The Gospel of Mark

John Mark grew up in Jerusalem in an active home of disciples of Jesus (Acts 12:12,25). Peter was closely associated with the family, referring to Mark as, “Marcus my son” (I Peter 5:13). No doubt, Mark had listened to Jesus many times himself and he certainly would have heard much from Peter.

His family links to the ecclesia were further strengthened in that Barnabas was his cousin. Mark was evidently a young disciple of such outstanding potential that Paul and Barnabas took him along on the first missionary journey to the Gentiles. Though something happened in Cyprus which caused Mark to return home just as the trip was building momentum, his ultimate conduct in the ecclesias was such that Paul warmly commended him (Col. 4:10; Phil. v.24).

Peter’s influence

Many early church historians record that Peter had much input into the Gospel of Mark. A couple of examples will suffice: 1) Papias (c. 120 A.D.) wrote, “Mark, having become the interpreter of Peter, wrote accurately all that he remembered of the things that were either said or done by Christ.” 2) Irenaeus (c. 180 A.D.) wrote, “Mark, the disciple and interpreter of Peter did also hand down to us in writing what had been preached by Peter.”

Peter’s call to service coincides with the beginning of the account of Jesus’ public ministry (1:16-18) followed by events in Peter’s household (1:29,36). Chapter 16:7 includes a specific message involving Peter that is not found elsewhere. Several images of Peter are also presented which do not place him in a favorable light. While that might seem strange to fleshly thinking, it is just the type of thing a disciple would do if his purpose was to show that Christ can save us no matter how human or weak we are.

Written to the Romans

Tradition says Mark was written initially for the benefit of the ecclesia at Rome. Clement of Alexandria wrote (c. 180 A.D.), “When Peter had publicly preached the word in Rome…those who were present…urged Mark, since he had followed Peter for a long time, and since he remembered the things which had been spoken, to write out the things which had been said; and when he had done so, he gave the gospel to those who had asked him.” Note that Mark was in Rome with Paul (Phil. vs. 23-24).

Unique language

Mark uses the word euthus to describe time passage; it is translated “immediately,” “straightway” and “at once.” Euthus and its related forms are used 47 times in Mark. That’s more than in the rest of the New Testament combined.

Sometimes, for effect, a writer will use the present tense when telling a story about past events; this is called the historic present. The verb form brings the narrative to life. Luke uses this form 1 time; Matthew 21 times; Mark 151 times.

On five occasions, Mark records that people are “amazed” by Jesus. They are amazed at his teaching, his healing of the paralytic, his walking on the water and hisstilling of the storm, his appearance at a time of trouble and his willingness to go to Jerusalem after revealing what would happen there (1:27; 2:12; 6:51; 9:15; 10:32).

They did not understand

More than in the other gospels, Mark records the inability of the dis­ciples to understand the teaching of Jesus (4:13,40; 7:18; 9:18,19,28,29). These were men of God who were chosen and called as the elite of Jesus ‘ disciples (John 17:6). We can readily imagine how Peter and the others would read the account with dismay at their former ignorance.

Also stressed in Mark is the fact the apostles did not anticipate the trial, crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus (8:31; 9:9,10,19,31,32, etc.). This is eloquent confirmation that the gospels are not the work of charlatans preaching error for the sake of honor and money. Charlatans do not demean themselves in this way.

We may react with criticism that the apostles were hard of heart. But before we become too critical, let us take note of their devotion and the fact that they gave up all to follow Jesus.

Do not tell anyone

In Mark, the point stands out that Jesus stressed to those he healed that they were not to tell anyone of their healing (1:44; 3:11-12; 7:36; 8:26). In each case, they ignored his request and talked openly of their experiences.

Was this a matter of false modesty on the part of Jesus? Was he trying to hide the power of God? No, the answer is that he had to do more than heal the sick, restore sight to the blind and make the lame to leap. He had to heal the broken-hearted and preach the gospel to the poor; that was more important than the physical healing. The healings demonstrated the power and compassion of the Lord and his conquest of sin but they were not the most important aspect of his work.

Furthermore, excitement about his ability to heal and to multiply food led to the people wanting to make him a king. He wasn’t trying to foment rebellion or start a revolution. He came to teach men how to subdue self and revolt against sin’s hold on their lives.

The time would come when they were to openly proclaim his kingship, but that would be when he was no longer visibly present. Then they were to go to all nations, preaching everywhere the gospel of the good news of Jesus Christ.

Let us not be slow to understand, heavy-hearted or weak of faith — let us go forth preaching and living the “good news” that Jesus is the Mes­siah, who is at the right hand of God, until…