The Evangelist Mark from Albrecht Dürer's The Four Evangelists (1526)
The Gospel According to Mark
Peter's Interpreter?
"'Interpreter' probably means, not that Mark translated Peter's Aramaic words into Greek, but that as a catechist he expounded Peter's teaching." St. Augustine wrote in the 5th century that Matthew was the earliest gospel and Mark was an abbreviated version of it. Modern scholars discount this suggestion for a number of reasons - for example Mark leaves out the nativity story and sermon on the mount both central to Christian belief. In addition, the authors of both Matthew and Luke deferred to the authority of Mark and followed its narrative sequence.
"Mark is the shortest and simplest and in other ways suggests that it is the earliest. Its material is not uniformly ordered: some stories appear to be part of a time-sequence, others are associated topically. Since the same degree of authorial control does not obtain throughout, it has been often suggested that various sorts of material, and preliminary small collections of material, lie behind Mark. Some incidents and sequences might plausibly be based on the memory of Peter (the healing of his mother-in-law may have had only Peter as its eyewitness); others do not stand out as offering the same suggestion. The Petrine link and the lack of a single overall historical ordering are both commented on by Papias. The other, non-Petrine features remain and challenge analysis." Unlike the author of Matthew (who very likely wrote his gospel for a Palestinian audience) the author of Mark appears much less less informed about the Palestinian area and Judaism. For example, Mark 8:27 speaks of "the villages of Caesarea Philippi" but Caesarea Philippi was a single town. This would be consistent with Mark being gentile writer living in Rome. The location where the gospel was committed to writing, however, was Alexandria, Egypt. (See Secret Mark).
The Tradition of Peter in Rome
"On a large number of early Christian sarcophagi now in the Lateran Museum the imprisonment of Peter by Herod Agrippa and his release by the angel is represented. The French historian of the 'Persecutions of the first two Centuries,' Paul Allard, was the first to point out that the frequency with which this subject was chosen might be accounted for by the existence of a traditional belief in a close connection between this event and the first visit of St. Peter to Rome."
"This agrees with the tradition that the apostles were dispersed from Jerusalem twelve years after the ascension [Eusebius Historia Ecclesiastica 5.18.14; Acts of Peter; Clement of Alexandria, Stromateis 6.5.43]. It also explains the remarkable interest in Simon the magician in Acts. Justin Martyr tells how Simon also went to Rome in the reign of Claudius and there had a great conflict with Peter."
The Emperor Claudius issued an edict expelling the Jews from Rome (Acts 18:2) circa 49-50 C.E.
"There is nothing improbable in this. In the ghetto in the Jewish quarter of Rome, Transtiberim, Jewish customs were of course observed. Peter, a devout Jew from the mother-country, would probably have been invited (as Stephen and Paul were) to speak in the synagogues, but when '[God] worked through Peter for the mission to the circumcised' (Gal. 2:8), there would have been sharp tensions and the formation of Christian synagogues. It only required some zealot, like Paul during his former life as a Pharisee in Jerusalem, to be roused in an attempt to suppress the heretics. Nazarene meetings would be broken up, homes wrecked and stones thrown in the streets." The view that Peter was a source for the Gospel of Mark is not widely held by biblical scholars, however.
"Papias's testimony that Mark represented the disciple Peter's remembrances is particularly at odds with the Second Gospel's ignorance and confusion about Jewish affairs (Mk. 14:12), and general gentile orientation."
 (2) Dating
The 7Q5 Fragment The eminent Jesuit papyrologist, J. O'Callaghan first identified the fragment as a portion of Mark 5:52f in an article in Bliblica 53 (1972) 91-109. A largely intact scroll jar bearing the word "Rome" in Hebrew, was found on the same plateau as the fragment. If this jar came from the city where the Gospel of Mark was reputedly written, it may have held a copy along with the other scrolls. Unlike the scrolls in the other caves, which were parchment, this scroll was papyrus. This finding, if true, indicates that the first gospels were written on scrolls, not codices.
The fragment "has so few words, and of such little significance (e.g., Greek kai = 'and') that most New Testament scholars would now appear to firmly reject this identification on the grounds that the fragment could as well be from the Illiad or other works of ancient Greek literature."
"Since 7Q5 was written in Zierstil (ornamental style), a style used from 50 B.C. to 50 A.D. (this was the dating of the noted Oxford University paleographer, Colin H. Roberts), the fragment was necessarily datable to around 40-50 A.D. (It had to be a few years after the death of Jesus, but prior to 50 A.D.)
"Two points favor its identity with the Mark passage. In line 4 three letters and remains of a fourth could be the middle of the name
GENNESARET (a term for Galilee). The previous line has a space before the word 'And' [
KAI], indicating that it starts a new paragraph (otherwise Greek scribes did not leave spaces between words)."
"Some of the letters are far from clear, notably in line 2 and after 'And' [
KAI] in line 3. Read differently the pattern is changed opening the door to doubt. The letters which fit
GENNESARET, could equally be part of a verbal form. With other letters reconstructed in alternative ways the fragment could come from a completely different book. No one knows how much Jewish literature in Greek from the period 200 BC to AD 70 has been lost to us."
There are also discrepancies between the reconstructed text and the standard text in lines 3 and 4 (highlighted in blue below).  "The second query, which at first sight is more serious, is the omission of EPIQNGEN ['into the land of'] between lines 3 and 4. [The substitute word EIS, 'into', conveys the same sense]. But early New Testament papyri, often produced quickly and cheaply for private rather than for official use, are full of mistakes, and a scribal error of this order does not invalidate the rest of the identification. In addition, though this omission is not found in any Greek manuscript and is no mentioned in the 25th or 26th editions of Nestle or in Greeven's Synopsis, it is to be found in some Coptic manuscripts, which give independent evidence of the existence of this reading in Egypt." - John Wenham, Redating Matthew, Mark & Luke (1991), p. 178
"The possibilities for 7Q5 are:
"If 7Q5 is tentatively identified with Mark 6:52f, some of O'Callaghan's other identifications at once become plausible. 7Q4 fits 1 Timothy 3:16-4:3 (O'Callaghan thinks this certain) and 7Q8 fits James 1:23f. That epistles like 1 Timothy and James, commonly dated round about the end of the century, should have been in the possession of a Christian community in Palestine in 68 is a conclusion almost too shocking to be comtemplated!" Handing Down the Tradition
"They were evidently Christians before they met Paul and were presumably leaders of the church in Rome prior to their expulson." Paul, in his Epistle to the Romans, c.57 C.E., tells of his intention to visit Rome.
"'Many years' probably implies the existence of the church for a decade or more, and the worldwide proclamation of its faith suggests strong growth in spite of the exodus under Claudius." Irenaeus presents the earliest patristic testimony on the time of Mark's writing and places the release of the Gospel of Mark more than two decades later.
"Hand down" refers to passing down a tradition - not to the writing itself. If Mark had taken notes from Peter he may not have passed a finished manuscript on to the church until after Peter's death (ca. 67 C.E.) A date in this range is in accord with the conclusions of most scholars who conclude that the first edition of the Gospel of Mark probably appeared about 70 C.E., following the fall of Jerusalem during the Jewish War (66-70 C.E.), and the canonical edition about 100 C.E. The dating of the first edition is based largely upon allusions to the fall of Jerusalem in Mark's "Little Apocalypse". Although a quick reading of the passage suggests a description of events in the Jewish War., the account lacks specific detail - unlike early Christian accounts known to have been written after the war. Instead Mark's account echoes the language of Hebrew prophets and was likely inspired by passages from the Old Testament.
Correspondence with the Pauline Community Mark refers obliquely to the kind of sacrifice reflected in the Pauline letters:
"Mark has Jesus use the same word to Simon Peter in chapter 15: 'Thrice you will deny me' (aparnese). Simon of Cyrene [who carried Jesus' cross] is given as the Christian model, not Simon Peter, in keeping with Mark's almost obsessive theme of the inadequacy of the original circle of disciples..."
"If Mark is post-45, then the crisis of the late 60's to early 70's becomes the most plausible 1st c. setting for a composition that stresses (a) persecution and execution of Jesus' disciples [pick up your cross, etc.], (b) an imminent advent of God's
basileia ['kingdom'] with power, (c) and warnings against being misled by deceivers who appear 'in my name.'" Actually the Christians were said to have fled to Pella near the beginning of the Jewish War (c. 70 C.E. ).
Early Persecutions
"The connection of the Pharisees with a Herod...points to the persecution under Agrippa I, A.D. 41-51. Forty years later, neither Matthew nor Luke understood the saying. Both added false explanations and eliminated Herod (dead as an issue), but kept the Pharisees who were all too lively."
False Christs
"Mark's apocalypses are rhetorical, using the language of the past to foretell what most people in the Levant feared was coming. Doing so made his sermons more convincing." When Antonius Felix was made procurator of Judaea (54-60 C.E.), he launched a bloody campaign against Zealots and others who were inciting civil disorder. A number of Messianic claimants came forward during this time (Flavius Josephus, War of the Jews, Bk III, Ch XIII, Sns 4-6), the most famous being the Egyptian prophet with whom Paul was confused when he was arrested by the Romans (c. 58 C.E.). This is very likely the period of "false Christs and false prophets" mentioned in Mark 13:22.
"Mark, who reproduces in part the teaching of St. Peter, must have composed about 60..." Although the first version may have appeared as early as this date, the version which was accepted into the Christian canon came much later. (There is evidence that these later texts were influenced by the Gospel of Matthew. See The First Gospel?.)
"Now, it is clear that what we have come to know as canonical Mark did not reach it final form until relatively late, probably sometime in the second century. This may be deduced from the fact that although both Matthew and Luke made use of a version of Mark as a source in the composition of their respective versions of the gospel, occasionally one encounters an episode, or simply details, in the canonical Markan narrative which neither Matthew nor Luke have included. Rather than assume that by coincidence both Matthew and Luke, independently of one another, chose to alter Mark's story in precisely the same way, scholars have tended to argue that such differences arose when later editors changed the Gospel of Mark after Matthew and Luke had already made use of it. That is to say, Matthew and Luke did not use what we have come to know as the canonical Gospel of Mark, but rather and earlier version of it. Clement's account, which speaks of various version of Mark know in the second century, generally confirms this view."
(3) Structure
Outline
Comitting the Story to Writing
"The storytellers technique is to take the listeners to the scene - by means of words- and allow them to observe the movement of the characters."
"By the time Mark wrote about AD 70 the term 'gospel' had become well established within early Christianity. In Paul's epistles 'gospel' refers to oral proclamation: its content was the death and resurrection of Jesus and the hope for his parousia or coming, and not, apparently, his actions and teaching (1 Corinthians 15:3-5; 1 Thessalonians 1:9; 2:10; Romans 1:3-4)."
"Mark's very first word,
arch, 'Beginning' refers to the opening verses: the writing as a whole is intended to be understood as itself 'gospel'. The evangelist himself tells us that he is writing a 'gospel' whose beginning is the fulfillment of the citation from Malachi 3:1 and Isaiah 40:3."
Appealing to the Audience
The Gospel of Mark "was intended primarily for Romans. This appears probable when it is considered that it makes no reference to the Jewish law, and that the writer takes care to interpret words which a Gentile would be likely to misunderstand, such as, 'Boanerges' (3:17); 'Talitha cumi' (5:41); 'Corban' (7:11); 'Bartimaeus' (10:46); 'Abba' (14:36); 'Eloi,' etc. (15:34). Jewish usages are also explained (7:3; 14:3; 14:12; 15:42). Mark also uses certain Latin words not found in any of the other Gospels, as 'speculator' (6:27, rendered, A.V., 'executioner;' R.V., 'soldier of his guard'), 'xestes' (a corruption of sextarius, rendered 'pots,' 7:4, 8), 'quadrans' (12:42, rendered 'a farthing'), 'centurion' (15:39, 44, 45). He only twice quotes from the Old Testament (1:2; 15:28)."
"Mark frequently uses Latin terms ('legion' and 'centurion'). The Roman division of the night is given instead of the Jewish."
"As in folklore, generally, Mark uses various forms of repetition, reiteration, or parallelism to give clear definition to his characters and as an aid to memory. Jesus begins in Capernaum with an exorcism (1:21-28), and then inaugurates the first trip into gentile territory with another exorcism (5:1-20). There are pairs of stories featuring healing by touch (1:40-45 and 5:25-34), miraculously feeding large crowds (6:30-44 and 8:1-10), and restoring sight to the blind (8:22-26 and 10:46-52). Mark also makes use of duplicate expressions on a smaller scale. He likes to say 'early, while it was still dark' (1:35); 'Be quiet, shut up!' (4:39); 'now, in the present' (10:30); 'the chosen people whom he selected' (13:20); 'It's over! The time has come!' (14:41) Redundancy of this sort give listeners (readers) breathing space - a better chance to take the story in."
Inherited Traditions
"Mark apparently inherited miracle stories from many different streams of first-generation Christian tradition. We find blocks of miracle stories (e.g., the stilling of the storm, the exorcism of the Gerasene demoniac, and the raising of the daughter of Jairus with the healing of the woman with the hemorrhage in 4:35-5:43), individual miracle stories surrounded by other types of material (e.g., the demoniac boy in 9:14-29), miracle stories embedded in larger cycles of stories (e.g., the two multiplications of loaves within the so-called 'bread section' of Mark [6:7-8:21], and individual miracles perhaps already embedded in a primitive pre-Marcian passion tradition (e.g., the healing of the blind Bartimaeus in 10:46-52; the cursing of the fig tree in 11:12-14, 20-25)."
The author of Mark retains some traditions that were an embarrassment to followers of Jesus that later gospels expunged.
Disciples' Shortcomings and an Abrupt Ending
"By setting out so clearly the disciples' shortcomings, the evangelist is able to instruct his readers on the nature of true discipleship. The weakness and self-centeredness of the disciples is exposed ruthlessly in a number of passages, but the reader never finds it difficult to draw positive lessons...The faltering disciples are finally forgiven and their broken relationship with Jesus is restored [Mark 16:7 after the resurrection]."
"Mk 16:9-20 has 17 non-Markan words in that short space written in an obvious non-Markan style and rhetorical tone. The juncture between 16:8 and 16:9 is very clumsy."
"The ending of the Gospel of Mark is a classic problem in New Testament textual criticism. The scholarly consensus is that Mark originally ended with the abrupt stop at 16:8 [with Mary of Magdala, Mary mother of James and Salome running terrified from the empty tomb]. The earliest Patristic evidence (Clement of Rome, Origen, Eusebius, and Jerome) give no indication of any text beyond 16:8. In most manuscripts, however, Mark come with endings which extend beyond 16:8. These alternative endings are attempts to smooth out the abruptness of 16:8 and to harmonize Mark with the ending of the other gospels."
In the oldest complete bible manuscripts, Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Vaticanus (ca. 350 C.E.), the Gospel of Mark ends with Jesus' crucifixion and burial and does not include Mark 16:9-20. Later manuscripts, however, do contain16:9-20.
"Codex Alexandrinus and Codex Bezae have them, and so do most later copies. Irenaeus, the bishop of Lyons at the end of the second century, knew of them, and Tatian included them in the harmony of the Gospels which he made at the time (the Diatessaron. A century later Jerome knew they existed in a few copies...The majority he had seen did not have the long ending of Mark's Gospel."
It is "possible that this ending was supplied by Ariston [3rd c.] because of an Armenian manuscript that was copied from a more ancient version in 989 CE which adds the colphon 'ariston eritsou
ariston eritsou.' Arist(i)on was a contemporary of Papias in the Yohannine school."
Passages from the Secret Gospel of Mark
Secret Gospel of Mark
"The Secret Gospel of Mark is known only from quotations in a letter from Clement of Alexandria, who lived between about 150 and 215 C.E., to one Theodore, otherwise unknown. That letter is known only from a fragment copied, in the mid-eighteenth century, onto the three end pages of a seventeenth-century collection of Ignatius of Antioch's letters at the Greek Orthodox monastery of Mar Saba, halfway between Bethlehem and the Dead Sea."
The "three-page handwritten addition [was] penned into the endpapers of a printed book, Isaac Voss' 1646 edition of the Epistolae genuinae S. Ignatii Martyris. The addition is in 18th century Greek minuscule copying a letter of Clement of Alexandria 'to Theodore' concerning a dispute with the Carpocratians, an heterodox Christian sect. It was discovered by Morton Smith [Columbia University] in 1958 when he, as a graduate student of Columbia University, was cataloguing the manuscript collection of the Mar Saba Monastery south of Jerusalem."
Recently Charlie Hedrick has visited the monastery and also seen the manuscript. "He also found the fragment of another gospel which he is transcribing and preparing for publication."
"Where did this letter come from? I believe that a monk at Mar Saba noticed that the original, a very ancient copy, or perhaps even the autograph, was so deteriorated that the manuscript was in danger of being lost forever. He transcribed the ancient text in a hurried, cursive minuscule script on the last three fly leaves of the 1646 volume with the intention to recopy it later in a more elegant hand. Perhaps he followed through with this plan and his copied manuscript has since been lost. Perhaps he never got the opportunity to to recopy the manuscript and all that was left for Morton Smith to discover was his 'rough draft' of the original. " Jack has reconstructed what the Greek original may have looked like on his site (above).
Clement of Alexandria was "the second-century church father well-known for his neo-platonic applications of Christian belief."
Secret Mark appears in the midst of a tight structural composition with "three passion
prediction bits which are VERY stylized. One latter element is the condemnation directly or indirectly of disciples. A) Peter is Satan B) They are discussing who among them is the greatest C) James and John want special privileges. Each of these bits is, in turn, followed by a little speech by Jesus to them about humility. However, the inclusion of SG after 10:34 destroys this pattern completely."
Jesus raises the young man inside the tomb and instructs him "the mystery of God's Domain" for six days. Jesus then returns to the other side of the Jordan. (For the complete passage see "Raising the Dead".)
"The Markan joint between these two pericopes [10:34 and 10:35] is not 'tight' at all. 10:34 concludes Jesus' longest prediction of his death and resurrection which the disciples fail to grasp. 10:35 involves an attempt by two disciples to guarantee places of privileges when Jesus 'comes into his glory.' I find no direct link between the language or the logic of these two passages. In fact the long fragment of secret Mark which deals with resurrection makes a better logical sequal to Jesus' prediction of his own resurrection than does the canonical sequence.
"Taking on the pressing question of Secret Mark's textual relationship with the version of Mark in our New Testament, Helmut Koester has published two intriguing studies arguing that the development of Mark was an evolutionary process. First came the version of Mark known by Matthew and Luke, the proto-Mark or Urkarkus long known to scholars of the synoptic problem. After this original version of Mark was published, the expanded version used by the Alexandrian church in Christian mysteries was made (and from that, its gnosticized Carpocration version). Soon afterward or simulaneously, a mostly expurgated version of Secret Mark was published widely and became canonical Mark. The original Urmarkus, lacking anything not found in Matthew or Luke, went the way of the sayings source and was not preserved."
"The second version of Mark expurgated those passages but left their textual debris strewn across its text. That may well have been done, with the minimal rewriting necessary, by the end of the seventies C.E."
|
