Book of Mark - Definition and Overview

The Gospel of Mark is the second in the most usual sequence of printing of the New Testament Gospels. The commonly accepted range of dates for the text in its existing form are ca. AD 65, the traditional date for the death of Peter, to ca. AD 80, a terminus set by the use of purely Markan material in the Gospel of Luke.

Authorship

The gospel itself is anonymous, but as early as Papias in the early 2nd century, the text was attributed to Mark, a disciple of Peter who is said to have recorded the Apostle's discourses. According to tradition, Mark would have had abundant opportunities to obtain information from Peter and other apostles about Jesus and his ministry.

While the text of Papias' original attribution is no longer extant, it was quoted by Eusebius of Caesarea, as follows:

"And the presbyter said this. Mark having become the interpreter of Peter, wrote down accurately whatsoever he remembered. It was not, however, in exact order that he related the sayings or deeds of Christ. For he neither heard the Lord nor accompanied Him. But afterwards, as I said, he accompanied Peter, who accommodated his instructions to the necessities [of his hearers], but with no intention of giving a regular narrative of the Lord's sayings. Wherefore Mark made no mistake in thus writing some things as he remembered them. For of one thing he took especial care, not to omit anything he had heard, and not to put anything fictitious into the statements."

Notable in Papias' guarantee of the authenticity of the text is the unambiguous statement that Peter "accommodated his instructions to the necessities". Since the time of Clement of Alexandria, at the end of the 2nd century, to the mid 20th century, scholars have generally thought that this gospel was first written at Rome, but some now conclude that Syria is a viable candidate as well. A recently published letter from Clement copied into a book at the Mar Saba monastery contains references to a previously unknown Secret Gospel of Mark and provides additional details about Mark's Roman origin. Many scholars are unconvinced that an early, "Secret" Mark existed before the canonical gospel, and an increasing number are beginning to feel that the letter is a modern-day forgery.

The Rome/Peter theory is under attack. It is argued that Mark's Latinizing language -- once seen as an indication of Roman provenance -- could have stemmed from many places throughout the larger Roman empire. Furthermore, Papias' comment does not make it clear that the Mark of whom he spoke is the author of our canonical gospel which bears that name. Neither does the comment in 1 Peter 5:13; Mark was a very common name in the Roman empire at the time that Peter and Papias wrote. Several passages jumble Galilean topography, indicating that the author, or his sources, were unfamiliar with the actual geography of that area (as Peter assumably would have been). Finally, the connection of the Gospel of Mark with persecution, and persecution with Rome, is dubious. Persecution was widespread and sporadic beyond the borders of the city of Rome. All this goes to say that we know little of the author of Mark or its geographical origin. The above arguments do not disprove that Mark and Peter were connected, but do question the traditional reasons for assuming that connection.

Date

The text of the Gospel itself furnishes us with no clear information as to the time that it was written. Comments attributed to Jesus in Mark 13:1–2 (the "little Apocalypse", see below) have been seen as a reference to the destruction of the Temple, which would place the work after AD 70. Most scholars contrast these comments with the more specific ones in Luke and Matthew, and would be hesitant to assign a date later than 70-73 CE, the latter being when Jerusalem was finally and fully sacked. Nevertheless, a great majority of moderate and conservative scholars assign Mark a date between 65 and 70 CE, although there are vocal minority groups which argue for earlier or later dates.

Two papyrologists, O'Callaghan and Thiede, have proposed an identification of a postage stamp-sized papyrus fragment found in a cave at Qumran, 7Q5, as containing Mark 6:52-53, raising the possibility that the Gospel was written and distributed prior to 68. Almost all other papyrologists, however, consider this identification of the fragment, and its supposition that early Christians lived at Qumran, to be dubious.

Audience

The general theory is that Mark is a Hellenistic gospel, written primarily for an audience of Greek-speaking residents of the Roman Empire. Jewish traditions are explained, clearly for the benefit of non-Jews (e.g. 7:1-4; 14:12; 15:42). Aramaic words and phrases are also expanded upon by the author: e.g. ταλιθα κουμ ("talitha cum", 5:41); κορβαν ("Corban", 7:11); αββα ("abba", 14:36). The author of Mark also certain Latinised vocabulary not found in any of the other Gospels: e.g. σπεκουλατορα ("soldier of the guard", 6:27, NRSV), ξεστων (Greek corruption of sextarius ["pots", 7:4]), κοδραντης ("penny", 12:42, NRSV), κεντυριων ("centurion", 15:39, 44, 45). It has been suggested by some that these usages show that the author of Mark is writing in Greek as a foreign language for the first time, though most literary-critical studies in recent years give more linguistic credit than this to the author.

The Hellenism exhibited is not confined to language. The description in this Gospel of how the Sanhedrin plotted to execute Jesus has been used to promote and condone anti-Semitism. The demonization of Pharisees at first seems to direct this gospel at a Gentile audience; perhaps one only partly of Jewish extraction, as at Alexandria. (See Jews in the New Testament for further discussion.)

Alongside these Hellenistic influences, Mark in common with the other synoptic gospels makes detailed use of the Old Testament in the form in which it had been translated into Greek, the Septuagint, for instance Mark 1:2; 2:23-28; 10:48b; 12:18-27; also compare 2:10 with Daniel 7:13-14. Those who seek to temper the anti-Semitism in Mark note passages such as 1:44; 5:7 ("Son of the Most High God"; cf. Gen. 14:18-20); 7:27; and 8:27-30. These also indicate that the Markan Jesus has kept his Jewish heritage, and also that the Gospel might not be as Hellenistic as it first seems.

Characteristics

Unlike both Matthew and Luke, Mark does not have any information about the life of Jesus before he begins his ministry. There is no nativity in Mark, contra Matthew (1:18-2:12) and Luke (2:1-20), no John the Baptist back-story (as in Lk. 1), no massacre of the infants (Mt. 2:13-23), and no childhood tales (Lk. 2:41-52). Neither is there a genealogy of Jesus (Mt. 1:1-17; Lk. 3:23-38). However, this is not to say that the author was just careless and lazy – the detail in the miracle stories, omitted by the later synoptics, show us otherwise (compare e.g. Mk. 1:19 & Lk. 4:38a; Mk. 5:21-43 & Mt. 9:18-26).

Mark’s Gospel seems to be fundamentally rooted in oral transmission. The phrase "immediately" (Gk. ευθυς) occurs nearly forty times in Mark, seven times in the first chapter alone, as compared to seven times in Luke and only four times in John. This is compounded by the seemingly continuous use in the Greek text of the present tense to describe past actions. This technique is known as the ‘historic present’, and is a strong feature in oral literature. "Again" (Gk. παλιν) is also used frequently as a temporal link between stories (e.g. 2:13; 8:1; 10:1), and there is also the strange phrase in 13:14 – "let the reader understand".

All these features indicate the Gospel’s roots in orality. Joanna Dewey, in a recent issue of the Journal of Biblical Literature (JBL), makes an impressive case for Mark having originally been a drama performed before interested listeners, and then as a result of its success later written down. This compiling would suggest that the author of Mark is a redactor, an editor, who by writing this drama down makes various theological points (see below). Still, the Greek grammar of Mark is by no means great – especially when compared to Luke’s Gospel! – so it could be that Mark’s Gospel is just a rapid succession of vivid pictures loosely strung together without much attempt to bind them into a literary whole. However, redaction critical studies on Mark see the book as a well-constructed, coherent narrative. Examples of this include the threefold passion prediction cycle.

Son of Man is the major title used of Jesus in Mark (2:10, 28; 8:31; 9:9, 12, 31; 10:33, 45; 14:21, 41). Many people have seen that this title is a very important one within Mark’s Gospel, and it has important implications for Mark’s christology. Jesus raises a question that demonstrates the association in Mark between ‘Son of Man’ (compare Dan. 7:13-14) and the suffering servant in Isaiah 52:13-53:12 – “How then is it written about the Son of Man, that he is to go through many sufferings and be treated with contempt?” (9:12b, NRSV) The answer is that it isn’t! At least, not explicitly; Mark’s Gospel creates this link between Daniel and Isaiah, and applies it to Christ. It’s postulated that this is because of the persecution of Christians; thus, Mark’s Gospel encourages believers to stand firm (13:13) in the face of troubles.

Markan priority among the Synoptics

The synoptic problem is an investigation into whether and how the gospels of Mark, Matthew, and Luke used each other or common sources. Most researchers into the synoptic problem have concluded that Mark was written first and used by Matthew and Luke (Markan priority). Markan priority was first proposed in 1786 but it did not come to dominate critical scholarship until the mid-19th century. The major alternative to Markan priority is the traditional view that Matthew was written first.

Of the two solutions to the synoptic problem featuring Markan priority, the Two-Source Hypothesis is the most popular and it also posits that the gospels of Matthew and Luke also draw extensively from a now-lost "sayings" gospel—called Q after German Quelle, "source". Out of a total of 662 verses, Mark has 406 in common with both Matthew and Luke, 145 with Matthew alone, 60 with Luke alone, and at most 51 peculiar to itself, according to a common concordance.

The "little Apocalypse" of Mark 13

Exegesis is often made to show correspondences with the calamities of the First Jewish Revolt of AD 66–70. Jesus' remarks in 13:1–2, seen as a reference to the destruction of the Temple, would place the work after AD 70. The passage predicts that the Temple would be torn down completely—"Not one stone will be left upon another." Indeed, the Temple was completely destroyed by the forces of the Roman general Titus (Josephus, Jewish War VI). (The Western Wall, which still stands, was not a part of the Temple proper, but rather part of a larger structure on which the Temple and other buildings stood.) This fulfilled prophecy would place the passage before the destruction of Jerusalem, for readers who affirm the reality of prophecies; others speculate that this an example of a vaticinium ex eventu (NL, loosely "prophecy after the event"; cf. Book of Daniel).

Losses and early editing

Mark is the shortest gospel. Manuscripts, both scrolls and codices, tend to lose text at the beginning and the end, not unlike a coverless paperback in a backpack. These losses are characteristically unconnected with excisions. For instance, Mark 1:1 has been found in two different forms. Half of the discovered texts contain the phrase "Son of God", while half do not. (NB: The article "the" is not present in Greek MSS; it was instead added to English translations for flow and compatibility with Church doctrine. "A Son of God" would also be a correct translation, as would the omission the article entirely.)

An axiom adopted by some readers, though not by professionals generally, is: "A shorter version generally means an earlier form." Judicious editing of unwanted material, however, may also produce a shorter document. The discovery of sections that have been added to the familiar, canonical Mark, quoted in a letter of Clement of Alexandria, is discussed in the entry for Secret Gospel of Mark.

Interpolations may not be editorial, either. It is a common experience that glosses written in the margins of manuscripts get incorporated into the text as copies are made. Any particular example is open to dispute of course, but one may take note of Mark 7:16, "Let anyone with ears to hear, listen," which is not found in early manuscripts.

Ending

There was some dispute among textual critics in the 19th century as to whether 16:9-20, describing a resurrected Jesus, were actually part of the original Gospel, or if they were added later. The oldest extant manuscripts do not contain these verses and the style differs from the rest of Mark, suggesting that they were a later addition. A few manuscripts even include a different ending after verse 8. By the 5th century, at least 4 different endings have been attested. (See Mark 16 for a more comprehensive treatment of this topic.)

The third-century theologian Origen quoted the resurrection stories in Matthew, Luke, and John but failed to quote anything after Mark 16:8, suggesting that his copy of Mark stopped there, but this is an argument of silence. Critics are divided over whether the original ending at 16:8, which ends the Gospel at the empty tomb without further explanation, was intentional or accidental from the loss of a final sheet or even the author's death. Some of those who believe that the 16:8 ending was intentional suggest a connection to the theme of the Messianic Secret.

References

• Bultmann, R., History of the Synoptic Tradition, Harper & Row, 1963.
• Brown, R. E., Fitzmeyer, J. & Murphy, R. (eds.), Jerome Biblical Commentary, Prentice Hall, 1968.
• Dewey, J., “The Survival of Mark’s Gospel: A Good Story?”, JBL 123.3 (2004) 495-507.
• Holmes, M. W., "To Be Continued... The Many Endings of Mark", Bible Review 17.4 (2001).
• McKnight, E. V., What is Form Criticism?, 1997.
• Perrin, N., What is Redaction Criticism?
• Telford, W. (ed.), The Interpretation of Mark, Fortress Press, 1985.

External links

Online translations of the Gospel of Mark:

• Early Christian Writings: (http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/mark.html)Mark in numerous English translations, on-line scholarly resources
• Mark at Bible Gateway (http://www.biblegateway.com/bible?language=English&Version=NIV&passage=Mark) (various versions)
• Mark on Wikisource (http://sources.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bible%2C_English%2C_King_James%2C_Mark)

Related articles:

• "Gospel of Mark", New Catholic Encyclopedia, [1] (http://www.newadvent.org). A bit dated, but very informative.
• A textual commentary on the Gospel of Mark (http://www-user.uni-bremen.de/~wie/TCG/TC-Mark.pdf) Detailed textcritical discussion of the 300 most important variants of the Greek text (PDF, 411 pages)
• The various endings of Mark (http://www-user.uni-bremen.de/~wie/TCG/TC-Mark-Ends.pdf) Detailed textcritical description of the evidence, the manuscripts, and the variants of the Greek text (PDF, 17 pages)
• Secret Gospel of Mark (http://www-user.uni-bremen.de/~wie/Secret/secmark_home.html) Description of an altered Gospel of Mark in Egypt, mentioned in a letter by Clement of Alexandria, with images.
• Easton's Bible Dictionary, 1897 (http://www.site-berea.com/dicionarios.html): mainstream Protestant scholarship of the 19th century summed up for the average reader