its Develop-the Apostolic Preaching of Acts and Its Develop-ments (reflecting the ministry of the Divine and ments (reflecting the ministry of the Divine and human Jesus of Nazareth in Galilee and Judea). human Jesus of Nazareth in Galilee and Judea). (This thesis was originally contained in Dodd’s (This thesis was originally contained in Dodd’s famous famous The Apostolic Preaching and Its Develop-The Apostolic Preaching and Its Develop-mentsments London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1936). London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1936).1414

1414But see also “ The Framework of the Gospel Narrative,” in But see also “ The Framework of the Gospel Narrative,” in Expository TimesExpository Times 43 43 (1932), pp. 396 ff. which was later issued in his (1932), pp. 396 ff. which was later issued in his New Testament StudiesNew Testament Studies (London: Cambridge University Press, 1953). American evangelical scholar (London: Cambridge University Press, 1953). American evangelical scholar Ralph Martin has stated, “ In the hands of the redaction-criticism it is the his-Ralph Martin has stated, “ In the hands of the redaction-criticism it is the his-tory writing of a creative theologian who makes history serve his purpose. No tory writing of a creative theologian who makes history serve his purpose. No issue is more central than to ask how Mark’s value will fare, either by depreci- issue is more central than to ask how Mark’s value will fare, either by depreci- ation or enhancement, in the matter of its witness to the historical Jesus .” - ation or enhancement, in the matter of its witness to the historical Jesus .” - Cited in Cited in Mark: Evangelist and Theologian Mark: Evangelist and Theologian (Exeter, U.K. and Grand Rapids, MI.: (Exeter, U.K. and Grand Rapids, MI.: Paternoster Press and Zondervan Publishing Academie Books, 1973). Paternoster Press and Zondervan Publishing Academie Books, 1973).


T.J. WeedenT.J. Weeden: Mark’s Gospel as a Polemic Against A “Do-: Mark’s Gospel as a Polemic Against A “Do-cetic Christology ” [Written about A.D. 80].cetic Christology ” [Written about A.D. 80].1515 Thus, Mark Thus, Mark opposed Jesus being represented as the typical Graeco-opposed Jesus being represented as the typical Graeco-Roman “divinized” man and the false conceptions of op-Roman “divinized” man and the false conceptions of op-ponents of the original disciples of Jesus. Weeden indeed ponents of the original disciples of Jesus. Weeden indeed believed Mark’s view of Jesus and true discipleship must believed Mark’s view of Jesus and true discipleship must be understood in terms of suffering and sacrifice.be understood in terms of suffering and sacrifice.1616

15Cf. his essay “ The Heresy That Necessitated Mark’s Gospel,” in Cf. his essay “ The Heresy That Necessitated Mark’s Gospel,” in Zeitschrift fur neu-Zeitschrift fur neu-testamentliche Wissenshaft testamentliche Wissenshaft 59 (1968): 145-58; and his primary book on the subject, 59 (1968): 145-58; and his primary book on the subject, Mark Mark - Traditions in Conflict - Traditions in Conflict ( Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1971). We disagree with Weeden ( Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1971). We disagree with Weeden about the date of Mark and some details of his thesis, but he had something right here !about the date of Mark and some details of his thesis, but he had something right here !

1616See James A. Brooks, See James A. Brooks, MarkMark, , NAC NAC , p. 21. This basic understanding of Mark, with some, p. 21. This basic understanding of Mark, with some

important modifications, is reflected in an essay by my own New Testament mentor, Prof.important modifications, is reflected in an essay by my own New Testament mentor, Prof. Terry L. Wilder, (Ph.D., Aberdeen), “ The Heart of Mark’s Gospel,” in the Terry L. Wilder, (Ph.D., Aberdeen), “ The Heart of Mark’s Gospel,” in the MidwesternMidwestern Journal of TheologyJournal of Theology Vol. 1. No.1 ( Fall 2004): 44-50. Vol. 1. No.1 ( Fall 2004): 44-50.


Ralph J. Martin: Mark written to refute a Ralph J. Martin: Mark written to refute a Gnostic Gnostic distortion of distortion of Paul’s concept of a spritual divine Paul’s concept of a spritual divine Christ.Christ. He did so by emphasizing Jesus’ earthly He did so by emphasizing Jesus’ earthly and human characteristics – Jesus, though truly and human characteristics – Jesus, though truly Divine, fulfilled the role of the prophecied OT & Divine, fulfilled the role of the prophecied OT & Davidic Messiah by humiliation, suffering, and Davidic Messiah by humiliation, suffering, and death. Only then, was there exaltation.death. Only then, was there exaltation.1717

1717Mark: Evangelist and Theologian Mark: Evangelist and Theologian (Exeter, U.K. and Grand Rapids, MI.: (Exeter, U.K. and Grand Rapids, MI.: Paternoster Press and Zondervan Publishing Academie Books, 1973). Paternoster Press and Zondervan Publishing Academie Books, 1973). See more recently, Robert H. Gundry, See more recently, Robert H. Gundry, Mark: A Commentary on His Mark: A Commentary on His Apology for the Cross Apology for the Cross (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Eerdmans Publishing (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1993).Company, 1993).


J.D. KingsburyJ.D. Kingsbury: Mark wrote to correct popular false Christ-: Mark wrote to correct popular false Christ-ology. Thus, “ Son of God ”, a functional, public, polemical ology. Thus, “ Son of God ”, a functional, public, polemical title = “ King of Israeltitle = “ King of Israel ” ”1818

Walter KelberWalter Kelber : Mark’s purpose was eschatological, e.g., to : Mark’s purpose was eschatological, e.g., to correct early Christian prophets who connected Jesus’ correct early Christian prophets who connected Jesus’ return with the fall of Jerusalem in 70 A.D. by showing He return with the fall of Jerusalem in 70 A.D. by showing He would later “return” to Galilee.would later “return” to Galilee.1919

18The Christology of Mark’s GospelThe Christology of Mark’s Gospel (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1983). Some other (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1983). Some other

scholars question whether Kingsbury’s view of Christology in either the Old or Newscholars question whether Kingsbury’s view of Christology in either the Old or New Testament allows for the full deity of the Messiah and fulfillment of O.T. prophecy.Testament allows for the full deity of the Messiah and fulfillment of O.T. prophecy.

1919The Kingdom in Mark: A New Place and a New Time The Kingdom in Mark: A New Place and a New Time (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1974); (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1974);

and and Mark’s Story of JesusMark’s Story of Jesus ( Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1979). ( Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1979).


Ernst TrocmeErnst Trocmevv : The issue of Mark’s Gospel is : The issue of Mark’s Gospel is ecclesiologyecclesiology - the doctrine of the Church - : he - the doctrine of the Church - : he represented a “progress-ive movement” which broke away represented a “progress-ive movement” which broke away from the conservative Christian body in Jerusalem.from the conservative Christian body in Jerusalem.2020

Howard C. KeeHoward C. Kee: The Modernist Sociological View of : The Modernist Sociological View of MARKMARK: : (Written 68/69 A.D. by a charismatic, apocalytic community (Written 68/69 A.D. by a charismatic, apocalytic community promoting itinerant evangelism).promoting itinerant evangelism).

2121

2020The Formation of the Gospel According to Mark The Formation of the Gospel According to Mark (Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1975). (Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1975).

James A. Brooks comments on this reading: “ It may be a necessary part of his view that James A. Brooks comments on this reading: “ It may be a necessary part of his view that TrocmeTrocmevv believed that the original Mark consisted only of chaps. 1-13, which were believed that the original Mark consisted only of chaps. 1-13, which were written in the 40s or 50s. Chaps. 14-16 were added ca. 85 A.D. ”, written in the 40s or 50s. Chaps. 14-16 were added ca. 85 A.D. ”, Mark , NAC, Mark , NAC, p. 22.p. 22.

2121Community of the New Age Community of the New Age (Philadelphia: The Westminster Press, 1977). Dr. Kee held to a (Philadelphia: The Westminster Press, 1977). Dr. Kee held to a

somewhat Bultmannian view of Jesus’ historicity and strongly slants the small apoc-somewhat Bultmannian view of Jesus’ historicity and strongly slants the small apoc-alyptic element in the Gospel of Mark toward a particular kind of “realized eschatology”. alyptic element in the Gospel of Mark toward a particular kind of “realized eschatology”. Thus, he leaves out any future prophetic fulfillment. Thus, he leaves out any future prophetic fulfillment.


Ernest BestErnest Best: The Gospel was written by a “Mark” in Rome, but not John : The Gospel was written by a “Mark” in Rome, but not John Mark of Acts and the Paul-ine Epistles. He rejects both the apologetic Mark of Acts and the Paul-ine Epistles. He rejects both the apologetic and the polemical theses, and holds that the Gospel was a pastoral and the polemical theses, and holds that the Gospel was a pastoral application of important early Jesus’ traditions.application of important early Jesus’ traditions.2222

2222Cf. Cf. Following Jesus: Discipleship in the Gospel of MarkFollowing Jesus: Discipleship in the Gospel of Mark (Sheffield, U.K.: JSOT, 1981); and (Sheffield, U.K.: JSOT, 1981); and

Mark: The Gospel as StoryMark: The Gospel as Story (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1983). Dr. Best, a Belfast Scot, has (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1983). Dr. Best, a Belfast Scot, has lectured at the Austin Presbyterian Theological Seminary in Texas, Presbyterian Collegelectured at the Austin Presbyterian Theological Seminary in Texas, Presbyterian College in Belfast, University of St. Andrews (Scotland), and from 1978- 80 was the Dean of thein Belfast, University of St. Andrews (Scotland), and from 1978- 80 was the Dean of the Divinity Faculty at Glasgow University.Divinity Faculty at Glasgow University.

E. What Kind of Code Is this E. What Kind of Code Is this KATA MARKONKATA MARKON ? ?

(9) (9) Three Other Minor ViewsThree Other Minor Views:: D. Rhoads and D. MitchieD. Rhoads and D. Mitchie: : Mark Mark – the “omniscient narrator of the Ad-– the “omniscient narrator of the Ad-

vent of the ‘ Reign of God in Jesus’ ” (Character vent of the ‘ Reign of God in Jesus’ ” (Character study)2323

Andrew StockAndrew Stock: Mark’s Gospel is the rhetorical presentation of Jesus’ : Mark’s Gospel is the rhetorical presentation of Jesus’ suffering in the form of a Greek tragedy.suffering in the form of a Greek tragedy.2424

Victor K. RobbinVictor K. Robbin’s thesis: Mark’s Gospel follows the literary form ’s thesis: Mark’s Gospel follows the literary form (genre) of classical Graeco-Roman teachers with disciples whose (genre) of classical Graeco-Roman teachers with disciples whose integrity cost them their lives ( ignores the heal-ing ministry of Jesus integrity cost them their lives ( ignores the heal-ing ministry of Jesus and his role as redeemer from sin).and his role as redeemer from sin).2525

2323Mark as Story: An Introduction to the Narrative of a Gospel Mark as Story: An Introduction to the Narrative of a Gospel (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, (Philadelphia: Fortress Press,

1982). 1982). 2424

Call to Discipleship: A Literary Study of Mark’s Gospel Call to Discipleship: A Literary Study of Mark’s Gospel (Wilmington, Del: Michael Glazier, (Wilmington, Del: Michael Glazier, 1982). In an earlier theological monograph, G.C. Bilezikian pursued a similar plan of in- 1982). In an earlier theological monograph, G.C. Bilezikian pursued a similar plan of interpretation in terpretation in The Liberated GospelThe Liberated Gospel (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Book House, 1977). (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Book House, 1977).

2525Cf. V.K. Robbins, Cf. V.K. Robbins, Jesus the Teacher: A Socio-Rhetorical Interpretation of Mark. Jesus the Teacher: A Socio-Rhetorical Interpretation of Mark. Phila-Phila-

delphia: Fortress Press, 1984.delphia: Fortress Press, 1984.

V. The V. The PriorityPriority of Mark Among the Synoptics of Mark Among the SynopticsWas It Was It the Firstthe First and P and Primaryrimary Christian Code ? Christian Code ?

Some Early Witnesses Would Have Some Early Witnesses Would Have Strongly Disagreed Strongly Disagreed !!!!!!!!!!!!!!

– Clement of Alexandria (Early 3rd Clement of Alexandria (Early 3rd Century).Century).

– Augustine of Hippo (d. 430): Matthew, Augustine of Hippo (d. 430): Matthew, Mark, Luke & John.Mark, Luke & John.

– Athanasius of Alexandria (328-373). Athanasius of Alexandria (328-373). (Quotes usual order). (Quotes usual order).

V. The V. The PriorityPriority of Mark Among the Synoptics of Mark Among the SynopticsWas It Was It the Firstthe First and P and Primaryrimary Christian Code ? (2) Christian Code ? (2)

Revolution for Markan Priority in Revolution for Markan Priority in the Later 19th Century:the Later 19th Century:

H. J Holtzmann (1863).H. J Holtzmann (1863).C.H. Wiesse (1880s).C.H. Wiesse (1880s).

Main Defenders in the 20th Main Defenders in the 20th Century:Century:

John C. HawkinsJohn C. Hawkins ( (Horae Synopticae. Horae Synopticae. Oxford: Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1899). Clarendon Press, 1899).

B.H. StreeterB.H. Streeter. (. (The Four GospelsThe Four Gospels. 4th Edition. . 4th Edition. London: The Macmillan Press, 1924).London: The Macmillan Press, 1924).


Others:Others:

C.H. Dodd, Joachim Jeremias, Vincent Taylor, Archibald M. Hunter, and William Barclay.2727

2727On Dodd, Jeremias, and Taylor, see the bibliography. See Prof. On Dodd, Jeremias, and Taylor, see the bibliography. See Prof. A.M. Hunter’s small yet outstanding book is A.M. Hunter’s small yet outstanding book is Introducing the New Introducing the New Testament Testament (2nd Edition, Revised; Philadelphia: Westminster Press, (2nd Edition, Revised; Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1957). William Barclay’s excellent volume is the 1957). William Barclay’s excellent volume is the The First Three The First Three Gospels Gospels (London and Philadelphia: SCM and Westminster Press, (London and Philadelphia: SCM and Westminster Press, 1966).1966).


DD. Traditional Arguments for the Priority of . Traditional Arguments for the Priority of MarkMark. (A). (A)

Since Mark is the shortest of the Gospels, it is easier to conceive of Since Mark is the shortest of the Gospels, it is easier to conceive of MatthewMatthew and and LukeLuke expanding it rather than vice versa. expanding it rather than vice versa.

Why does Why does MarkMark apparently leave out so much of Jesus’ teaching apparently leave out so much of Jesus’ teaching (Parables, etc.) and any detailed accounts of the resurrection. ?(Parables, etc.) and any detailed accounts of the resurrection. ?

When When MatthewMatthew and and LukeLuke differ from differ from MarkMark in the order of the in the order of the pericopespericopes (self-contained units of verses), they only occasionally agree against(self-contained units of verses), they only occasionally agree against him in their distinctive wording. Explanation ?him in their distinctive wording. Explanation ?

The language style, vocabulary, and grammar of both The language style, vocabulary, and grammar of both Matthew Matthew and and LukeLuke is more sophisticated than that of is more sophisticated than that of Mark.Mark.


SometimesSometimes, it appears as though the other Synoptic Gos- , it appears as though the other Synoptic Gos- pels correct impressions given in pels correct impressions given in Mark’sMark’s brief accounts. brief accounts.

In some cases, it appears that the author of In some cases, it appears that the author of MatthewMatthew com- com-pressed and rewrote pressed and rewrote Mark’Mark’ss “ looser” accounts [ ?! !?].“ looser” accounts [ ?! !?].

MarkMark’s narrative is given to much more candid and more ’s narrative is given to much more candid and more strongly emotional accounts than the other two Synoptic strongly emotional accounts than the other two Synoptic Gospels.Gospels.

It is easier for most to believe that It is easier for most to believe that MatthewMatthew and and LukeLuke im- im-proved on the precision of the accounts in proved on the precision of the accounts in MarkMark than that than that the latter “muddled” the fuller and more organized records the latter “muddled” the fuller and more organized records of longer Gospels.of longer Gospels.

VI.VI. Historic and Contemporary Historic and Contemporary Challenges to Markan Priority:Challenges to Markan Priority:

A.A. There is the ancient (early Church) There is the ancient (early Church) traditiontradition that that MatthewMatthew (reflecting earliest Jewish form of (reflecting earliest Jewish form of Christianity) preceded all others.Christianity) preceded all others.

B. For many traditional scholars, the B. For many traditional scholars, the MattheanMatthean theory (= that indeed Matthew’s Gospel was first) theory (= that indeed Matthew’s Gospel was first) best explainsbest explains the minor agreements in wording of the minor agreements in wording of MatthewMatthew & & LukeLuke against against MarkMark. [ Yet, would not . [ Yet, would not Matthew Matthew and and LukeLuke agree more perfectly if the agree more perfectly if the latter depended on the former ?]latter depended on the former ?]

VI.VI. Historic and Contemporary Historic and Contemporary Challenges to Markan Priority:Challenges to Markan Priority:

C. Most Roman Catholic scholars (following St. August-C. Most Roman Catholic scholars (following St. August-ine’s view) supported the historic priority of ine’s view) supported the historic priority of TheThe Gospel Gospel ofof MatthewMatthew until about 1943. until about 1943.

D. The most formidable challenge of the D. The most formidable challenge of the MarkanMarkan priority priority came from an erudite Methodist scholar at SMU in Texas, came from an erudite Methodist scholar at SMU in Texas, W.R. Farmer, who published the first edition of his book W.R. Farmer, who published the first edition of his book The Synoptic Problem The Synoptic Problem (London/New York: The Macmillan (London/New York: The Macmillan Press, 1964). Farmer strongly attacked all the traditional Press, 1964). Farmer strongly attacked all the traditional defenses that defenses that MarkMark was the earliest Gospel and the “two-was the earliest Gospel and the “two-document hypothesis” which B.H. Streeter propounded document hypothesis” which B.H. Streeter propounded at Oxford in the early 20th century. Farmer also reassert-at Oxford in the early 20th century. Farmer also reassert-ed a theory that J.J. Griesbach of Gottingen had formerly ed a theory that J.J. Griesbach of Gottingen had formerly proposed in the late 18th century. Essentially, the new proposed in the late 18th century. Essentially, the new Farmer-Griesbach hypothesis is that Matthew wrote first, Farmer-Griesbach hypothesis is that Matthew wrote first, that Luke used Matthew, and that Mark used the work of that Luke used Matthew, and that Mark used the work of both Matthew and Luke.both Matthew and Luke.

VI. VI. Historic and Contemporary Challenges toHistoric and Contemporary Challenges to

Markan Priority Markan Priority (3):(3):

E. Farmer and his supporters (a growing number E. Farmer and his supporters (a growing number of both conservative evangelical scholars and of both conservative evangelical scholars and moderate liberals) believe they can better explain moderate liberals) believe they can better explain why why ifif MarkMark only differs in less than 5% from only differs in less than 5% from Matthew Matthew and and LukeLuke, why Mark’s narrative is , why Mark’s narrative is significantly distinctive here.significantly distinctive here.2828

2828 See the criticisms and reaction to this theory in James A. Brooks, See the criticisms and reaction to this theory in James A. Brooks, Op.Op.

CitCit., pp. 24-25. See also the detailed and erudite defense of Farmer’s ., pp. 24-25. See also the detailed and erudite defense of Farmer’s basic view in John Wenham, basic view in John Wenham, Redating Matthew, Mark & Luke: A FreshRedating Matthew, Mark & Luke: A Fresh Assault on the Synoptic Problem Assault on the Synoptic Problem (London: U.K. and Downer’s Grove,(London: U.K. and Downer’s Grove, Ill.: Hodder and Stoughton and Intervarsity Press, 1992).Ill.: Hodder and Stoughton and Intervarsity Press, 1992).

VI. Historic and Contemporary Challenges to VI. Historic and Contemporary Challenges to

Markan PriorityMarkan Priority (4):(4):

F. British scholar and preacher, John Wenham, F. British scholar and preacher, John Wenham, former vice-Principal at Tyndale Hall, Bristol, and former vice-Principal at Tyndale Hall, Bristol, and Warden of Latimer House, Oxford, wrote a meticul-Warden of Latimer House, Oxford, wrote a meticul-ously nuanced study a few years ago in which he ously nuanced study a few years ago in which he argued that argued that MatthewMatthew was written ca. 40 A.D., that was written ca. 40 A.D., that MarkMark was then written about 45 A.D., was then written about 45 A.D., LukeLuke was was composed ca. 54 A.D. – with its second part, the composed ca. 54 A.D. – with its second part, the Acts of the ApostlesActs of the Apostles, ca. 62 A.D. Now, this student , ca. 62 A.D. Now, this student would accept these dates as historically reason-would accept these dates as historically reason-able and Biblically sound.able and Biblically sound.

Mark – A New Literary Genre ?Mark – A New Literary Genre ? Is The Is The Markan Code Markan Code Biographical-Historical Biographical-Historical or or IsIs It Something Else ? [1]It Something Else ? [1]

“ “ Mark is neither biography or history in the Mark is neither biography or history in the modern sense. It does not deal with such things as modern sense. It does not deal with such things as family background, influences on Jesus, any family background, influences on Jesus, any psychological analysis of Jesus, or periods of his psychological analysis of Jesus, or periods of his life. Mark’s primary purpose was not to set the life. Mark’s primary purpose was not to set the forth historical facts as objectively as possible. forth historical facts as objectively as possible. His purpose was to describe Jesus in such a way His purpose was to describe Jesus in such a way as to promote loyalty to him and his teaching.”as to promote loyalty to him and his teaching.”2929

2929James A. Brooks, James A. Brooks, Mark, NAC Mark, NAC , p. 25. Brooks also remarks, “ Mark , p. 25. Brooks also remarks, “ Mark and the other Gospels represent a unique combination of the and the other Gospels represent a unique combination of the deeds and teachings of a great person, a combination that is not deeds and teachings of a great person, a combination that is not even paralleled in the later apocryphal gospels.” (even paralleled in the later apocryphal gospels.” (IbidIbid.) Mark is .) Mark is uniqueunique !!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!

Mark – A New Literary Genre ?Mark – A New Literary Genre ? Is The Is The Markan Code Markan Code Biographical-Historical Biographical-Historical or or

IsIs It Something Else ? [2]It Something Else ? [2]

““ The gospels, then, are a form of ancient biography. When we study The gospels, then, are a form of ancient biography. When we study them. We walk through an ancient portrait gallery; the gospels are them. We walk through an ancient portrait gallery; the gospels are hung in the same hall as other ancient biographies – and we must hung in the same hall as other ancient biographies – and we must study them with the same concentration upon their subject, to see the study them with the same concentration upon their subject, to see the particular way each author tries to portray his understanding of Jesus. particular way each author tries to portray his understanding of Jesus. The gospels are Christology in narrative form, or less technically, The gospels are Christology in narrative form, or less technically, the the story of Jesusstory of Jesus..”” [Emphasis ours. JR]. [Emphasis ours. JR].3030

3030Richard A. Burridge (Dean of King’s College, London) in his Richard A. Burridge (Dean of King’s College, London) in his Four Gospels, Four Gospels, One Jesus ? A Symbolic Reading One Jesus ? A Symbolic Reading (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Eerdmans (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1994. See also his work, Publishing Company, 1994. See also his work, What are the Gospels ? A What are the Gospels ? A Comparison with Greco-Roman BiographyComparison with Greco-Roman Biography. SNTS Monograph Series 70 (Cam-. SNTS Monograph Series 70 (Cam-bridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992).bridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992).

VIII. The Authorship of Mark’s GospelVIII. The Authorship of Mark’s Gospel:: Anonymous Code or Genuine Personal Anonymous Code or Genuine Personal

Witness of a Vita ?Witness of a Vita ? Key Facts About the Book:Key Facts About the Book:

Although the earliest extant manuscripts do not contain the name or the identity of the author, ancient Christian

tradition is unanimous that Mark wrote the Gospel laterattributed to him.

The title or tag κατα Μαρκον was attached to this docu-ment in the early decades of the second century (certain-ly by ca. 150 A.D.) As James Brooks notes (among many others), because of its early date and its universal accept-ance by the Church, this title has much more significanceas evidence than later critics and detractors know.


Witness of a Vita ? Witness of a Vita ? [2][2]

B. Key Lines of Confirmatory Evidence of B. Key Lines of Confirmatory Evidence of Validated Witness.Validated Witness.

PapiasPapias, the earliest external witness, was probably the , the earliest external witness, was probably the pupil of John the Apostle (so other early traditions pupil of John the Apostle (so other early traditions reckon this so: Irenaeus, Polycarp, Clement, Hippolytus, reckon this so: Irenaeus, Polycarp, Clement, Hippolytus, Tertullian, and Eusebius).Tertullian, and Eusebius).

For nearly eighteen centuries Christian believers and For nearly eighteen centuries Christian believers and most Biblical scholars have found a connection between most Biblical scholars have found a connection between Peter (preaching in Rome) and Mark as his assistant and Peter (preaching in Rome) and Mark as his assistant and writing secretary convincing and reasonable.writing secretary convincing and reasonable.



The New Testament elsewhere independently The New Testament elsewhere independently attests to the close association of Mark with attests to the close association of Mark with Simon Peter (1 Simon Peter (1 PeterPeter 5:13). 5:13).

If Mark, who was not an apostle himself, wrote a If Mark, who was not an apostle himself, wrote a Gospel accepted as early as the middle of the Gospel accepted as early as the middle of the second century as an account of Jesus Christ, this second century as an account of Jesus Christ, this requires a logical and historical explanation. It requires a logical and historical explanation. It should be remembered that quite a bit is known should be remembered that quite a bit is known of Mark, both his youthful failures (of Mark, both his youthful failures (ActsActs 13:13) 13:13) and his services to the Apostolic cause in various and his services to the Apostolic cause in various times (times (ActsActs 12:12,25; 13:5,13; 15:36-40; 12:12,25; 13:5,13; 15:36-40; ColossiansColossians 4:10; 4:10; PhilemonPhilemon 24; and 2 24; and 2 TimothyTimothy 4:11).4:11).


Witness of a Vita ? Witness of a Vita ? [4][4]While it is true that “Markus” (Marcus) was a While it is true that “Markus” (Marcus) was a common Roman name, the common Roman name, the John MarkJohn Mark of Acts is a of Acts is a known person. Thus, “ The story of the youth in known person. Thus, “ The story of the youth in Mark Mark 14:5114:51 seems to be of a different complexion seems to be of a different complexion from other Gospel incidents. If Mark himself was from other Gospel incidents. If Mark himself was the youth, its presence is explained and the youth, its presence is explained and vindicated. In that case it is likely that the Supper vindicated. In that case it is likely that the Supper was celebrated in his own home and that the was celebrated in his own home and that the upper room is the same as that in Acts 12.”upper room is the same as that in Acts 12.”3131

3131Article, “ Mark, The Gospel of, Authorship,” in James Orr, ed. Article, “ Mark, The Gospel of, Authorship,” in James Orr, ed. International Bible Encyclopedia.International Bible Encyclopedia. Grand Rapids, Michigan and Grand Rapids, Michigan and Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark and Zondervan Publishing Company, 1915Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark and Zondervan Publishing Company, 1915. .



Contemporary authors who deny that Mark is truly Contemporary authors who deny that Mark is truly reflecting Peter’s testimony must assume the burden of reflecting Peter’s testimony must assume the burden of proof to be on themselves. The haughty and con-proof to be on themselves. The haughty and con-temptuous assertions from the “higher” critical literary temptuous assertions from the “higher” critical literary detractors from Mark (or the other Gospels) that the New detractors from Mark (or the other Gospels) that the New Testament was written without eyewitnesses flies in the Testament was written without eyewitnesses flies in the face of its own plain assertions (*face of its own plain assertions (*LukeLuke 1:1-4; 1:1-4; JohnJohn 19:20; 19:20; *20:30-31; 21:24-25; *20:30-31; 21:24-25; ActsActs 1:3; *1 1:3; *1 Corinthians Corinthians 15:1-5; 15:1-5; GalatiansGalatians 1:11-22; * 1:11-22; *HebrewsHebrews 2:3-4; *2 2:3-4; *2 Peter Peter 1:16-21; and *1 1:16-21; and *1 JohnJohn 1:1-4 ). 1:1-4 ).



One late tradition that Mark became the One late tradition that Mark became the bishop of Alexandria in Egypt (and later bishop of Alexandria in Egypt (and later was martyred there) has been question-was martyred there) has been question-ed, though not disproven. Hippolytus of ed, though not disproven. Hippolytus of Rome (d. 325 A.D.) described Mark as Rome (d. 325 A.D.) described Mark as “stump-fingered.”“stump-fingered.”3232

32 32 Hippolytus of Rome, Hippolytus of Rome, Refutation of All Heresies Refutation of All Heresies 7.30, 7.30, cited by James A. Brooks, cited by James A. Brooks, MarkMark Op. Cit.Op. Cit., 27. One further , 27. One further later tradition in the later tradition in the Paschal ChroniclePaschal Chronicle of the seventh of the seventh century claimed he died a martyr’s death. Neither of century claimed he died a martyr’s death. Neither of these extra-Biblical traditions are certain.these extra-Biblical traditions are certain.

IX.IX. The Place of Writing and the Initial The Place of Writing and the Initial Audience: Is The Audience: Is The Markan CodeMarkan Code – The Gospel – The Gospel Kata MarkonKata Markon Geographically Identifiable ? Geographically Identifiable ?

Locations Suggested by the Early Church Locations Suggested by the Early Church Tradition:Tradition:

The destination of Gospel was typically thought to be The destination of Gospel was typically thought to be Italy, probably Rome. Italy, probably Rome.

One later writer, John Chrysostom ( d., 407 A.D.) said – One later writer, John Chrysostom ( d., 407 A.D.) said – Egypt. Egypt.

Chrysostom’s opinion, however, seems to rest on the Chrysostom’s opinion, however, seems to rest on the misunderstanding of a tradition that Mark once served misunderstanding of a tradition that Mark once served the bishop of Alexandria.the bishop of Alexandria.3333

3333Chrysostom, Chrysostom, Homily on Matt.Homily on Matt. 1, cited by James Brooks, 1, cited by James Brooks, Ibid. Ibid. Cf. also Ralph Martin, Cf. also Ralph Martin, Mark: Evangelist Mark: Evangelist

and theologian, chand theologian, ch. Iii, “ Mark in the Frame of History,” pp. 61-2. . Iii, “ Mark in the Frame of History,” pp. 61-2.

IX. The Place of Writing and the Initial Audi-ence: Is IX. The Place of Writing and the Initial Audi-ence: Is The The Markan CodeMarkan Code – The Gospel – The Gospel Kata MarkonKata Markon

Geographically Identifiable ? (2)Geographically Identifiable ? (2)

Several Powerful Evidences for/against a Several Powerful Evidences for/against a Roman Provenance:Roman Provenance:

If Paul’s Prison Epistles were written from Rome If Paul’s Prison Epistles were written from Rome (virtually certain), then (virtually certain), then ColossiansColossians 4:10 and 4:10 and PhilemonPhilemon 24 24 connect Mark with Rome in the early sixties (and the connect Mark with Rome in the early sixties (and the possibility that he was there earlier or wrote there earlier possibility that he was there earlier or wrote there earlier exists as well).exists as well).

Again, 1 Again, 1 PeterPeter 5:13 appears clearly to connect Mark with 5:13 appears clearly to connect Mark with Peter in Rome in the late 50s or early 60s. It has been Peter in Rome in the late 50s or early 60s. It has been plausibly argued that the description -- plausibly argued that the description -- “ Babylon” is “ Babylon” is a code word for Rome and the kingdom of Caesar.a code word for Rome and the kingdom of Caesar.

IX. The Place of Writing and the Initial Audi-IX. The Place of Writing and the Initial Audi-ence: Is The ence: Is The Markan CodeMarkan Code – The Gospel – The Gospel Kata Kata MarkonMarkon Geographically Identifiable ? (3) Geographically Identifiable ? (3)

2 2 TimothyTimothy 4:11 powerfully implies that Mark 4:11 powerfully implies that Mark would soon journey to Rome . . . Moreover, would soon journey to Rome . . . Moreover, when when MarkMark 15:21 is compared with 15:21 is compared with RomansRomans 16:13 (assuming “Rufus” was the same in 16:13 (assuming “Rufus” was the same in both instances), it seems natural to link the both instances), it seems natural to link the Gospel with the city of Rome.Gospel with the city of Rome.

There is a virtually universal early Christian There is a virtually universal early Christian tradition that Peter died as martyr in Rome tradition that Peter died as martyr in Rome during the Neronian persecution (A.D.64-65).during the Neronian persecution (A.D.64-65).

IX. The Place of Writing and the Initial Audience: IX. The Place of Writing and the Initial Audience: Is The Is The Markan CodeMarkan Code – The Gospel – The Gospel Kata Markon Kata Markon Geographically Identifiable ? (4)Geographically Identifiable ? (4)

The presence of numerous Latinisms in the The presence of numerous Latinisms in the Gospel also support either a Roman provenance Gospel also support either a Roman provenance or, possibly, a Roman destination.or, possibly, a Roman destination.

NeverthelessNevertheless, some evidence exists that Mark , some evidence exists that Mark was written earlier (in the mid to late 40s) and was written earlier (in the mid to late 40s) and that Palestine or Syria its actual place of writing that Palestine or Syria its actual place of writing and Rome (with its mixed Jewish and Gentile and Rome (with its mixed Jewish and Gentile church) was the destination. Certainly there were church) was the destination. Certainly there were Christians in Rome nearly two decades before Christians in Rome nearly two decades before either Peter either Peter oror Paul arrived there ( Paul arrived there (ActsActs 2:10-13; 2:10-13; 10:1-33; 28:13-16; 10:1-33; 28:13-16; RomansRomans 15:19-24; 16:3-16). 15:19-24; 16:3-16).

X. Date of Mark’s Gospel: X. Date of Mark’s Gospel: Is Is KATA KATA MARKONMARKON a Code with Particular Incarnational a Code with Particular Incarnational Aspects or Is It Timeless Fiction ?Aspects or Is It Timeless Fiction ?

A.A. MarkMark is definitely timely (1:4, 5,9; is definitely timely (1:4, 5,9; 15:42ff.16:1,2,9).15:42ff.16:1,2,9).

B. The traditional date given for Mark in B. The traditional date given for Mark in modern times has been between ca. 55 – modern times has been between ca. 55 – 65 A.D. and is linked to late Roman 65 A.D. and is linked to late Roman provenance.provenance.

X. Date of Mark’s Gospel: X. Date of Mark’s Gospel: Is Is KATA KATA MARKONMARKON a Code with Particular Incarnational a Code with Particular Incarnational

Aspects or Is It Timeless Fiction ? [2]Aspects or Is It Timeless Fiction ? [2]

C. It is possible that the allusions to persecution C. It is possible that the allusions to persecution in Mark (Cf. 8:34-38; 10:38-40) have a Neronian in Mark (Cf. 8:34-38; 10:38-40) have a Neronian background in mind. However, in the era of background in mind. However, in the era of Caligula (37-41 A.D.) and Claudius (41-53 A.D.), Caligula (37-41 A.D.) and Claudius (41-53 A.D.), the first stirrings against the new Christian way the first stirrings against the new Christian way began (Cf. Suetonius, began (Cf. Suetonius, Claudius Claudius 25:4; Tacitus’ 25:4; Tacitus’ AnnalsAnnals 25:44.2-5; 25:44.2-5; ActsActs 18:1-3; and 2 18:1-3; and 2 Thess. Thess. 2:3,4).2:3,4).3434

3434Paul Barnett, Paul Barnett, Jesus & The Rise of Early ChristianityJesus & The Rise of Early Christianity ( Leicester, ( Leicester, U.K. and Downers Grove, Illinois: Intervarsity Press, 1999 ), ch. 2, pp. U.K. and Downers Grove, Illinois: Intervarsity Press, 1999 ), ch. 2, pp. 27-30.27-30.

X. Date of Mark’s Gospel: X. Date of Mark’s Gospel: Is Is KATA KATA MARKONMARKON a Code with Particular Incarnational a Code with Particular Incarnational Aspects or Is It Timeless Fiction ? [3]Aspects or Is It Timeless Fiction ? [3]

Since Nero died in 68 A.D. and Peter Since Nero died in 68 A.D. and Peter was most probably martyred by 64/ 65 was most probably martyred by 64/ 65 at the latest, then, on the latest, he at the latest, then, on the latest, he must have arrived in Rome by 62 A.D. must have arrived in Rome by 62 A.D. IfIf one accepts the later conservative one accepts the later conservative date for Mark, its publication in late date for Mark, its publication in late 62-64 seems highly probable in this 62-64 seems highly probable in this schema.schema.

XI. The Occasion and Purpose of Mark’s Gospel : XI. The Occasion and Purpose of Mark’s Gospel : What Was the Intention of the Gospel Code What Was the Intention of the Gospel Code KATA KATA

MARKONMARKON ? Why ??????? ? Why ???????

Whether in the late 40s or mid-60s, the Roman authorities Whether in the late 40s or mid-60s, the Roman authorities and the Jewish authorities displayed hostility to Christians.and the Jewish authorities displayed hostility to Christians.

The threat of imminent persecution may constitute the The threat of imminent persecution may constitute the primary occasion for Mark’s composition. primary occasion for Mark’s composition.

Another contributing purpose may have been to translate Another contributing purpose may have been to translate the regular apostolic preaching and teaching, along with the the regular apostolic preaching and teaching, along with the oral traditions of Jesus (from Peter, John, oral traditions of Jesus (from Peter, John, et alet al.) into a form .) into a form which new Gentile converts in Rome and elsewhere could which new Gentile converts in Rome and elsewhere could use to guide their faith.use to guide their faith.


MARKONMARKON ? Why ??????? [2] ? Why ??????? [2]

**Mark also wanted to share his Divinely-shaped Mark also wanted to share his Divinely-shaped understanding of the record of Jesus which he understanding of the record of Jesus which he had learned from Peter and the other apostles. He had learned from Peter and the other apostles. He wanted to demonstrate that not only was Jesus wanted to demonstrate that not only was Jesus both truly human and deity (God), as the Son of both truly human and deity (God), as the Son of God, e.g., the Messiah, He was the Lord of the God, e.g., the Messiah, He was the Lord of the nations and the suffering Savior of Sinners.nations and the suffering Savior of Sinners.

Mark’s Gospel, whether the First or Second in Mark’s Gospel, whether the First or Second in chronological order, is primarily a Gospel of Jesus chronological order, is primarily a Gospel of Jesus for disciples, i.e., those who would follow in the for disciples, i.e., those who would follow in the path of Master, who was the Suffering Servant.path of Master, who was the Suffering Servant.


MARKONMARKON ? Why ??????? [3] ? Why ??????? [3]

He “[ Mark] presents Jesus as the Son of God, the He “[ Mark] presents Jesus as the Son of God, the suffering Son of Man, and urges his readers likewise suffering Son of Man, and urges his readers likewise ‘ to take up the cross.’ This emphasis, found ‘ to take up the cross.’ This emphasis, found primarily in 8:27-10:45, is thus rightly called by primarily in 8:27-10:45, is thus rightly called by scholars ‘ the heart of Mark’s gospel’. ”scholars ‘ the heart of Mark’s gospel’. ”3535

35 35 Professor Terry L. Wilder, “ The Heart ofProfessor Terry L. Wilder, “ The Heart of Mark’s Gospel,” Mark’s Gospel,” Op. Cit.,Op. Cit., p. 44. (Note 17). p. 44. (Note 17).

Part IC: IPart IC: Introduction to Mark’s ntroduction to Mark’s Gospel: Gospel: Manuscripts & Gospel Outline.Manuscripts & Gospel Outline.

See the Next Section in the See the Next Section in the Appendices to Parts 1A & 1B.Appendices to Parts 1A & 1B.

Mark is a marvelous Gospel !!!Mark is a marvelous Gospel !!!

BREAK. AppendicesBREAK. Appendices

Some Medieval ManuscriptsSome Medieval Manuscripts

Some Ancient ManuscriptsSome Ancient Manuscripts

Outlines of the Gospel of MarkOutlines of the Gospel of Mark

Maps of “ the Gospel Era ”Maps of “ the Gospel Era ”

Some Medieval Manuscripts:Some Medieval Manuscripts:The Book of Kells. Folio 292 RThe Book of Kells. Folio 292 R

Some Medieval Manuscripts: Lindisfarne Gospels :Some Medieval Manuscripts: Lindisfarne Gospels :(7(7thth/8/8thth Century). British Library Cotton MS Nero D.IV, f.211 Century). British Library Cotton MS Nero D.IV, f.211

Some Medieval Manuscripts: Some Medieval Manuscripts: Opening of theOpening of theGospel of St. Mark. Folio 86, The Book of Durrow.Gospel of St. Mark. Folio 86, The Book of Durrow.

(Ca. 680 A.D.) Dublin Trinity College, 51. (Ca. 680 A.D.) Dublin Trinity College, 51.

Some Ancient Manuscripts: IntroductionSome Ancient Manuscripts: Introduction

Partial New Testament Papyri.Partial New Testament Papyri.The oldest complete bibles are the The oldest complete bibles are the Codex Vaticanus and the and the Codex Sinaiticus. Older Manuscripts . Older Manuscripts are fragments of verses or chapters are fragments of verses or chapters of bible books. Some are named but of bible books. Some are named but most are numbered. most are numbered. P1P1 (Papyri (Papyri number 1) through number 1) through P5300. The . The following is a list of the oldest:following is a list of the oldest:

Some Ancient Manuscripts: IntroductionSome Ancient Manuscripts: Introduction<50 <70 <50 <70 125 125 200200 250250 300300 350350 400400

Matthew Matthew P64 P67P67 P45 Vat. Sin.

MarkMark 7Q5 P45P45 Vat. Sin.

LukeLuke P45,75P45,75 Vat. Sin.

JohnJohn P52 P66 P45,75P45,75 Vat. Sin.

ActsActs P45P45 Vat. Sin.

Rom- Hebr. Rom- Hebr. 7Q4 P46P46 Vat. Sin.

James-JudeJames-Jude Vat.,P72 ,P72 Sin.

RevelationRevelation P47P47 Vat. Sin.

Some Ancient Manuscripts: Some Ancient Manuscripts: Rylands Papyrus (P52)

One of the earliest surviving pieces of New Testament Scripture is a fragment of a papyrus codex One of the earliest surviving pieces of New Testament Scripture is a fragment of a papyrus codex containing John 18:31-33 and 37-38, called the Rylands Papyrus (P52). This papyrus was found in containing John 18:31-33 and 37-38, called the Rylands Papyrus (P52). This papyrus was found in

Egypt, and has been dated at about 125 A.D. ( John Rylands Library in Manchester, England).Egypt, and has been dated at about 125 A.D. ( John Rylands Library in Manchester, England).

Some Ancient Manuscripts:Some Ancient Manuscripts: Bodmer PapyrusBodmer Papyrus (P66, P72-75) (P66, P72-75)

This collection of approximately fifty Greek and Coptic This collection of approximately fifty Greek and Coptic manuscripts was purchased by M. Martin Bodmer of manuscripts was purchased by M. Martin Bodmer of Switzerland in 1955-56, and has been dated at around Switzerland in 1955-56, and has been dated at around 200 A.D. Most of the collection is located in the Biblio-200 A.D. Most of the collection is located in the Biblio-theca Bodmeriana in Cologny (near Geneva). The ex-theca Bodmeriana in Cologny (near Geneva). The ex-ception is Pap. VIII (including 1 & 2 Peter), which was ception is Pap. VIII (including 1 & 2 Peter), which was given as a gift to Pope Paul VI in 1969; it is in the Va-given as a gift to Pope Paul VI in 1969; it is in the Va-tican Library. The documents were discovered in Egypt. tican Library. The documents were discovered in Egypt. They are from both codices and scrolls; most are They are from both codices and scrolls; most are papyri, but three are on parchment (Pap. XVI, XIX, and papyri, but three are on parchment (Pap. XVI, XIX, and XXII). The manuscripts include Old and New Testa-ment XXII). The manuscripts include Old and New Testa-ment texts and writings of the early churches. The papyrus texts and writings of the early churches. The papyrus manuscript P75 (the gospel of Luke and John) showed a manuscript P75 (the gospel of Luke and John) showed a virtually identical text to the ([see below]): virtually identical text to the ([see below]):

Some Ancient Manuscripts:Some Ancient Manuscripts: Bodmer Papyrus (P66, P72-75) ca. 200 A.D. Bodmer Papyrus (P66, P72-75) ca. 200 A.D.

The Bibliotheca Bodmeriana in Cologny (near Geneva).The Bibliotheca Bodmeriana in Cologny (near Geneva).

Some Ancient Manuscripts:Some Ancient Manuscripts:

The Chester Beatty Papyrus P45 (Dated 200-250 A.D.)The Chester Beatty Papyrus P45 (Dated 200-250 A.D.) Made public in 1931, it contains the Gospels, Acts, Paul’s Epistles, and Made public in 1931, it contains the Gospels, Acts, Paul’s Epistles, and Revelation. It was actually found in Egypt about 1895.Revelation. It was actually found in Egypt about 1895.

Some Ancient Manuscripts:Some Ancient Manuscripts: Magdalen Papyrus (P64) Magdalen Papyrus (P64)The papyrus scraps had been housed at the library of Magdalen College for more than 90 years, the The papyrus scraps had been housed at the library of Magdalen College for more than 90 years, the gift of a British chaplain, Rev. Charles Huleatt, who bought them at an antiquities market in Luxor, gift of a British chaplain, Rev. Charles Huleatt, who bought them at an antiquities market in Luxor, Egypt. Using new tools such as a scanning laser microscope along with more conventional hand-Egypt. Using new tools such as a scanning laser microscope along with more conventional hand-writing analysis, Thiede re-dates the fragments, previously dated in the mid- to late second century, to writing analysis, Thiede re-dates the fragments, previously dated in the mid- to late second century, to sometime between 30 and 70 A.D. In three places on the Magdalen Papyrus, the name of Jesus is sometime between 30 and 70 A.D. In three places on the Magdalen Papyrus, the name of Jesus is written as "KS", an abbreviation of the Greek word Kyrios, or Lord. Contains Matthew 26written as "KS", an abbreviation of the Greek word Kyrios, or Lord. Contains Matthew 26

Some Ancient Some Ancient Manuscripts:Manuscripts:The Oxyrhynchus PapyriThe Oxyrhynchus Papyri Mid-second century; sayings of Jesus which have parallels in all four gos- Mid-second century; sayings of Jesus which have parallels in all four gospels.More than two thousand papyri from Oxyrhynchus in Egypt have been pels.More than two thousand papyri from Oxyrhynchus in Egypt have been published, most of which are not Biblical. The Biblical passages are thought published, most of which are not Biblical. The Biblical passages are thought

to have been copied from an even earlier manuscript, perhaps 110-130CE.to have been copied from an even earlier manuscript, perhaps 110-130CE.

Some Ancient Manuscripts: [ British Museum]Some Ancient Manuscripts: [ British Museum]The two oldest Complete New Testament Manuscripts scholars The two oldest Complete New Testament Manuscripts scholars have are two “Codex” Manuscripts – These are the have are two “Codex” Manuscripts – These are the Sinaiticus Sinaiticus and and Vaticanus. Vaticanus. (4(4thth Century) Century)

Codex Codex Sinaiticus Sinaiticus

Originally included both Old and New Originally included both Old and New Testaments plus Testaments plus the Epistle of Barna the Epistle of Barna basbas and the and the Shepherd of HermasShepherd of Hermas, all , all in Greek. Sin. was found in a monas-in Greek. Sin. was found in a monas-tery library on the slopes of Mount tery library on the slopes of Mount Sinai in 1859 and brought to St. Sinai in 1859 and brought to St. Petersburg. In 1933 it was sold to the Petersburg. In 1933 it was sold to the British Museum in London where it where it currently resides. currently resides.

Some Ancient Manuscripts: Some Ancient Manuscripts: Codex VaticanusCodex Vaticanus Fourth century Greek codex of the Old and the Fourth century Greek codex of the Old and the

New Testaments. The codex was brought to the New Testaments. The codex was brought to the Vatican from Constantinople as a gift to the pope Vatican from Constantinople as a gift to the pope in the fourteenth century. The Old Testament in the fourteenth century. The Old Testament lacks lacks GenGen.1-46:28; portions of II .1-46:28; portions of II KingsKings 2; and 2; and PsalmsPsalms 105-137. The New Testament is missing 105-137. The New Testament is missing HebHeb. 9:14; I and II . 9:14; I and II TimTim.; .; TitusTitus and and RevelationRevelation..

It was not available to open scholarship until It was not available to open scholarship until 1889. The original is still in the Vatican. Neither 1889. The original is still in the Vatican. Neither Sinaiticus or Vaticanus contain the last twelve Sinaiticus or Vaticanus contain the last twelve verses of Mark (verses of Mark (MarkMark 16:9-20). However, the 16:9-20). However, the verses are included in some earlier fragments, verses are included in some earlier fragments, and in the writings of Church fathers, even ones and in the writings of Church fathers, even ones cited by scholars as second century. These are cited by scholars as second century. These are the only two Greek manuscripts (the only two Greek manuscripts (SinaiticusSinaiticus and and VaticanusVaticanus), out of a total of 620 which contain the ), out of a total of 620 which contain the Gospel of Mark, that omit the verses. Gospel of Mark, that omit the verses.

The Evidence of Ancient Manuscripts:The Evidence of Ancient Manuscripts:Amazing Confirmatory Evidence of the Authenticity Amazing Confirmatory Evidence of the Authenticity

and Reliability of the Greek New Testament.and Reliability of the Greek New Testament.

There are over There are over 5,3005,300 known ancient Greek known ancient Greek manuscript copies (MSS) and fragments of the manuscript copies (MSS) and fragments of the New Testament in Greek that have survived until New Testament in Greek that have survived until today.today.

Counting an additional Counting an additional 10,00010,000 Latin Vulgate and Latin Vulgate and over over 9,3009,300 other early manuscript versions in other early manuscript versions in Syriac, Coptic, Armenian, Gothic, and Ethiopic, Syriac, Coptic, Armenian, Gothic, and Ethiopic, totaling over totaling over 24,00024,000 surviving manuscripts of the surviving manuscripts of the New Testament.New Testament.

Small changes and variations in manuscripts Small changes and variations in manuscripts affect none of the central Christian doctrines, nor affect none of the central Christian doctrines, nor do they change the message.do they change the message.

The Evidence of Ancient Manuscripts:The Evidence of Ancient Manuscripts:Amazing Confirmatory Evidence of the Authenticity Amazing Confirmatory Evidence of the Authenticity

and Reliability of the Greek New Testament.(II)and Reliability of the Greek New Testament.(II)Tertullian stated that by 150 A.D., the Church in Rome had Tertullian stated that by 150 A.D., the Church in Rome had compiled a list of the New Testament books matching our compiled a list of the New Testament books matching our list of today.list of today.

We have 32,000 quotes from before 325 AD, from Irenaeus We have 32,000 quotes from before 325 AD, from Irenaeus (182-188 AD), Justin Martyr (before 150 AD), Polycarp (107 (182-188 AD), Justin Martyr (before 150 AD), Polycarp (107 AD), Ignatius (100), Clement (96 AD) and many other AD), Ignatius (100), Clement (96 AD) and many other second and third century fathers. All but eleven verses of second and third century fathers. All but eleven verses of the New Testament could be reconstructed through their the New Testament could be reconstructed through their writings alone.writings alone.

The The Muratonian Canon Fragment dating from 170 AD lists dating from 170 AD lists the same New Testament that we have.the same New Testament that we have.

See the See the Ante-Nicene FathersAnte-Nicene Fathers, a 32 volume Encyclopedia of , a 32 volume Encyclopedia of the writings of the Early Church, by Eerdmans Publishing. the writings of the Early Church, by Eerdmans Publishing. Or on the Internet see the Or on the Internet see the Early Church Fathers

Some Ancient Manuscripts: Some Ancient Manuscripts: A Disputed Manuscript (I) A Disputed Manuscript (I)

The external, direct evidence is contradictory. The external, direct evidence is contradictory. There is disagreement about whether Mark wrote There is disagreement about whether Mark wrote his gospel before or after Peter's death, which his gospel before or after Peter's death, which took place during Nero's persecution of the church took place during Nero's persecution of the church c. 65. The Gospel of Mark was written either when c. 65. The Gospel of Mark was written either when Peter was in Rome or just after his death in Rome. Peter was in Rome or just after his death in Rome. To be on the safe side a date ranging from 63-68 To be on the safe side a date ranging from 63-68 should be attributed the Gospel of Mark. But for should be attributed the Gospel of Mark. But for those of us who eshew a “safe” date, any year those of us who eshew a “safe” date, any year between 45 to 55 A.D. appears historically between 45 to 55 A.D. appears historically defensible !defensible !

7Q5 : Disputed Ms. Fragment from Qumran:7Q5 : Disputed Ms. Fragment from Qumran:

Some Ancient Manuscripts: A Disputed Manuscript (II)

Oldest Copy of Mark’s Gospel?

Found in cave seven at Qumran was a very small papyrus fragment consisting of five lines of text and twenty visible letters (7Q5). Some have argued that this is actually a fragment of the earliest copy of Gospel of Mark. They consider it to be part of Mark 6:52-53. If this identification is correct, then the date of the Gospel of Mark should be pushed back to the 40's CE, since the fragment has been dated between 50 BCE and 50 CE. The issue is complicated, but suffice it to say that the evidence for the identification of this fragment with the Gospel of Mark falls well short of proof.

part i. pp. introduction to the gospel of mark. 1st lesson

Spiritual

gospel of mark

status of marks gospel

gospel robert funk

jesus seminar

theyheed jesus

study of mark important

written portraits of

marks greek