See also:Church . Till quite
See also:recent times this
See also:Gospel, though nominally equal to the others in authority, has unquestionably not aroused the same
See also:interest or feelings of
See also:attachment as they have, partly from its not bearing the name of an apostle for its author, as the first and
See also:fourth do, partly, also, owing to the fact that the first and third, while they include most of what is found in it, contain much additional
See also:matter, which is of the highest value . Of
See also:late, however, it has acquired new importance through the critical inquiries which have led to the conclusion that the two other synoptic Gospels are based upon it, or upon a document which is upon the whole most truly represented in it (see GOSPEL), so that it possesses the
See also:advantage of being an earlier source of information, or at least of bringing us more fully into contact with such a source . The significance of all that we can learn as to the
See also:history of the composition of Mark's Gospel is clearly enhanced by this
See also:consideration . (1) Early Account of a Writing by Mark.—According to a fragment of
See also:Papias (ap . Eus . Hist . Eccl . III . 3o) taken from a
See also:work probably written c . A.D . 140, Mark, who was the follower and interpreter of
See also:Peter, recorded after the latter's decease the words of Christ and the narratives of His deeds which he had heard the Apostle deliver, but he could not arrange the matter " in
See also:order," because he had not himself been a
See also:personal follower of Jesus .
This account Papias had derived, he tells us, from an informant who had heard it repeatedly given by " theelder," a Christian of the first generation . There can be little doubt that the work to which Papias himself supposed this
See also:story to apply was the Gospel of Mark virtually as we know it . The tradition in regard to this work must have been continuous between his
See also:time and that of
See also:Irenaeus, who (c . A.D. r8o) gives a similar account of its composition . It may be noted also that the same view of the origin of the Gospel of Mark appears to have been held by a contemporary of Papias,
See also:Martyr . In his
See also:Dialogue with Trypho (c. ro6) he cites a fact about the name of Peter from " his
See also:Memoirs," and adds also another similar fact about the name given to the sons of Zebedee, just as they are stated in Mark iii. i6, ry, and nowhere else so far as we know . He may well have been ready to
See also:call the work " Peter's," though he believed that Mark actually composed it, on the ground that the latter recorded what the Apostle said (cf. ibid. c . 103) . But is our Gospel of Mark also to be identified with the writing by Mark spoken of by " the elder " whose account had been reported to Papias ? Some confusion is here more conceivable; while, if it is supposed that such a writing was worked up in our second Gospel, this may seem sufficient to explain the connexion of Mark's name with the latter . In support of this view it is urged, though it is so much less of ten now than it used to be, that the description " not in order " does not
See also:fit our Gospel of Mark, the order in which is from an
See also:historical point of view as
See also:good as, if not better than, in the other Gospels . But from whomsoever the expression proceeds —whether from Papias, or his informant, or " the elder "—we may feel sure that considerations such as
See also:appeal to us from our training in historical
See also:criticism are not those which suggested it, but rather the want of agreement between this Gospel and some standard which on altogether different grounds was applied to it .
See also:argument, then, for supposing that the
See also:original writing by Mark differed widely in
See also:form and contents from the Gospel which now bears his name appears to be without force . The question whether the two differed to any, and if so to what, extent can be decided only from an examination of the Gospel itself . (2) The Question of the Integrity of the Gospel of Mark.—There are in a good many parts of this Gospel indications that the narrative has been derived from
See also:Simon Peter, or some one else who was a personal follower of Jesus in the days of His earthly
See also:ministry . It has been widely
See also:felt that the account of the call of the first four disciples and of the events which immediately followed (i . 15–39) at the opening of the Galilean ministry, bears strong marks of proceeding from Simon Peter . Other passages might be pointed out in which it is suitable to suppose that this
See also:disciple in particular was the informant . But we will content ourselves with noticing signs that the reminiscences of some eyewitness are recorded . (a) Traits appear which are wholly without importance, and upon which no stress is laid in the context, but which it was natural for a narrator who was actually
See also:present, and only for such a one to introduce, because he remembered them as associated with the
See also:principal events . The following are instances and others might he cited: the mention of " other boats," iv . 36; the
See also:half-foolish remark made by Peter when in a dazed
See also:condition at the Transfiguration, ix . 5, 6; the
See also:young man who, when Jesus was arrested, followed, " having a
See also:cast about him, " xiv . 51, 52; the fact that Simon of
See also:Cyrene was " coming from the
See also:country," xv .
21 . (b) There is
See also:great truth of
See also:local colouring . The referernes to places and the descriptions of natural features (the lake-
See also:shore, i . 16; ii . 13; iii . 7; the hills near at
See also:hand, iii . 13; v . 5, 13; Vi . 46; the
See also:desert places among the hills or by the shore, i . 35, 45; vi . 31, 32) appear to beaccurate; the routes indicated in the journeys that are taken are probable (vii . 24, 31; viii .
27; X . 17, 32, 46; xi . I) . Again, the
See also:term "
See also:village-towns " (i . 38) is a remarkably appropriate one (cf .
See also:Josephus, B . I . III. iii . 2) . There would, indeed, be an exception to the general correctness of the topography if we were compelled to suppose that " country of the Gerasenes " (which is the best
See also:reading according to existing MS: evidence at Mark v. r) must mean the territory of the city of
See also:Gerasa . But it is easy to imagine that some confusion may have arisen in the transliteration of the name into Greek, and that the place really indicated is Khersa, near the
See also:middle of the eastern shore of the lake . The pair of references (vi .
45, 53) which might also be adduced as an exception, will be noticed below . Further, the conditions of
See also:life and thought in
See also:Palestine at the time in question are faithfully represented, Aramaic words spoken on some important occasions are preserved (iii. i7; v . 41; xv . 34) . And, to mention a point of a different kind, the parts played by different sections among the Jewish
See also:people are such as might be expected . The point of view of speakers and actors is throughout that belonging to the time of the ministry of Jesus, not to that when the Christian Church had come into existence . (c) The good order in this Gospel, i.e. the natural development of the narrative, will be indicated below . It has without good reason, as we have seen, been supposed to show that it cannot be the record by Mark referred to by Papias . And in reality it would be difficult to account for this feature except on the supposition that one who had lived through the events had been accustomed, when required to give a comprehensive
See also:sketch of the history of the ministry and sufferings of Jesus, to relate the facts in the
See also:main as they happened; and that a hearer of his has to a considerable extent reproduced them in the same order . The last consideration seems to show that the general form and structure of the Gospel, and not merely certain portions of it, are original . In point of
See also:style, also, there is a large amount of uniformity . The chief exceptions are that, whereas some incidents are related in a very concise manner (e.g. i .
23-28, and 40–45), there, is in other cases considerable
See also:amplitude of description (see esp. v . I–20, 35–43 and ix . 14–27) . But Mark's own writing might exhibit this variety, according to what he had been told or could remember . Moreover,. a tendency to amplitude of language may be noticed here and there in some of the more concise narratives . Further, it would be unreasonable to suppose that Mark, even if he relied chiefly on what he had heard Peter teach, would refrain from using any other
See also:sources of information which he possessed . Some have supposed that the same Logian document in Greek which was used by the first and third evangelists was also used by Mark . This is highly improbable, but he may have derived particular sayings from the Aramaic source itself of that document by
See also:translation; and may also have learned both sayings and narratives in other ways . It would seem also that the Discourse on the Last Things in ch. xiii., differing as it does both in its greater length and in its systematic structure from other discourses recorded by him, must have come to his hands in a written form . In it some genuine sayings of Christ appear to have been worked up along with matter taken from Jewish Apocalypses and in accordance with an Apocalyptic
See also:model . There does not, then, seem to be good reason for thinking that the work which proceeded from the hands of Mark differed widely in character and contents from the Gospel which now bears his name . But there are indications that some passages have been interpolated in it: e.g. in Mark iv. ro there is some want of fitness in the inquiry of the disciples as to the meaning of " the parables " after only one has been given, and again a want of agreement between that inquiry and the words of Jesus at v .
13, " Know ye not thisparable, and how shall ye know all the parables ? " We
See also:notice further that the two parables in vv . 26–32 are somewhat loosely appended . It looks as if they were insertions in the passage as it originally stood, and that the references to parables in the plural, together with the statement at vv . 33,34, had been introduced in order to adapt the context to these additions . This view is confirmed by the fact that in Luke viii . 4 seq. only one parable, that of the sower, is given or referred to . This evangelist has probably here followed the original form of Mark . Similarly the collection of sayings after Mark ix . 40 (vv . 41-50) has probably been interpolated . They are thrown together in a way unusual with Mark, who is accustomed to place each important saying in a setting of its own .
Here again wenote that they do not appear at the corresponding point in Luke, though some of them are given by him in other contexts . The account of the
See also:crossing of the lake (vi . 45-53) after the feeding of the five thousand furnishes an instance of a different kind . The difficulty as to the position of Bethsaida, or (if ds ro wipav, " unto the other side," at v . 45 is taken to refer only to the crossing of a
See also:bay at the
See also:north-eastern corner of the lake) the discrepancy between " crossing " in this sense and in that of v . 53 would be explained if the narrative (which is not in Luke) may be held to be an
See also:interpolation by one not
See also:familiar with the localities . Once more, the account of the feeding of the four thousand (viii . 1-9) resembles that of the feeding of the five thousand (vi . 35-44) closely in all respects except that of the numbers given, about which differences might easily arise in tradition, and it looks therefore as if it might be a " doublet," i.e. another form of the same narrative derived through a different channel . And it is not so likely that Mark should have mistaken it for a distinct incident as that an editor of his Gospel should have done so . Some other instances, of greater or less probability, might be mentioned . In addition to such larger insertions, the text of the original document seems to have undergone a certain amount of revision .
Some of the cases in which the first and third evangelist agree against Mark in a word or clause may be best accounted for by their both having reproduced the
See also:common source (an example may be seen under 4 below) . As we have found it necessary to distinguish between the original composition by Mark, to whom in the main the work appears to be due, and some enlargement aid alteration which it subsequently underwent whereby it reached its present form, these stages must be
See also:borne in mind in considering
See also:dates that may be assigned in connexion with this Gospel . According to Papias, Mark wrote after the
See also:death of Peter, i.e. after A.D . 64, if we suppose, as it is usual to do, that Peter was martyred in the
See also:massacre by
See also:Nero after the burning of Rome . It would be natural for Mark to set himself to make his record soon after the Apostle's death; and in confirmation of the view that he did so it may be pointed out that in the form of the prophecy in ch. xiii. of the calamities that were to come upon Jerusalem, no details occur of a kind to suggest that it had actually taken place . Further, Mark's work may very probably have been used by Luke in its original form, On the other hand, it was known to our first evangelist very nearly in the form in which we have it . The chief revision of Mark would seem, then, to have taken place between the times of the composition of the first and third Gospels, which cannot be far removed from one another (see
See also:MATTHEW, GOSPEL OF ST) . The last twelve verses were added later still, probably early in the and century, probably to take the place of the ending which had been lost, or which was regarded as defective . (On the evidence that the last 12 verses are not by the same hand as the
See also:rest of the Gospels see
See also:Westcott and Hort's New Testament in Greek, append., p . 29 seq. and Swete's St Mark in loc. and p. xcvi. seq. of his introduction.) (3) The Gospel History as represented in Mark.—After a (i) prefatory passage, i . 1-13, the Gospel deals with (ii) Christ's ministry in Galilee and other parts of
See also:northern Palestine, i . 14–ix .
5o . This portion of the history may suitably be divided into three periods: (a) Early
See also:period . From the opening of the work of Jesus to the first plot to destroy Him (i . 14 iu . 6) . (b) Middle period . From the gathering of crowds from all parts and
See also:appointment of the Twelve to the sending forth of the Twelve to extend Christ's work and the alarm of Herod (iii . 7–vi . 29) . (c) Closing period . From Christ's withdrawal with His disciples after their return from their
See also:mission to His final departure from Galilee (vi . 3o-ix .
5o) . Throughoutwe can trace a development as to (a) the stir created and the attitude of men towards Jesus: i . 32–34, 37 (excitement atCapernaum); 38, 45 (fame spreads through a wide
See also:district) ; iii . 7, 8 (people from distant parts appear in the crowds) ; iv . 2 seq . (the word of the
See also:Kingdom is received in very various ways) ; viii . 28 (great diversity of opinions as to the claims of Jesus) ; (b) the opposition to Him, ii . 1–iii . 6–iii . 22 (
See also:scribes come from Jerusalem and a more heinous
See also:charge is preferred) ; (c) the formation of a
See also:band of disciples and the position accorded to them: i . 16–20 (four are called to follow Him) ; ii . 14 (yet another) ; iii .
14 (He " makes twelve " including those before called) ; vi . 7 seq (He sends them out to preach and work
See also:cures) ; (d) the methods which he adopts : i . 21, 39–iii . I (preaches in the synagogues, later more commonly by the lake-shore or on the
See also:mountain sides; or He teaches in a
See also:house where He happens to be); at iv. i seq. he adopts a new mode of address because a sifting-
See also:process was required; from vi . 45 onwards He mainly devotes Himself to the training of the Twelve, while seeking retirement from the multitude; (e) in the districts which he visits: i . 38 (tour in the neighbourhood of Capernaum); v . 1 (crosses to eastern shore of the lake) ; vi . 6b (a tour which includes
See also:Nazareth) ; vi . 45 (Bethsaida) ; vii . 31 (
See also:journey to Tyre and Sidon and back through
See also:Decapolis); viii . 22, 27 (is at Bethsaida and visits neighbourhood of Caesarea
See also:Philippi); (f) His self-
See also:revelation; viii . 27 seq .
(first unambiguousdeclaration of His Messiahship) . (iii) The Journey from Galilee to Jerusalem, the Last Days, Passion and Resurrection, x . 1 to end . He goes first to " the
See also:borders of
See also:Judaea and beyond
See also:Jordan " (Peraea), and exercises His ministry there, x . 1–16 . In connexion with the journey from this region to Jerusalem three striking incidents are recorded, X . 17–52 . The account of the time in erusalem includes a series of conflicts with opponents xi . 27–xii . 40, and the discourse on the Last Things, xiii . The only notes of time in the Gospel occur in connexion with the
See also:conspiracy to kill Jesus (xiv . 1) and the Last Supper (
See also:verse 12) .
(4) The Leading Ideas of St Mark.—Ch. i . 1, which stands as atitle, was probably, even according to the
See also:short form of it which is supported by MS. evidence, due to a reviser of the original . Both Matthew and Luke show signs of having had a somewhat different beginning before them . Nevertheless, that title fitly describes the work . It is emphatically " the Gospel," because it sets forth the
See also:person and work of the Christ . The evangelist is conscious of this aim . It appears not only at great moments of the history such as the
See also:Baptism (i . Is), the confession of Peter (viii . 29), the Transfiguration (ix . 7); nor again merely in the prominence given to the miracles of Jesus and in particular to the casting out of devils, but also in many of the sayings recorded in it, as in the great series contained in the narratives in ch. ii . 5, 10, 17, 19; and again in the reply of Jesus to those who charged Him with being in collusion with Satan (iii . 27) .
The character of the genuine disciples of the Christ and the demands that are made of them form, as it were, thecomplement to the
See also:representation of what He Himself is, and are set forth in other striking sayings, related along with the memorable occasions on which they were spoken: (iii . 34, 35; viii . 34-36; ix . 23, 29, 35-37; X . 14, 15, 42-45) . See Swete, Commentary on St Mark (2nd ed., 1902) ; A . Menzies, The Earliest Gospel (1901); D . W .
See also:Wrede, Das Messiasgeheimniss in den Evangelien, zugleich ein Beitrag zum Verstandniss
See also:des Markusevangeliums (1901); E . J .
See also:Weiss, Das dlteste Evangelium (1903) . Also bibliography to the article GOSPEL .
(V . H .
CARL MARK (1858– )
There are no comments yet for this article.
Do not copy, download, transfer, or otherwise replicate the site content in whole or in part.
Links to articles and home page are encouraged.