Gospel of Mark The Gospel of Mark is the second in the most usual sequence of printing of the New Testament Gospels. The commonly accepted range of dates for the text in its existing form are ca. AD 65, the traditional date for the death of Peter, to ca. AD 80, a terminus set by the use of purely Markan material in the Gospel of Luke. Authorship The gospel itself is anonymous, but as early as Papias in the early 2nd century, the text was attributed to Mark, a disciple of Peter who is said to have recorded the Apostle's discourses. According to tradition, Mark would have had abundant opportunities to obtain information from Peter and other apostles about Jesus and his ministry. While the text of Papias' original attribution is no longer extant, it was quoted by Eusebius of Caesarea, as follows: "And the presbyter said this. Mark having become the interpreter of Peter, wrote down accurately whatsoever he remembered. It was not, however, in exact order that he related the sayings or deeds of Christ. For he neither heard the Lord nor accompanied Him. But afterwards, as I said, he accompanied Peter, who accommodated his instructions to the necessities [of his hearers], but with no intention of giving a regular narrative of the Lord's sayings. Wherefore Mark made no mistake in thus writing some things as he remembered them. For of one thing he took especial care, not to omit anything he had heard, and not to put anything fictitious into the statements." Notable in Papias' guarantee of the authenticity of the text is the unambiguous statement that Peter "accommodated his instructions to the necessities". Since the time of Clement of Alexandria, at the end of the 2nd century, to the mid 20th century, scholars have generally thought that this gospel was first written at Rome, but some now conclude that Syria is a viable candidate as well. A recently published letter from Clement copied into a book at the Mar Saba monastery contains references to a previously unknown Secret Gospel of Mark and provides additional details about Mark's Roman origin. Many scholars are unconvinced that an early, "Secret" Mark existed before the canonical gospel, and an increasing number are beginning to feel that the letter is a modern-day forgery. The Rome/Peter theory is under attack. It is argued that Mark's Latinizing language -- once seen as an indication of Roman provenance -- could have stemmed from many places throughout the larger Roman empire. Furthermore, Papias' comment does not make a clear that the Mark of whom he spoke is the author of our canonical gospel which bears that name. Neither does the comment in 1 Peter 5:13; Mark was a very common name in the Roman empire at the time that Peter and Papias wrote. Several passages jumble Galilean topography, indicating that the author, or his sources, were unfamiliar with the actual geography of that area (as Peter assumably would have been). Finally, the connection of the Gospel of Mark with persecution, and persection with Rome, is dubious. Persection was widespread and sporatic beyond the borders of the city of Rome. All this goes to say that we know little of the author of Mark or its geographical origin. The above arguments do not disprove that Mark and Peter were connected, but do question the traditional reasons for assuming that connection. Date The text of the Gospel itself furnishes us with no clear information as to the time that it was written. Comments attributed to Jesus in Mark 13:1–2 (the "little Apocalypse", see below) have been seen as a reference to the destruction of the Temple, which would place the work after AD 70. Most scholars contrast these comments with the more specific ones in Luke and Matthew, and would be hesitant to assign a date later than 70-73 CE, the latter being when Jerusalem was finally and fully sacked. Nevertheless, a great majority of moderate and conservative scholars assign Mark a date between 65 and 70 CE, although there are vocal minority groups which argue for earlier or later dates. Two papyrologists, O'Callaghan and Thiede, have proposed an identification of a postage stamp-sized papyrus fragment found in a cave at Qumran, 7Q5, as containing Mark 6:52-53, raising the possibility that the Gospel was written and distributed prior to 68. Almost all other papyrologists, however, consider this identification of the fragment, and its supposition that early Christians lived at Qumran, to be dubious. Audience Mark is a Hellenistic gospel, written primarily for an audience of Greek-speaking residents of the Roman Empire. This is evidenced by the fact that it explains Jewish usages (7:3; 14:3; 14:12; 15:42) and takes care to interpret Aramaic words and phrases which a Gentile would be likely not to understand, such as "Boanerges" (3:17); "Talitha cumi" (5:41); "Corban" (7:11); "Bartimaeus" (10:46); "Abba" (14:36); "Eloi" (15:34). Mark also uses certain Latin words not found in any of the other Gospels, such as "speculator" (6:27, rendered AV "executioner"; RV "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). These usages are consistent with the hypothesis that Mark is writing in Greek, as a foreign language, for the first time. The Hellenism exhibited is not confined to language. The description in this Gospel of how the Sanhedrin (the authorities of the Judaic religion) plotted to execute Jesus has been used to promote and condone anti-Semitism. The demonization of Pharisees, or non-Hellenized Jews, would have directed this gospel at a Gentile audience; perhaps one only partly of Jewish extraction, as at Alexandria. The audience for Mark seems to have experienced some persecution, and would have been expecting more. (See Jews in the New Testament for further discussion.) Characteristics Characteristic of this text is the absence of a genealogy for Jesus, present (albeit in contradicting forms) in both Matthew and Luke. Mark also records with minuteness Jesus' very words (3:17; 5:41; 7:11, 34; 14:36) as well as his position (9:35) and gestures (3:5, 34; 5:32; 9:36; 10:16). He is also careful to record particulars of person (1:29, 36; 3:6, 22, etc.), number (5:13; 6:7, etc.), place (2:13; 4:1; 7:31, etc.), and time (1:35; 2:1; 4:35, etc.), which the other evangelists omit. The phrase "and straightway" occurs nearly forty times in this Gospel; in Luke, which is much longer, it is used only seven times, and in John only four times. In a more modern translation, this phrase would be rendered as "immediately" or "soon afterward". It is this immediacy which makes the gospel "a transcript of life" according to Brooke Foss Westcott. This immediacy is heightened by the frequent use of the present tense to describe Jesus' actions, although most translations do not represent this. At the same time, the repetitive use of "and straightaway" is an apparent indication that various literary forms and doublets have been loosely strung together to construct a continuous narrative; this usage suggests to some readers that Mark is not an author, but rather an editor, but an editor with a theological hand. Compare Matthew, which uses "and it came to pass" as a repetitive link in retelling Mark's story, though more eloquently and elaborately, in the exact same sequence. These linking formulas are not as evident in English translations as they are in the Greek texts. Since the time of Papias, Mark has commonly been thought of as a rapid succession of vivid pictures loosely strung together without much attempt to bind them into a whole or give the events in their natural sequence. This pictorial power is that which specially characterizes the author, so that "if anyone desires to know an evangelical fact, not only in its main features and grand results, but also in its most minute and so to speak more graphic delineation, he must betake himself to Mark". Redaction criticism since the 1950s, however, has produced another view of Mark's gospel: one of a carefully constructed narrative with a detailed internal structure. This is especially apparent in the threefold passion prediction cycle. Mark also has other peculiarities: Only in this gospel is Jesus addressed (by himself, except for once) as the Son of Man. The testing of Jesus in the wilderness for forty days does not contain any discourse between Satan and Jesus. Jesus heals using his fingers and spit (7:33) Jesus must lay his hands on a blind man twice to cure him (8:22). There are no favorite disciples. Jesus is not yet known as the "crucified savior"—that theology is yet to come, courtesy of Paul. The underlying theme of this Gospel may be expressed in the motto: "Jesus came ... preaching the gospel of the kingdom" (1:14). Yet the Gospel also portrays Jesus as consistently attempting to hide his identity as the Messiah from the general public. This persistent theme is often referred to as the Messianic secret, and is one of the distinguishing characteristics of Mark in constrast with the other Gospels. Markan priority among the Synoptics The synoptic problem is an investigation into whether and how the gospels of Mark, Matthew, and Luke used each other or common sources. Most researchers into the synoptic problem have concluded that Mark was written first and used by Matthew and Luke (Markan priority). Markan priority was first proposed in 1786 but it did not come to dominate critical scholarship until the mid-19th century. The major alternative to Markan priority is the traditional view that Matthew was written first. Of the two solutions to the synoptic problem featuring Markan priority, the Two-Source Hypothesis is the most popular and it also posits that that the gospels of Matthew and Luke also draw extensively from a now-lost "sayings" gospel—called Q after German Quelle, "source". Out of a total of 662 verses, Mark has 406 in common with both Matthew and Luke, 145 with Matthew alone, 60 with Luke alone, and at most 51 peculiar to itself, according to a common concordance. The "little Apocalypse" of Mark 13 Exegesis is often made to show correspondences with the calamities of the First Jewish Revolt of AD 66–70. Jesus' remarks in 13:1–2, seen as a reference to the destruction of the Temple, would place the work after AD 70. The passage predicts that the Temple would be torn down completely—"Not one stone will be left upon another." Indeed, the Temple was completely destroyed by the forces of the Roman general Titus (Josephus, Jewish War VI). (The Western Wall, which still stands, was not a part of the Temple proper, but rather part of a larger structure on which the Temple and other buildings stood.) This fulfilled prophecy would place the passage before the destruction of Jerusalem, for readers who affirm the reality of prophecies; others speculate that this an example of a vaticinium ex eventu (NL, loosely "prophecy after the event"; cf. Book of Daniel). Losses and early editing Mark is the shortest gospel. Manuscripts, both scrolls and codices, tend to lose text at the beginning and the end, not unlike a coverless paperback in a backpack. These losses are characteristically unconnected with excisions. For instance, Mark 1:1 has been found in two different forms. Half of the discovered texts contain the phrase "Son of God", while half do not. (NB: The article "the" is not present in Greek MSS; it was instead added to English translations for flow and compatibility with Church doctrine. "A Son of God" would also be a correct translation, as would the omission the article entirely.) An axiom adopted by some readers, though not by professionals generally, is: "A shorter version generally means an earlier form." Judicious editing of unwanted material, however, may also produce a shorter document. The discovery of sections that have been added to the familiar, canonical Mark, quoted in a letter of Clement of Alexandria, is discussed in the entry for Secret Gospel of Mark. Interpolations may not be editorial, either. It is a common experience that glosses written in the margins of manuscripts get incorporated into the text as copies are made. Any particular example is open to dispute of course, but one may take note of Mark 7:16, "Let anyone with ears to hear, listen," which is not found in early manuscripts. Ending There was some dispute among textual critics in the 19th century as to whether 16:9-20, describing a resurrected Jesus, were actually part of the original Gospel, or if they were added later. The oldest extant manuscripts do not contain these verses and the style differs from the rest of Mark, suggesting that they were a later addition. A few manuscripts even include a different ending after verse 8. By the 5th century, at least 4 different endings have been attested. (See Mark 16 for a more comprehensive treatment of this topic.) The third-century theologian Origen quoted the resurrection stories in Matthew, Luke, and John but failed to quote anything after Mark 16:8, suggesting that his copy of Mark stopped there, but this is an argument of silence. Critics are divided over whether the original ending at 16:8, which ends the Gospel at the empty tomb without further explanation, was intentional or accidental from the loss of a final sheet or even the author's death. Some of those who believe that the 16:8 ending was intentional suggest a connection to the theme of the Messianic Secret. References New Catholic Encyclopedia: Mark, Gospel of (A bit dated, but very informative) www.newadvent.org Michael W. Holmes, To Be Continued...The Many Endings of Mark, Bible Review, Volume 17, Number 4, August 2001 Edgar V. McKnight, What is Form Criticism?, 1997 Norman Perrin, What is Redaction Criticism? Rudolf Bultmann, History of the Synoptic Tradition, Harper & Row, 1963 Raymond E. Brown, Joseph Fitzmeyer, Roland Murphy, Jerome Biblical Commentary, Prentice Hall, 1968 William Telford, Editor, The Interpretation of Mark, Fortress Press, 1985 External links A textual commentary on the Gospel of Mark Detailed textcritical discussion of the 300 most important variants of the Greek text (PDF, 411 pages) The various endings of Mark Detailed textcritical description of the evidence, the manuscripts, and the variants of the Greek text (PDF, 17 pages) Secret Gospel of Mark Description of an altered Gospel of Mark in Egypt, mentioned in a letter by Clement of Alexandria, with images. Easton's Bible Dictionary, 1897: mainstream Protestant scholarship of the 19th century summed up for the average reader Early Christian Writings:Mark in numerous English translations, on-line scholarly resources Read Mark at Bible Gateway Mark on Wikisource Most Popular Articles: Music    Musical Instruments    Guitar    Classical Music    History    Music Definition    Country Music    Rock Music    Pop Music    Hip Hop    Rap    DJ    Video Games    Casino Games    Poker    Blackjack    Casinos    Real Estate    Loan    Auction    eBay    Marketing    Search Engine Optimization    File Sharing    MP3    Music Industry    Kazaa    Internet    Supermodel    Fashion    Fashion Designers    Erotica    Modeling    Clothing    Boots    Shoes    Diamond Engagement Rings    Diamond    Rugs    Gospel Music    Affiliate    E-Commerce    Radio This article is licensed under the GNU Free Documentation License at http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/fdl.html You may copy and modify it as long as the entire work (including additions) remains under this license. You must provide a link to http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/fdl.html To view or edit this article at Wikipedia go to http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel_of_Mark