An Overview of the Gospel of Mark

What do you know about the Gospel of Mark? Learn more about Mark’s Gospel with the brief overview below.

Who Wrote the Gospel of Mark?

Although none of the gospels names its author, each has had a fairly consistent testimony in church history. That John Mark is the author of the second gospel is the consistent widespread traditional view. Papias gives the first witness to Mark’s authorship of the second gospel. Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, Clement of Rome, and Ignatius, as well as others, agree. The internal evidence for authorship is extremely weak. There is a brief incident in 14:50-52 that might refer to the author. In the confusion over Jesus’ arrest in Gethsemane, a young man, grabbed by one of the soldiers, ran away into the night leaving behind the sheet that had been wrapped around his body. No other gospels record this. It is possible that the young man could have been Mark, and this was his way of saying he was there.

Ten references to Mark occur in the NT (Ac 12:12, 25; 13:5, 13; 15:37, 39; Col 4:10; Phm 24; 1Pt 5:13; and 2Tm 4:11). The Jerusalem church met in his home so perhaps he came from a wealthy family (cf. Ac 12:12). When Paul and Barnabas went to Antioch for ministry, they brought Mark along (cf. Ac 12:25). He accompanied them as a “helper” on their first missionary journey (cf. Ac 13:5), but left in the middle of the trip and returned home (cf. Ac 13:13). This became the focus of controversy when the second missionary journey began (cf. Ac 15:37-39). As a result, Barnabas took Mark and went to Cyprus; Paul took Silas and headed overland for Asia Minor. That Mark became an effective servant cannot be denied. Mark was with Paul in Rome when the apostle wrote Colossians (cf. Col 4:10) and Philemon (cf. Phm 24) and also with Peter in “Babylon,” when 1 Peter was written (cf. 1Pt 5:13). Paul made a concluding admission concerning Mark when he told Timothy, “Pick up Mark and bring him with you, for he is useful to me for service” (cf. 2 Tm 4:11).

Although Mark was the writer of the second gospel, there is good indication the person behind the book was Simon Peter. That a relationship existed between the two is verified both outside and inside this gospel. Outside the gospel: (1) Papias commented: “Mark, having become the interpreter of Peter, wrote down accurately whatever he remembered of the things said and done by the Lord, but not however in order” (Cited by Eusebius, Hist. Eccl. III.xxxix.15). (2) Peter said Mark was with him in “Babylon” (cf. 1Pt 5:13). (3) The second gospel covers the same material mentioned in Peter’s report to the church at Jerusalem (cf. Ac 10:34-43). (4) Peter was aware of his imminent death and declared he was taking steps to ensure his brethren would be able to remember what he had taught (cf. 2Pt 1:13-15). Was Peter filling Mark’s mind with stories from Jesus’ life so he could write them down? Internal evidence also points to a relationship between Peter and Mark: (1) The second gospel basically begins with Peter’s call to follow the Lord. (2) The second gospel clearly has an eyewitness behind it. The stories concerning Jesus appear in the present tense, which pictures them as actually occurring. There are about 150 historic presents in this gospel compared with 78 in Matthew and only four in Luke. (3) The second gospel relates a number of facts about Peter not found in the other gospels, and some favorable details about Peter are omitted (cf. 1:36; 11:21; 13:3; 16:7). (4) This gospel gives special attention to the ministry of Jesus in Galilee, especially Capernaum, the place of Peter’s residence.

When Was the Gospel of Mark Written?

Dates for the writing of the second gospel range from AD 44 to 75. Documentary theories on the writings of the Synoptic Gospels require that Mark be the earliest of the gospels. There has been a tendency in recent scholarship to date the writing of all the NT books earlier than previously thought. Part of the reason for this is that the destruction of Jerusalem (in AD 70) is never mentioned in the New Testament. That fact would have been extremely significant in a number of the gospel stories, and, if it had indeed occurred, surely one or more of the gospel writers would have mentioned it. A quote from Irenaeus must be evaluated when considering Mark’s date: “Matthew also issued a written gospel among the Hebrews in their own dialect, while Peter and Paul were preaching in Rome, and laying the foundation of the church.

After their departure, Mark, the disciple and interpreter of Peter, did also hand down to us in writing what had been preached by Peter” (Against Heresies, III, i, 1). The word “departure” is the word exodus, used in Scripture for physical death (cf. Lk 9:51). If that was what Irenaeus was communicating, the second gospel could not have been written until after Peter’s death. According to Eusebius, Mark wrote the gospel based on Peter’s lectures on the life of Jesus in Rome and was approved by Peter. Mark’s gospel was circulated privately while Peter lived, and then Mark published it after Peter’s death. In what year did Peter die? Tradition states Peter died under the persecutions of Nero, which began in AD 64. Many believe that Peter’s death may have occurred around AD 66 or 67. After his death, there was a desire to commit to writing Peter’s stories concerning Jesus. Mark was the natural choice to pen the account. Not only that, but the Holy Spirit moved him along (cf. 2Pt 1:21) to communicate the stories without errors. The actual writing probably took place in AD 67 or 68.

Who Was the Original Audience for the Gospel of Mark?

Mark seems to have written the second gospel for a Gentile audience, and in particular he may have had Romans in view. Several factors point to this conclusion.

1. The second gospel has the fewest quotes and allusions (63) to the OT of all the gospels. A Gentile reader would not have been interested in or familiar with its contents.
2. Mark interprets the Aramaic words found in the gospel. For example the cry of Jesus from the cross, “Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani?” is translated “My God, My God, why have you forsaken Me?” (cf. 15:34).
3. Mark explains geographical locations in connection with his stories. The location of the Mount of Olives “opposite the temple” is spelled out in 13:3.
4. There are no references in Mark to the Jewish law. There were so many items of importance to Jewish people that related to the law, yet Mark never mentions them.
5. Mark explains Jewish customs. “Jews do not eat unless they carefully wash their hands” (cf. 7:3). Such a custom would have been known and practiced by Jews (cf. 14:12 and 15:42).
6. Mark presents Jesus as the mighty worker, a man who conquers by doing. Romans were concerned with a person’s production, not his words. The effective service of Jesus was of greater significance than His lineage or claims.

Although there is no direct reference to a city in the gospel, tradition says Mark wrote this book from Rome. Several lines of evidence support this contention.

1. Mark used a number of Latin words, even though there were Greek equivalents: cf. two lepta (12:42), “modius” for bushel (4:21), “speculator” for executioner (6:27), “census” for tribute (12:14), the “Praetorium” for the palace (15:16), and “centurion” for centurion (15:39, 44, 45).
2. Roman divisions of time are used in this gospel, four “watches” in the night, whereas in Jewish reckoning there were only three.
3. Mark referred to Alexander and Rufus (15:21), sons of Simon of Cyrene, the one who carried Jesus’ cross. They were personal acquaintances of the author and his readers. Paul referred to a “Rufus” and called him “a choice man in the Lord” (cf. Rm. 16:13). That these two men named Rufus are the same individual may have some warrant.

What Is the Purpose of the Gospel of Mark?

The occasion prompting the writing of this gospel is not known. The compulsion of the Holy Spirit working in Mark’s life is paramount. But after Peter’s death there was a desire within the church at Rome to have his great teachings written down. Mark was the natural choice to do the job. Peter had spent time preparing him for the task (cf. 2Pt 1:13-15).

Several outstanding characteristics are apparent in Mark. First, the second gospel is the gospel of action. Events in this gospel move rapidly. About two of every three verses begin with the word “and,” a device for action. This is further seen in a key word in the gospel: “straightway” or “immediately.”

Second, Mark pictures Jesus as the Servant of the Lord, the reason such a stress was placed on immediacy of action. When considering a servant, one is primarily interested in his service. Jesus’ servitude is emphasized in the key verse in Mark: “For even the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give His life a ransom for many” (10:45).

Third, this gospel emphasizes Jesus’ miracles. This reflects the servant character of the Lord, for as a servant His miracles are prominent. However, only two miracles are unique to the second gospel: the healing of the deaf and dumb man (7:31-37) and the healing of the blind man at Bethsaida (8:22-26).

Fourth, Mark emphasized common, familiar aspects of life. He gave attention to such ordinary features as boating and fishing, animals, clothing, housing, coins, and divisions of time.

Fifth, Mark is the gospel of vivid detail. Special attention is given to such particulars as the looks and gestures of the Lord (3:5; 10:16). In the story of the feeding of the five thousand men, only Mark’s account gives the vivid detail of “green” grass (6:39).

What Is the Background of the Gospel of Mark?

Where does the material written by Mark end? The options are the gospel ends at 16:8, at 16:20, or that another ending should be added either after 16:8 or 16:20. Additional material may have become lost over the centuries, but it was part of the early texts.

The evidence to support the ending of the gospel of Mark comes down to the question, “Which is the best Greek text?” The issue revolves around whether one considers the majority of the manuscript evidence to be what supports one’s conclusion or whether one regards certain ancient texts as a better and more faithful

rendering of the original Greek. The majority of the manuscripts support the reading of Mark’s gospel through 16:20. The older manuscripts (e.g., Vaticanus and Sinaiticus, both fourth century) support the shorter ending at v. 8.

Some internal arguments may be hard to follow unless one has competent ability in the original language. The vocabulary and theology of vv. 9-20 are quite different from the earlier portions of the gospel. It seems that the internal evidence substantiates the claim that Mark’s manuscript should conclude at v. 8. If the gospel does end at v. 8, how can the addition of vv. 9-20 be explained? Certainly it would not have simply been lost. The gospel of Mark was probably written on a scroll, and the conclusion of the gospel would have been rolled up on the inside. It was more common for the first portion to be removed for some reason or simply become worn out through use. Perhaps over the decades, as the gospel was copied, it was felt that the ending at v. 8 was much too abrupt and not an appropriate conclusion. The most common suggestion has been that Aristion, a disciple of the apostle John, made the addition, perhaps even under the authority of John. Some, while recognizing that vv. 9-20 are not Markan, nevertheless conclude that they are a part of the manuscript in the same sense that Deuteronomy 34, concerning the death of Moses, and Joshua 24, concerning Joshua’s death, were added. Do vv. 9-20 fit the same criteria? Some believe they do. Perhaps Mark himself intended to add to the manuscript but may have died before he could do so. The problem of the ending of Mark’s gospel probably will not be solved as long as people live in physical bodies on this earth.