The Full Wiki

Gospel of Mark: Wikis


Note: Many of our articles have direct quotes from sources you can cite, within the Wikipedia article! This article doesn't yet, but we're working on it! See more info or our list of citable articles.

Did you know ...

More interesting facts on Gospel of Mark

Include this on your site/blog:


From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Bible
New Testament

The Gospel According to Mark (Greek: κατὰ Μᾶρκον εὐαγγέλιον, τὸ εὐαγγέλιον κατὰ Μᾶρκον, to euangelion kata Markon), commonly shortened to the Gospel of Mark , is the second book of the New Testament. This Canonical account of the life of Jesus is one of the Synoptic Gospels. It was thought to be an epitome, and accordingly, its place as the second gospel in most Bibles. However, most contemporary scholars now regard it as the earliest of the canonical gospels[1] (c 70). [2] while other scholars now argue that the Gospel of the Hebrews actually was composed first and the basis for future gospels. [3][4]

The Gospel of Mark narrates the ministry of Jesus of Nazareth from his baptism by John the Baptist to the resurrection and it concentrates particularly on the last week of his life (chapters 11–16, the trip to Jerusalem). Its swift narrative portrays Jesus as a heroic man of action,[2] an exorcist, a healer and miracle worker. It calls him the Son of Man[5], the Son of God[6], and the Messiah or Christ. [7]

Two important themes of Mark are the Messianic secret and the obtuseness of the disciples. In Mark, Jesus often commands secrecy regarding aspects of his identity and certain actions.[8] Jesus uses parables to explain his message and fulfill prophecy (4:10-12). At times, the disciples have trouble understanding the parables, but Jesus explains what they mean, in secret (4:13-20, 4:33-34). They also fail to understand the implication of the miracles that he performs before them.[2]



The Gospel of Mark was composed by an anonymous author,[2] traditionally believed to be Mark the Evangelist (also known as John Mark), a cousin of Barnabas.[9] There is external evidence that the the Gospel of Mark may have been based on the preaching of disciple of Peter. However, this is an area of ongoing debate. [10][1] (See also the Augustinian hypothesis and Augustine of Hippo)



As early as Papias in the early 2nd century, the text was attributed to Mark.[9], who is said to have recorded the Apostle Peter's discourses. Papias cites his authority as being John the Presbyter. While the text of Papias is no longer extant, it was quoted by Eusebius of Caesarea:

This, too, the presbyter used to say. ‘Mark, who had been Peter's interpreter, wrote down carefully, but not in order, all that he remembered of the Lord’s sayings and doings. For he had not heard the Lord or been one of his followers, but later, as I said, one of Peter’s. Peter used to adapt his teachings to the occasion, without making a systematic arrangement of the Lord’s sayings, so that Mark was quite justified in writing down some of the things as he remembered them. For he had one purpose only – to leave out nothing that he had heard, and to make no misstatement about it.[11]

Irenaeus concurred,[12] as did Origen of Alexandria,[13] Tertullian,[14] and others. Clement of Alexandria, writing at the end of the 2nd century, reported that Mark was urged by those who had heard Peter's speeches in Rome to write what the apostle had said.[13] Following this tradition, scholars have often speculated that this gospel was written at Rome. Among recent alternate suggestions are Syria, Alexandria, or more broadly any area within the Roman Empire. Other scholars argue that the Papias citation is unreliable, pointing out that there is no distinctive Petrine tradition in Mark.[15]

Since the Gospel of Mark contains mistakes concerning Galilean geography and customs, [16][17][18] the author was not native to the Holy Land, as was the historical Peter.[19] It has been argued that there is an impending sense of persecution in the gospel, and that this could indicate it being written to sustain the faith of a community under such a threat. As the main Christian persecution at that time was in Rome under Nero, this has been used to place the writing of the Gospel in Rome.[20] Furthermore, it has been argued that the Latinized vocabulary[21] employed in Mark (and in neither Matthew nor Luke) shows that the Gospel was written in Rome. Also cited in support is a passage in First Peter: "The chosen one at Babylon sends you greeting, as does Mark, my son.";[22] Babylon being interpreted as a derogatory or code name for Rome, as the famous ancient city of Babylon ceased to exist in 275 BC. Jerome affirms that Mark the disciple and interpreter of Saint Peter, and the follower and Apostle of Jesus Christ. According to Eusebius,[23] Mark composed a gospel embodying what he had heard Peter preach in Rome. [24][25][26]

However, certain scholars dispute the connection of the gospel with persecution, identified with Nero's persecution in Rome, asserting that persecution was widespread, albeit sporadic beyond the borders of the city of Rome.[27]

Possible Primary Source to the Synoptic Gospels

The first page of Mark in Minuscule 544

It is generally agreed among contemporary scholars that the Gospel of Mark was the first of the Canonical Gospels to be written. The reason that such great importance is attached to this gospel, has been the widespread, popular belief in the Academic community that the Gospel of Mark and probably Q were the basis of Synoptic Gospels, as held in the two-source hypothesis. [28]Most critical scholars believe that Mark was written around or shortly after the fall of Jerusalem and the destruction of the Second Temple in year 70.[29][30][31][32][33][34][35] (Papyrologists Fr. Josep O'Callaghan and Carsten Peter Thiede, as well as conservative scholar John A. T. Robinson [36] have proposed an earlier date.)[1] [37] [1]

However, all the aforementioned scholars accept Marcan Priority and that the Gospel of Mark was a primary source document. [38] [39] [40][41] Not only does modern critical scholarship support this conclusion, [42] but the writings of Church Fathers do as well. For example, Jerome's Illustrious men, which was a major bibliographical text containing a list of early authors and their writings cites over 800 Christian sources as well as 31 from Josephus, 36 from Phils and 25 lost documents. Mark and his gospel are at the top of Jerome's list in Section 1, exactly where the first written account of the life of Jesus Christ should be located. [43]

The scholarship is clear and uncontested. Mark's gospel is a short, Koine Greek basis for the Synoptic Gospels. It provides the general chronology, from Jesus' baptism to the empty tomb.[42]

The majority of scholars still believe that the Gospel of Mark was combined with Q, Q being the second primary source to form the Synoptic gospels. However the issue of Q is far from settled. Even some supporters of the Q source hypothesis have concerns. If Q did exist, these sayings of Jesus would have been highly treasured in the Early Church. It remains a mystery how such an important document, which was the basis of the two canonical Gospels, could be totally lost. An even greater mystery why the extensive Church Catalogs compiled by Eusebius and Nicephorus would omit such an important work, yet include such spurious accounts as the Gospel of Peter and the Gospel of Thomas. The existence of a highly treasured dominical sayings document in circulation going totally unmentioned by the Fathers of the Early Church, remains one of the great conundrums of Modern Biblical Scholarship.[44][45]

Bruner-Welch Endowed Professor,[46] James Edwards, confronts this issue head on. He too has studied Jerome's Illustrious men. When Edwards looked at the first section of Illustrious Men, he found the Gospel of Mark where it should be, as it was the first gospel written and was the basis of later gospels. Following it should be Q. But not only is Q not where it should be at the top of Jerome's list, this treasured work recording the Logia of Christ is mentioned nowhere by Jerome. Rather, the first seminal document is not Q but the Gospel of the Hebrews. Section 2 on James, the largest in the Illustrious Men, is mainly about this Hebrew Gospel (one-third of the section). The entirety of the third section is devoted to the Hebrew Gospel as well. In "the place of honor" that should be given "the phantom Q" we find a Hebrew usurper. [47] From this basis James Edwards expands the Parker Hypothesis into the Hebrew Gospel Hypothesis. In meticulous detail he puts forward his solution to the synoptic problem. This Hypothesis states Matthew wrote a small Hebrew Gospel called the Gospel of the Hebrews and this primary source along with Mark formed the basis for the Gospel of Luke and possibly Matthew . [48]


Beginning of a Latin Gospel of Mark, Book of Durrow (7th century).

The general theory is that Mark wrote a Hellenistic gospel, primarily for an audience of gentile Greek-speaking residents of the Roman Empire. Jewish traditions are explained, clearly for the benefit of non-Jews (e.g., Mark 7:1–4; 14:12; 15:42). Aramaic words and phrases are also expanded upon by the author, e.g., ταλιθα κουμ (talitha koum, Mark 5:41); κορβαν (Corban, Mark 7:11); αββα (abba, Mark 14:36).

Alongside these Hellenistic influences, Mark makes 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 show the non-Hellenistic side of Mark note passages such as 1:44; 5:7 ("Son of the Most High God"; cf. Genesis 14:18–20); Mark 7:27; and Mark 8:27–30. These also indicate that the audience of Mark has kept at least some of its Jewish heritage, and also that the gospel might not be as Hellenistic as it first seems.

The Gospel of Mark contains several literary genres and came at a time when Christian faith was rising. Professor Dennis R MacDonald writes:

Whether as a response to the Jewish War (66–70) or to the deaths of the earliest followers of Jesus, or to the need of a definitive version of Jesus' life, or to objectionable theological trends, the author of the Gospel of Mark recast traditional materials into a dramatic narrative climaxing in Jesus' death. It is not clear precisely what kind of book the author set out to compose, insofar as no document written prior to Mark exactly conforms with its literary properties. Its themes of travel, conflict with supernatural foes, suffering, and secrecy resonate with Homer's Odyssey and Greek romantic novels. Its focus on the character, identity, and death of a single individual reminds one of ancient biographies. Its dialogues, tragic outcome, and peculiar ending call to mind Greek drama. Some have suggested that the author created a new, mixed genre for narrating the life and death of Jesus.[49]

Losses and early editing

Mark is the shortest of the canonical gospels. Manuscripts, both scrolls and codices, tend to lose text at the beginning and the end, not unlike a coverless paperback in a backpack.[50] These losses are characteristically unconnected with excisions. For instance, Mark 1:1 has been found in two different forms. Most manuscripts of Mark, including the 4th-century Codex Vaticanus, have the text "son of God",[51] but three important manuscripts do not. Those three are: Codex Sinaiticus (01, א; dated 4th century), Codex Koridethi (038, Θ; 9th century), and the text called Minuscule 28(11th century).[52] Bruce Metzger's Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament states: "Since the combination of B D W all in support of [Son of God] is extremely strong, it was not thought advisable to omit the words altogether, yet because of the antiquity of the shorter reading and the possibility of scribal expansion, it was decided to enclose the words within square brackets."

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.

Revision and editorial error may also contribute. Most differences are trivial but Mark 1:41, where the leper approached Jesus begging to be healed, is significant. Early (Western) manuscripts say that Jesus became angry with the leper while later (Byzantine) versions indicate that Jesus showed compassion. This is possibly a confusion between the Aramaic words ethraham (he had pity) and ethra'em (he was enraged).[53] Modern translations follow the later manuscripts for this passage.[54]


Starting in the 19th century, textual critics have commonly asserted that Mark 16:9–20, describing some disciples' encounters with the resurrected Jesus, was a later addition to the gospel. Mark 16:8 stops at the empty tomb without further explanation. The last twelve verses are missing from the oldest manuscripts of Mark's Gospel.[55] The style of these verses differs from the rest of Mark, suggesting they were a later addition. In a handful of manuscripts, a "short ending" is included after 16:8, but before the "long ending", and exists by itself in one of the earliest Old Latin codices, Codex Bobiensis. By the 5th century, at least four different endings have been attested. (See Mark 16 for a more comprehensive treatment of this topic.) Possibly, the Long Ending (16:9-20) started as a summary of evidence for Jesus' resurrection and the apostles' divine mission, based on other gospels.[56] It was likely composed early in the second century and incorporated into the gospel around the middle of the second century.[56]

Therefore, the Gospel of Mark may have originally ended abruptly at Mark 16:8. This has become problematic for scholars, as it is unlikely that a Christian author would have intentionally ended his gospel in such a fashion. The most common explanation is that the ending was lost. This is not uncommon with ancient scrolls due to their wearing patterns. The gospel may have been be unfinished, due to death or some form of persecution. Finally Mark could have been a two volume work in the tradition of Luke-Acts, the second volume being lost or unfinished. [57] [58] [59] [60]

Irenaeus, c. 180, quoted from the long ending, specifically as part of Mark's gospel.[61] The 3rd-century theologian Origen of Alexandria 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. Eusebius and Jerome both mention the majority of texts available to them omitted the longer ending.[62] Critics are divided over whether the original ending at 16:8 was intentional, whether it resulted from accidental loss, or even the author's death.[63] Those who believe that 16:8 was not the intended ending argue that it would be very unusual syntax for the text to end with the conjunction gar (γάρ), as does Mark 16:8, and that thematically it would be strange for a book of good news to end with a note of fear (ἐφοβοῦντο γὰρ, "for they were afraid").[64] Some of those who believe that the 16:8 ending was intentional suggest a connection to the theme of the "Messianic Secret". This abrupt ending is also used to support the identification of this book as an example of closet drama, which characteristically ended without resolution and often with a tragic or shocking event that prevents closure.[65]

Secret Gospel of Mark

The Secret Gospel of Mark refers to a version of the Gospel of Mark being circulated in 2nd century Alexandria, which was kept from the Christian community at large. This non-canonical gospel fragment was discovered in 1973, by biblical researcher Morton Smith at the Mar Saba monastery.[66]

In this fragment, Clement of Alexandria explains that Mark, during Peter's stay in Rome wrote an account of the life of Jesus. Mark selected those events that would be the most helpful to the Church. When Peter died a martyr, Mark left Rome and went to Alexandria. He brought both his own writings and those of Peter. It was here that Mark composed a second more spiritual Gospel and when he died, he left his composition to the Church.[67]

The Carpocrates got a copy of this Gospel and they misinterpreted it, which caused problems for the early Church. Some modern scholars maintain it was a clumsy forgery, while others accept this text as being authentic.[68] [69] The nature of the Secret Gospel of Mark as well as Morton Smith's role in its discovery are still being debated. [70][71] [72] [73]

Canonical Status

A related issue is the adoption of the Gospel of Mark as a Canonical Gospel, given that, like the hypothetical Q, it is largely reproduced in Matthew and Luke, but, unlike Q, it did not become "lost". Traditionally Mark's authority and survival has derived from its Petrine origins (see above "Authorship"). Another possibility has been a supposed Roman origin and an established status there before the other gospels reached Rome.[74] A recent suggestion is that Mark gained widespread popularity in oral performance, apart from readings from manuscript copies. Its widespread oral popularity ensured it a place in the written canon.[75]


The Gospel of Mark differs from the other gospels in language, detail and content. Its theology is unique. The gospel's vocabulary embraces 1330 distinct words, of which 60 are proper names. Eighty words, (exclusive of proper names), are not found elsewhere in the New Testament. About one-fourth of these are non-classical. In addition Mark makes use of the "historic present" as well as the "Messianic secret" to make known his Gospel message. [76]


Christians consider the Gospel of Mark to be divinely inspired and will see the gospel's theology as consistent with that of the rest of the Bible. Each sees Mark as contributing a valuable voice to a wider Christian theology, though Christians sometimes disagree about the nature of this theology. However, Mark's contribution to a New Testament theology can be identified as unique in and of itself.

Mark is seen as an historian/theologian and declares that his account is "The Gospel of Jesus Christ". The "Suffering Messiah" is central to Mark's portrayal of Jesus, his theology and the structure of the gospel. This knowledge is hidden and only those with spiritual insight may see. The concept of hidden knowledge may have become the basis of the Gnostic Gospels.[77]


All Christians believe that Jesus was the Son of God, the second person of the Holy Trinity. The majority Christian view is that Jesus was conceived by the Holy Spirit and born of the Virgin Mary. Adoptionism is a minority Christian belief that Jesus was born of Joseph and Mary in the normal way. Jesus became divine, ie (adopted as God's son), later at his baptism. By these accounts, [78] Jesus was chosen because of his sinless devotion to the will of God, rather than his pre-existent status as the eternally begotten Son of God.

Adoptionism arose among early Jewish Christians seeking to reconcile the claims that Jesus was the Son of God with the radical monotheism of Judaism, in which the concept of a trinity of divine persons in one Godhead was unacceptable. The early Jewish-Christian Gospels make no mention a supernatural birth. Rather, they state that Jesus was begotten at his baptism.

The theology of the Virgin Birth developed as Christianity left its Jewish roots and Gentile Christianity became dominant. Adoptionism was declared heresy at the end of the second century, and was rejected by the Emperor Constantine at the First Council of Nicaea, which wrote the orthodox doctrine of the Trinity and identifies Jesus as eternally begotten of God. [79]

Some scholars see Adoptionist concepts in the Gospel of Mark and in the writings of the Apostle Paul. Mark has Jesus as the Son of God, occurring at the strategic points of 1:1 ("The beginning of the gospel about Jesus Christ, the Son of God") and 15:39 ("Surely this man was the Son of God!"), but the Virgin Birth of Jesus has not been developed.

The phrase "Son of God" is not present in some early manuscripts at 1:1. Bart D. Ehrman uses this omission to support the notion that the title "Son of God" is not used of Jesus until his baptism, and that Mark reflects an adoptionist view.[80]However, the authenticity of the omission of "Son of God" and its theological significance has been rejected by Bruce Metzger and Ben Witherington III.[81][82]

By the time the Gospels of Luke and Matthew were written, Jesus is portrayed as being the Son of God from the time of birth, and finally the Gospel of John portrays the Son as existing "in the beginning". [83]

Meaning of Jesus' death

The only one explicit mention of the meaning of Jesus' death in Mark occurs in 10:45 where Jesus says that the "Son of Man came not to be served but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom (lutron) for many (anti pollōn)." According to Barnabas Lindars, this refers to Isaiah's fourth servant song, with lutron referring to the "offering for sin" (Isaiah 53:10) and anti pollōn to the Servant "bearing the sin of many" in Isaiah 52:12.[84] The Greek word anti means "in the place of", which indicates a substitutionary death.[85]

The author of this gospel also speaks of Jesus' death through the metaphors of the departing bridegroom in 2:20, and of the rejected heir in 12:6-8. He views it as fulfilling Old Testament prophecy (9:12, 12:10-11, 14:21 and 14:27).

Many scholars believe that Mark structured his gospel in order to emphasise Jesus' death. For example, Alan Culpepper sees Mark 15:1-39 as developing in three acts, each containing an event and a response.[86] The first event is Jesus' trial, followed by the soldiers' mocking response; the second event is Jesus' crucifixion, followed by the spectators mocking him; the third and final event in this sequence is Jesus' death, followed by the veil being rent and the centurion confessing, "truly this man was the Son of God." In weaving these things into a triadic structure, Mark is thereby emphasising the importance of this confession, which provides a dramatic contrast to the two scenes of mocking which precede it. D. R. Bauer suggests that "by bringing his gospel to a climax with this christological confession at the cross, Mark indicates that Jesus is first and foremost Son of God, and that Jesus is Son of God as one who suffers and dies in obedience to God."[87] Joel Marcus notes that the other Evangelists "attenuate" Mark's emphasis on Jesus' suffering and death, and sees Mark as more strongly influenced than they are by Paul's "theology of the cross".[88]

Characteristics of Mark's content

The narrative can be divided into three sections: the Galilean ministry, including the surrounding regions of Phoenicia, Decapolis, and Cæsarea Philippi (1-9); the Journey to Jerusalem (10); and the Events in Jerusalem (11-16).

  • Unlike both Matthew and Luke, Mark does not offer any information about the life of Jesus before his baptism and ministry, including neither the nativity nor a genealogy.
  • Jesus' baptism is understated, with John not identifying Jesus as the Son of God, nor initially declining to baptize him
  • Son of Man is the major title used of Jesus in Mark (Mark 2:10, 2:28; 8:31; 9:9, 9:12, 9:31; 10:33, 10:45; 14:21, 14:41). 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" (cf. 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). Yet this comparison is not explicit; Mark's Gospel creates this link between Daniel and Isaiah, and applies it to Christ. It is postulated that this is because of the persecution of Christians; thus, Mark's Gospel encourages believers to stand firm (Mark 13:13) in the face of troubles.
  • Jesus "explained everything in private to his disciples" (4:34) while only speaking in parables to the crowds. His use of parables obscures his message and fulfills prophecy (Mark 4:10-12).
  • The Messianic Secret, Jesus' command to unclean spirits and to his disciples that they not reveal his identity, is stronger in Mark than in the other gospels.[89]
  • To the question "Are You the Christ?", Jesus gives the direct answer, "I am": Mark 14:62; cf. Mark 15:2, Matthew 26:63-64, 27:11, Luke 22:70, 23:3, 23:9, John 18:20, 18:33-37.
  • Mark is the only gospel that has Jesus explicitly admit that he does not know when the end of the world will be (Mark 13:32). The equivalent verse in the Byzantine manuscripts of Matthew does not contain the words "nor the Son" (Matthew 24:36) (but it is present in most Alexandrian and Western text-type).[90] See also Kenosis.
  • "No sign will be given to this generation" 8:12; Matthew and Luke include "except for the sign of Jonah" Matthew 12:38-39, Luke 11:29. See also Typology (theology).

Characteristics of Mark's language

The phrase "and immediately" occurs nearly forty times in Mark; while in Luke, which is much longer, it is used only seven times, and in John only four times.[91] The word Greek: νομος law ([5]) is never used, while it appears 8 times in Matthew, 9 times in Luke, 15 times in John, 19 times in Acts, many times in Romans.

Latin loanwords are often used: speculator, sextarius, centurion, legion, quadrans, praetorium, caesar, census, flagello, modius, denarius.[92] Mark has only a few direct Old Testament quotations: 1:2-3, 4:12, 7:6-7, 11:9-10, 12:29-31, 13:24-26, 14:27. Mark makes frequent use of the narrative present; Luke changes about 150 of these verbs to past tense.[93] Mark frequently links sentences with Greek: και (and); Matthew and Luke replace most of these with subordinate clauses.

Other characteristics unique to Mark

  • 8:1–9 - Feeding of the four thousand;
  • 8:10 - Crossing of the lake;
  • 8:11–13 - Dispute with the Pharisees;
  • 8:14–21 - Incident of no bread and discourse about the leaven of the Pharisees.


Galilean ministry

Journey to Jerusalem

Events in Jerusalem

See also


  1. ^ a b c d Brown, Raymond E. (1997). Introduction to the New Testament. New York: Anchor Bible. pp. 164. ISBN 0-385-24767-2. 
  2. ^ a b c d Harris, Stephen L., Understanding the Bible. Palo Alto: Mayfield. 1985.
  3. ^ Pierson Parker, A Proto-Lukan Basis for the Gospel According to the Hebrews Journal of Biblical Literature, Vol. 59, No. 4 (Dec., 1940), pp. 471-473
  4. ^ James R. Edwards, The Hebrew Gospel & the Development of the Synoptic Tradition, Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing, 2009 pp. 1-376
  5. ^ 2:10 (Jesus; to teachers of the law), 2:28 (Jesus; to Pharisees), 8:31 (Jesus via Mark, to disciples), 8:38 (Jesus; to disciples and Caesarean crowd), 9:9,12 (Jesus via Mark; to Peter, James, and John), 9:31 (Jesus; to disciples), 10:33 (Jesus; to disciples), 10:45 (Jesus; to disciples), 13:26 (Jesus; to Peter, James, John, and Andrew), 14:21 (Jesus; to disciples), 14:41 (Jesus; to Peter, James, and John), 14:62 (Jesus; to high priest w/ chief priests, elders, and teachers of the law)
  6. ^ verbatim in 3:11 (evil spirits; to Jesus), 5:7 ("Legion" i.e. evil spirits; to Jesus), 15:39 (centurion at crucifixion; to undefined audience); contextually implied in 1:11 (voice from heaven; to John the Baptist), 8:38 (Jesus as eschatology; to disciples and crowd), 9:7 (voice from cloud; to disciples), 12:6 (Jesus as parable; to chief priests, scribes, and elders), 13:32 (Jesus as eschatology; to disciples), 14:61 (Jesus; to chief priest); included in some manuscripts of 1:1 (Markan author as character introduction; to audience)
  7. ^ 1:1 (Markan author; to audience), 8:29 (Peter; to Jesus), 9:41 (Jesus; to John), 12:35 (Jesus; to a large crowd), 13:21 (Jesus; to Peter, James, John, and Andrew (v. 33)), 14:61-62 (Jesus; to high priest), 15:31 (chief priests, teachers of the law; (mockingly) to each other)
  8. ^ Secrecy regarding... 1:43-45 (healing; to leper), 3:12 (identity as Son of God; to evil spirits), 5:43 (resurrecting a girl; to disciples and girl's parents), 7:36 (healing; to healed man, "some people"), 8:30 (identity as Messiah; to Peter, unspecified disciples), 9:9 (identity as Son of God; to Peter, James, John); according to some manuscripts of 8:25 (healing blindness; to healed man)
  9. ^ a b Bernd Kollmann, Joseph Barnabas (Liturgical Press, 2004), page 30.
  10. ^ Kirby, Peter. "Gospel of Mark" Retrieved January 30, 2010.
  11. ^ Papias, quoted in Eusebius History of the Church, trans. G.A. Williamson (London: Penguin Books Ltd., 1965). 3.39.15 / pp. 103–4. Also available online
  12. ^ Irenaeus, Against Heresies 3.1, also 10:6.
  13. ^ a b cited in Eusebius, History of the Church, 6:14
  14. ^ Tertullian, Against Marcion 4:5
  15. ^ Schelle, U. The History and Theology of the New Testament Writings.Minneapolis: Fortress, 1998. p200
  16. ^ Dennis Nineham, Saint Mark, p 193
  17. ^ Bart Ehrman, The New Testament. A Historical Introduction to the Early Christian Writings,p 74
  18. ^ Lee Martin McDonald, Stanley Porter, Early Christianity and its Sacred Literature, p 286
  19. ^ Complete Gospels, Robert J. Miller editor, 1992, translation note to verse 7:31: "Mark's geographical sense seems confused here, since Tyre is south of Sidon: to return to the Sea of Galilee [actually a freshwater lake, see note at 4:35-41, Luke corrects this at Luke 5:1 etc.] from Tyre would not normally mean a journey north to Sidon, nor to the southeast through the region of the gentile cities of the Decapolis (cf. 5:20). What seems to be intended is a general indication of a trip through non-Israelite areas to the north and east of Galilee." Translation note to verse 9:2-8: "...Again Mark provides his characters with a symbolic landscape [featuring a Lofty mountain] appropriate to the moment, without having to get too specific about the geographical details." Translation note to verse 5:1-20: "The placing of this episode in Gerasa, thirty miles from the lake, led to several "corrections" in the manuscript tradition..." Translation note to verse 3:13-19: "Jesus leads his group up an unnamed mountain. Mark creates an evocative landscape at will (empty places, a mountain, the seaside, "his home" or "the house"), without regard to narrative connection or plausibility..."
  20. ^ Brown et al., pp. 596-97.
  21. ^ See the Bauer lexicon, 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, Mark 15:44–45).
  22. ^ 1 Peter 5:13
  23. ^ Paul L. Maier, The Church History, Kregel Publications, 2007 p 114 [1]
  24. ^ F. L. Cross & E. A. Livingstone, The Oxford dictionary of the Christian Church, Oxford University Press, 1989 pp. 874-875
  25. ^ Thomas Patrick Halton, On illustrious men, Volume 100 of Fathers of the Church, CUA Press, 1999 pp.17-19 [2] and the Early Church Fathers
  26. ^ Senior, Donald P. (1998), "Mark", in Ferguson, Everett, Encyclopedia of Early Christianity (2nd ed.), New York and London: Garland Publishing, Inc., p. 719, ISBN 0-8153-3319-6 
  27. ^ H.H. Ben-Sasson, A History of the Jewish People, Harvard University Press, 1976, ISBN 0674397312, pages 254-256: "The reign of Gaius Caligula (37-41) witnessed the first open break between the Jews and the Julio-Claudian empire. Until then — if one accepts Sejanus' heyday [19-31] and the trouble caused by the census after Archelaus' banishment [6] — there was usually an atmosphere of understanding between the Jews and the empire ... These relations deteriorated seriously during Caligula's reign, and, though after his death the peace was outwardly re-established, considerable bitterness remained on both sides. ... Caligula ordered that a golden statue of himself be set up in the Temple in Jerusalem. ... Only Caligula's death, at the hands of Roman conspirators (41), prevented the outbreak of a Jewish-Roman war that might well have spread to the entire East." See also Zealots.
  28. ^ M.G. Easton, Easton's Bible Dictionary (Oak Harbor, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc., 1996, c1897), "Luke, Gospel According To"
  29. ^ Peter, Kirby (2001-2007). "Early Christian Writings: Gospel of Mark". Retrieved 2008-01-15. 
  30. ^ Achtemeier, Paul J. (1991-). "The Gospel of Mark". The Anchor Bible Dictonary. 4. New York, New York: Doubleday. p. 545. ISBN 0385193629. 
  31. ^ Meier, John P. (1991). A Marginal Jew. 2. New York, New York: Doubleday. pp. 955–6. ISBN 0385469934. 
  32. ^ Helms, Randel (1997). Who Wrote the Gospels?. Altadena, California: Millennium Press. p. 8. ISBN 0965504727. 
  33. ^ Funk, Robert W.; Roy W. Hoover, and the Jesus Seminar (1993). The five Gospels: the search for the authentic words of Jesus: new translation and commentary. New York, New York: Macmillan. ISBN 0025419498. 
  34. ^ Crossan, John Dominic (1991). The historical Jesus: the life of a Mediterranean Jewish peasant. San Francisco, California: HarperSanFrancisco. ISBN 0060616296. 
  35. ^ Eisenman, Robert H. (1998). James the Brother of Jesus: The Key to Unlocking the Secrets of Early Christianity and the Dead Sea Scrolls. Penguin Books. p. 56. ISBN 014025773X. 
  36. ^ John Robinson, Redating the New Testament, 1976, Wipf & Stock Publishers: ISBN 1579105270. p.352
  37. ^ Millard, A. R. (2000). Reading and Writing in the Time of Jesus. NYU Press. p. 56. ISBN 0814756379. "C.P. Thiede drew on papyrology, statistics and forensic microscopy to try to prove O'Callaghan's case, yet without convincing the majority of leading specialists." 
  38. ^ McNeile, A.H. (1927). "Chapter II part 2 The Synoptic Gospels - 2. Date". An Introduction to the Study of the New Testament. Oxford: University Press. 
  39. ^ Marcus, Joel (2004). The Way of the Lord: Christological Exegesis of the Old Testament in the Gospel of Mark. Continuum International Publishing Group. p. 115. ISBN 978-0567082660. 
  40. ^ H.H Ben=Sasson, A History of the Jewish People, Harvard University Press, 1976, page 334, ISBN 0674397312
  41. ^ Goguel, M. (1925). Introduction au Nouveau Testament. Paris: Ernst Leroux. p. 373 f.. 
  42. ^ a b Funk, Robert W. and the Jesus Seminar. The acts of Jesus: the search for the authentic deeds of Jesus. HarperSanFrancisco. 1998. "Luke," p. 267-364
  43. ^ Section 1:4, of Illustrious Men states, "Then, also, the Gospel of Mark, who was his disciple and interpreter of Peter..."
  44. ^ James R. Edwards, The Hebrew Gospel & the Development of the Synoptic Tradition, Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing, 2009 pp. 209 - 247
  45. ^ Martin Hengel, The Four Gospels and the One Gospel of Jesus Christ Trinity Press, SCM 2000 p.207- 210
  46. ^ Bruner-Welch Endowed Professor
  47. ^ and, Section 2:11, states "The gospel which is named the Gospel of the Hebrews, and which I have just translated into Greek and Latin, which Origen..." Then, Section 3:1, Jerome continues on about the Hebrew Gospel as follows, " ...composed a Hebrew Gospel of Christ, first published in Judea for the sake of those Hebrews who believed, this was translated into Greek, though by what author is not known. Moreover, the Hebrew itself has been preserved in the library at Cesaera which Pamphilus the martyr so diligently gathered. I have also had the opportunity of having the volume described to me by the Nazarenes of Boera, a city of Syria, who use it. In this it is to be noted...
  48. ^ James R. Edwards, The Hebrew Gospel & the Development of the Synoptic Tradition, Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing, 2009 pp. 1-376
  49. ^ Dennis R MacDonald, Early Christian Literature
  50. ^ N. Clayton Croy, The Mutilation of Mark's Gospel (Abingdon, 2003) ISBN 0687052939
  51. ^ Greek grammar and article use allow an English translation of the Son of God, a son of God, or merely Son of God.
  52. ^ Novum Testamentum Graece
  53. ^ Willker, Wieland. "A Textual Commentary on the Greek Gospels. Vol. 2: Mark, p.41" (PDF). TCG 2007: An Online Textual Commentary on the Greek Gospels, 5th ed.. Retrieved 2008-01-09. 
  54. ^ The New Living Translation includes a footnote indicating that early manuscripts state that Jesus was angry.[citation needed]
  55. ^ Ehrman, Bart (2005). Misquoting Jesus: The Story Behind Who Changed the Bible and Why. HarperSanFrancisco. ISBN 0-06-073817-0. 
  56. ^ a b May, Herbert G. and Bruce M. Metzger. The New Oxford Annotated Bible with the Apocrypha. 1977.
  57. ^ Scholars agree that Luke based his work on Mark and the first 16 Chapters of Acts have a distinct Markan flavor to them, raising several interesting possibilities see William Telford, The Theology of the Gospel of Mark, Cambridge University Press, 1999 pp. 182 - 183
  58. ^ N. Clayton Croy, The Mutilation of Mark's Gospel (Abingdon, 2003) ISBN 0687052939
  59. ^ These losses are characteristically unconnected with excisions. For instance, Mark 1:1 has been found in two different forms. Most manuscripts of Mark, including the 4th-century Codex Vaticanus, have the text "son of God",Greek grammar and article use allow an English translation of the Son of God, a son of God, or merely Son of God. but three important manuscripts do not. Those three are: Codex Sinaiticus (01, א; dated 4th century), Codex Koridethi (038, Θ; 9th century), and the text called Minuscule 28(11th century).Novum Testamentum Graece
  60. ^ David Arthur DeSilva, An introduction to the New Testament: contexts, methods & ministry formation, InterVarsity Press, 2004 pp. 224 - 227
  61. ^ Irenaeus, Against Heresies 3.10.5-6, "Furthermore, near the end of his Gospel, Mark says: 'thus, after the Lord Jesus had spoken to them, he was taken up into heaven, and sits on the right and of God.'" c.f. Mark 16:19
  62. ^ Willker, Wieland. "A Textual Commentary on the Greek Gospels. Vol. 2b: The various endings of Mk" (PDF). TCG 2006: An Online Textual Commentary on the Greek Gospels, 4th ed.. Retrieved 2006-07-06. 
  63. ^ Price, Christopher. "The Missing Ending of the Gospel of Mark". Christian Colligation of Apologetics Debate Research & Evangelism: Answering Skeptics. Retrieved 2006-07-06. 
  64. ^ N. B. Stonehouse, The Witness of Matthew and Mark to Christ (1944) pp. 86-118; also J. B. Tyson, Journal of Biblical Literature 80 (1961) pp. 261-268. A relevant commentary: P. W. van Horst, "Can a book end with γάρ? A note on Mark 16:8", in Journal of Theological Studies, new series 23 (1972) pp. 121-124.
  65. ^ Stephen H. Smith (1995). "A Divine Tragedy: Some Observations on the Dramatic Structure of Mark's Gospel". Novum Testamentum (E.J. Brill, Leiden) 37: 209–231. doi:10.1163/1568536952662709. 
  66. ^ Wilhelm Schneemelcher, New Testament Apocrypha: Gospels and related writings, Vol 1, Westminster John Knox Press, 2003 pp.106 - 109
  67. ^ Bart D. Ehrman, Lost scriptures: books that did not make it into the New Testament, Oxford University Press US, 2003 pp.87 - 89
  68. ^ Bart Ehrman, Lost Christianities: The Battles for Scripture and the Faiths We Never Knew, Oxford University Press, 2003 p. 79
  69. ^ Early Christian Writings
  70. ^ Carlson, Stephen C. (2005). The Gospel Hoax - Morton Smith's Invention of Secret Mark. Baylor University Press. ISBN 1932792481. 
  71. ^ Jeffery, Peter (2006). The Secret Gospel of Mark Unveiled: Imagined Rituals of Sex, Death, and Madness in a Biblical Forgery. Yale University Press. ISBN 0300117604. 
  72. ^ Wright, Jesus and the Victory of God, 1996, p. 49.
  73. ^ Bruce, "The 'Secret' Gospel of Mark," 1974.
  74. ^ B. H. Streeter, The Four Gospels: a Study of Origins (London, 1924), p. 12
  75. ^ J. Dewey, "The Survival of Mark's Gospel: a Good Story?" Journal of Biblical Literature, 123 (2004) pp. 495-507
  76. ^ William Telford, Mark, Continuum International Publishing Group, 2003 pp.75 - 78
  77. ^ William L. Lane, The Gospel according to Mark, Volume 2 of The new international commentary on the New Testament, Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing, 1974 pp.300 - 303
  78. ^ They too accept Matthew's gospel, and like the followers of Cerinthus and Merinthus, they use it alone. They call it the Gospel of the Hebrews, for in truth Matthew alone in the New Testament expounded and declared the Gospel in Hebrew using Hebrew script. After saying many things, this Gospel continues: “After the people were baptized, Jesus also came and was baptized by John. And as Jesus came up from the water, Heaven was opened, and He saw the Holy Spirit descend in the form of a dove and enter into Him. And a voice from Heaven said, ‘You are my beloved Son; with You I am well pleased.’ And again, ‘Today I have begotten You.’ “Immediately a great light shone around the place; and John, seeing it, said to Him, ‘Who are you, Lord? And again a voice from Heaven said, ‘This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased.’ Then John, falling down before Him, said, ‘I beseech You, Lord, baptize me!’ But He forbade him saying, ‘Let it be so; for thus it is fitting that all things be fulfilled.’” Epiphanius, Panarion 30.3.7 & 13.7
  79. ^ "Jesus was either regarded as the man whom God had chosen, in whom the Deity or the Spirit of God dwelt, and who, after being tested, was adopted by God and invested with dominion, (Adoptian Christology); or Jesus was regarded as a heavenly spiritual being (the highest after God) who took flesh, and again returned to heaven after the completion of his work on earth (pneumatic Christology)." Adolf von Harnack, History of Dogma [3]
  80. ^ Ehrman, Bart D., The Orthodox Corruption of Scripture: The Effect of Early Christological Controversies on the Text of the New Testament. New York: Oxford University Press, 1996. p.74-55.
  81. ^ Bruce M. Metzger, A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament (New York : United Bible Societies, 1994). Mark 1:1.
  82. ^ Ben Witherington III, What Have They Done With Jesus? (San Francisco: Harper Collins, 2006), p. 7.
  83. ^ Ehrman, Bart D., The Orthodox Corruption of Scripture: The Effect of Early Christological Controversies on the Text of the New Testament. New York: Oxford University Press, 1996. p.74-55.
  84. ^ Lindars, Barnabas. "Salvation Proclaimed, VII: Mark 10:45 – A Ransom for Many" Expository Times 93 [1982], 293.
  85. ^ Ladd, George Eldon. A Theology of the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1987), 188.
  86. ^ Culpepper, R. Alan. "The Passion and Resurrection in Mark," Review and Expositor 75 [1978], 584.
  87. ^ Bauer, D. R. "Son of God" in Joel B. Green, Scot McKnight and I. Howard Marshall (eds.) Dictionary of Jesus and the Gospels (Downers Grove: IVP, 1992), 773.
  88. ^ Marcus, Joel (2000). "Mark – Interpreter of Paul". New Testament Studies 46 (4): 473–487. doi:10.1017/S0028688500000278. 
  89. ^ Wrede, Wilhelm. The Messianic Secret in the Gospels. 1901. ISBN 0-227-67717-X
  90. ^ Metzger, Bruce M. (1994). Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testamanet (Second ed.). Freiburg, Germany: UBS. pp. 51–52. ISBN 3-438-06010-8. On Matthew 24.36: "The omission of the words ["neither the Son"] because of the doctrinal difficulty they present is more probable than their addition by assimilation to Mk 13.32."
  91. ^ Easton's Bible Dictionary: Mark, Gospel according to
  92. ^ Bauer lexicon
  93. ^ Complete Gospels, Miller, p.11
  94. ^ Similar to a rabbinical saying from the 2nd century BC, "The Sabbath is given over to you ["the son of man"], and not you to the Sabbath." [4] Jewish Encyclopedia: New Testament: Misunderstood Passages
  95. ^ The verb katharizo means both "to declare to be clean" and "to purify." The Scholars Version has: "This is how everything we eat is purified", Gaus' Unvarnished New Testament has: "purging all that is eaten." See also Strong's G2511
  96. ^ Willker, Wieland. "A Textual Commentary on the Greek Gospels. Vol. 2: Mark, p.448" (PDF). TCG 2007: An Online Textual Commentary on the Greek Gospels, 5th ed.. Retrieved 2008-01-09. 


  • Brown, R., et al. The New Jerome Biblical Commentary, Prentice Hall, 1990.
  • Bultmann, R., History of the Synoptic Tradition, Harper & Row, 1963.
  • Dewey, J., "The Survival of Mark’s Gospel: A Good Story?", JBL 123.3 (2004) 495-507.
  • Ehrman, Bart D., Misquoting Jesus, Harper Collins, 2005.
  • Grant, Robert M., A Historical Introduction to the New Testament Harper and Row, 1963: Chapter 8: The Gospel Of Mark
  • Dormeyer, Detlev , Das Markusevangelium, Wiss. Buchgeselschaft Darmstadt 2005, ISBN 9783534156139
  • Guy, Harold A, The Origin of the Gospel of Mark, Hodder & Stoughton 1954
  • Holmes, M. W., "To Be Continued... The Many Endings of Mark", Bible Review 17.4 (2001).
  • Ladd, George Eldon. A Theology of the New Testament Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1987.
  • Mack, Burton L., 1993. The Lost Gospel: The Book of Q and Christian origins, HarperSanFrancisco.
  • McKnight, E. V., What is Form Criticism?, 1997.
  • Neill, Stephen and Wright, Tom, The Interpretation of The New Testament 1861-1986, Oxford University Press, 1990, 1989, 1964, ISBN 0192830570
  • Perrin, N., What is Redaction Criticism?
  • Perrin, Norman & Duling, Dennis C., The New Testament: An Introduction, Harcourt Brace Jovanovich 1982, 1974
  • Schnelle, Udo, 1998. The History and Theology of the New Testament Writings (M. Eugene Boring translator), Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1998.
  • Telford, W. (ed.), The Interpretation of Mark, Fortress Press, 1985.
  • Tuckett, C. (ed), The Messianic Secret, Fortress Press, 1983

External links

Online translations of the Gospel of Mark:

Related articles:

Gospel of Mark
Preceded by
New Testament
Books of the Bible
Succeeded by


Got something to say? Make a comment.
Your name
Your email address