Week 5 - The Gospel of Mark

Augustine dismissed Mark as an abridger or compiler of Matthew, but de Silva’s indicates that Mark (who is believed to have been John Mark, a follower of Peter’s) created the first Gospel, probably in Rome, or at least in the West, around the time of the destruction of the Jerusalem Temple in 70 A.D. or shortly before. The clues to its geographical source are that, although written in Greek, he uses a number of “Latinisms,” and he explains Aramaic terms for an audience that may not have been familiar with them. He cites Papias, an early collector of information about the Apostles and the Gospels, that Mark wrote down Peter’s teachings, taking care not to mis-state anything. Mark intended his Gospel to confirm the beliefs of the early Christian community, he writes, those who already believed that Jesus was the Messiah, rather than for the purpose of proselytizing.

We have been hearing a good deal about “Q,” a posited early written source of stories about Jesus and his sayings which was believed to have been used by both Matthew and Luke as a source. It appears that Mark did not use Q, so his Jesus sayings and stories are believed to be independent and early material, and his Gospel is also believed to have been used as a source for Matthew and Luke. I also understand that Mark’s Greek was not terribly erudite but de Silva does indicate that being rather simple and straightforward makes it particularly forceful. He also indicates that Mark traditionally did not get a lot of respect, partly because his was considered to be a later and lesser Gospel.

De Silva indicates that Mark’s structuring fosters his theological purpose. He utilizes what has been referred to as a “Marcan sandwich,” which suggests that this is unique to his Gospel. For example, he frames a narrative with two parallel stories, which serves to indicate the beginning of a thematic narrative and its ending. An example of this (of which there are several in Mark’s Gospel) is Mark 8:22 – 10:52, which de Silva describes as “a very tightly interconnected segment structured by three passion predictions and teachings on discipleship framed by an inclusion of stories of healing blind men.” (pg. 199) “Inclusio” is de Silva’s term for the Marcan sandwich technique, which he says was a common device in the ancient world, particularly in cultures where the oral tradition was strong.

Mark also uses the theme of the “Messianic secret” to further his theological goals. We know that Jesus is Messiah and Son of God, and the demons know (but are forbidden from revealing the secret) but the disciples and followers of Jesus must take the journey with him to gradually learn the truth of his identity and mission here on earth. Thus there are several instances of miracles and miraculous events, such as the transfiguration, in which the disciples know that Jesus is not an ordinary man – but even when Peter recognizes and confesses that Jesus is the Messiah in Mk 8:29, he seems to have a memory lapse of that fact as Jesus’s journey to the cross continues. Jesus also gives them hints but doesn’t fully disclose his Messiahship. For example, he forgives the paralyzed man’s sins at Mk 2:5, eliciting the reaction from the scribes that “He’s blaspheming! Who can forgive sins but God alone?” (Mk. 2:7 – NIV Study Bible) Jesus responds, inter alia, “Which is easier: to say to the paralytic, Your sins are forgiven,’ or to say, ‘Get up take your mat and walk’?” (Mk 2:8 – NIV Study Bible) To signify that the Son of Man has the authority to forgive sins on earth, Jesus then commands the man to take up his mat and walk. The people are amazed by events such as this but do not fully comprehend the truth.

What is the reason for the “Messianic secret”? De Silva suggests that one reason that Jesus didn’t openly declare his messiahship is that it would have been misunderstood during his lifetime. The belief that the Messiah would be a soldier-liberator for the Jewish people would have been so widespread that this hope would have overtaken Jesus’s real message and purpose had it been prematurely disclosed. Another more practical reason in my view is that had he been proclaiming himself the Messiah earlier, his life might have been terminated prematurely. I believe that the drama of Jesus’s life is that during his lifetime he did such miraculous things, he did bring hope, he did bring an ethical message for people, and he did proclaim the Kingdom of God – and then he was subjected to the abuse, the suffering and the death on the cross – and then rose triumphantly. Then the truth of his message of Messiahship could be perceived – but only when the disciples shared his appearances after the Resurrection were they fully able to bring his message to the world.

So – Mark’s Gospel contains a lot of good stuff and needs to be appreciated for what it brings to the life of believers and the church during some of the earliest years of Christianity.