I recently finished making a quick intro guide to the Gospel of Mark for my church. This weekend we’re starting a new series on one of the shortest, strangest, and most difficult gospel accounts to grasp. I thought the intro would be good to post on my blog because it’s short and sweet—I hope.

About the Gospel of Mark:

The Gospel of Mark is anonymous—like the other Gospels—but unlike the other Gospels it does not have any allusions or clues as to its authorship (e.g., Lk 1:1-4; Jn 21:24). However, it is possible that the author of the Gospel assumed the readers’ knowledge of authorship (e.g., Lk 1:1-4; Acts 1:1). More likely, the author’s understanding that his Gospel was hardly a creative literary product but rather was an expression of the gospel from God promised by Isaiah (52:7; 61:1) and expressed in the teaching and stories of Jesus as preached in the early church (see Mk 1:1; 1:14).

Traditionally, within the earliest years of the church, the Gospel became known as the “Gospel according to Mark.” The earliest known reference to the Gospel being attributed to Mark is by Papias, Bishop of Hierapolis in what is today known as southwest Turkey. Bishop Papias provides the earliest documentable testimony to Mark as author of the Gospel in his five-volume work Interpretation of the Lord’s Sayings (A.D. 120). Papias claimed to have learned that Mark authored the Gospel by a significant leader in the church whom he references as the Elder (possibly a disciple to one of the twelve Apostles or one of the twelve): Papias states: “And this is what the Elder said, ‘Mark, who became Peter’s interpreter, accurately wrote, though not in order, as many of the things said and done by the Lord as he had noted.” If Papias is correct, then it appears that Mark was transcribing the very words of Peter the Apostle and these writings subsequently became known as the Gospel according to Mark. It is also significant that one of the most significant church fathers, Irenaeus, mentions that Papias was a hearer of the Apostle John himself, and a companion of Polycarp, who was also a disciple of the Apostle John. Either way, Papias’ witness to Mark as being the author of the Gospel has a great deal of extra biblical historical evidence to support Markan authorship.

But if Mark was a disciple of Peter, Apostle to the Lord Jesus Christ, then who exactly was Mark? All evidence from the early church and the Bible itself point to “John Mark,” the disciple of Peter mentioned many times in the New Testament (see 1 Pet 5:13; Acts 12:12, 25; 13:13; 15:37-39 and in the Pauline writings: Philem 24; Col 4:10; 2 Tim 4:11). Therefore, in light of the biblical and early church evidence, Mark was the companion of both peter and Paul, a member of the primitive community in Jerusalem that met in the upper room of his mother’s home (Acts 12:12) where Jesus might have celebrated the Last Supper (see Mk 14:14-15; Acts 1:13-14).

Gospel of Mark Background and Miscellaneous Facts

Whereas Matthew was written to a Jewish audience, Mark is likely targeted to Roman audiences within Italy. Therefore Mark was written for the most part toward a gentile socio-cultural context. Evidences of this are (1) that Mark often translates Aramaic terms for his readers and in other places he uses Latin expressions, which would be more suited to a Roman audience; (2) he explains Jewish customs; (3) he omits Jewish elements, such as genealogies found in Matthew and Luke; and lastly (4) that Mark makes the fewest references to the OT out of all the gospels.

What was life like in Rome when Mark wrote his gospel account? The state of affairs in Rome was bleak to say the least. For example, in A.D. 64, very close to when Mark wrote his account, a devastating fire broke out in Rome. More than half the city was destroyed; and strong rumors persisted that the emperor Nero set them himself. Unfortunately for Christians in the city and region, the emperor Nero himself devised a plan to blame the Christians for the travesty. The Roman historian Tacitus recounts the situation that followed (keep in mind Tacitus is no Christian or Christian sympathizer):

But neither human help, nor imperial munificence, nor all the modes of placating Heaven, could stifle scandal or dispel the belief that the fire had taken place by order of the Emperor. Therefore, to scotch the rumor, Nero substituted as culprits, and punished with the utmost refinements of cruelty, a class of men and women, loathed for their vices, whom the crowd styled Christians. Christus, the founder of the name, had undergone the death penalty in the reign of Tiberius, by sentence of the procurator Pontius Pilatus, and the pernicious superstition was checked for a moment, only to break out once more, not merely in Judea, the home of the disease, but in the capital itself, where all things horrible or shameful in the world collect and find a vogue. First, then, the confessed members of the Christian sect were arrested; next, on their confessions of being Christ followers, vast numbers were convicted, not so much on the count of being arsonists but for the hatred of the human race. And ridicule accompanied their end: they were covered with wild beasts’ skins and torn to death by dogs; or they were fastened on crosses, and when daylight failed were burned to serve as lamps by night. Nero had offered his gardens for the spectacle, and gave an exhibition in his circus, mixing with the crowd in the habit of a charioteer. Hence, in spite of a guilt which had earned the most exemplary and brutal punishment conceivable, there rose a sentiment of pity, due to the impression that they were being sacrificed not for the welfare of Rome but to the ferocity of a single man. (Annals 15.44)

So if the Gospel of Mark was written sometime during this period of persecution, between A.D. 65-68, this passage from Tacitus sheds light on Mark’s contextual setting. The Roman church was both literally and figuratively experiencing the fires of persecution. Mark’s purpose in writing was “not historical or biographical,” per se, but intensely practical. He was writing a book for the guidance and support of his fellow Christians in a situation of intense crisis.

Jesus: “King of the Broken”

The way Mark prepares his readers for suffering is by placing before them the passion experience of Jesus. Jesus’ way was a via dolorosa (Latin for “way of suffering”). The way of discipleship for Christians is the same way—the cross. And about one-third of Mark’s Gospel is devoted to the death of Jesus. Thus, the Gospel of Mark points to Jesus as the suffering Servant of the Lord (Mk 10:45) and this suffering servant of the Lord is also the King of those who are broken and in need of wholeness. All this said, Mark demonstrates Jesus’ actions and deeds more so than his teaching, particularly emphasizing the service and sacrifice of Jesus for his people; and it is not that Mark isn’t concerned with the teaching of Jesus, but he is painting a picture in the gospel account of Jesus’ actions being representative more so than his teaching. The motto actions speak louder than words is definitely true of Mark’s gospel. In light of Jesus’ actions, Mark focuses on the humanity of Jesus more clearly than any of the other evangelists, emphasizing Jesus’ human emotions (1:41; 3:5; 6:34; 8:12; 9:36), his human limitations (4:38; 11:12; 13:32), and other small details that highlight the human side of the Son of God (e.g., 7:33, 34; 8:12; 9:36; 10:13-16). The savior of the world and messiah, the King, is also the one who suffered with his broken people.

Like with the other gospels, Mark challenges his readers with the message and hope of Jesus. But on Mark’s understanding the implication for the Roman church is clear. Faithfulness and obedience as a follower of Jesus Christ will inevitably lead to suffering and perhaps even death.

3 Responses to “Introduction to the Gospel of Mark”

1. Wyatt Houtz says:

   January 9, 2010 at 8:24 pm

   Hey philo, great blog! I haven’t considered that Mark may have received material from the apostle john. I believe I read that John Mark was the cousin of peter, and isn’t there an episode in acts where peter is staying at john mark’s parents house. Maybe that is one of your references.

   this is well written, i hope you post more of your notes. i like how you tied thye tacitus quote in with the apocolyptic nature of mark, they do go together.
2. Josh says:

   January 9, 2010 at 10:00 pm

   Thanks Wyatt:-)

   I actually had a good time doing these notes. That quote by Tacitus was awesome. I’ve read that quote before and thought it would be good.
3. Josh says:

   January 9, 2010 at 10:01 pm

   Ooops, I’m on Josh’s computer, hehe. (this is Phil)