History of the Gospel of Mark - Assignment Example

History of the Gospel of Mark The gospel of Mark is the second book of the New Testament. It is one of the four books of the gospel of Jesus Christ in the Holy Bible. The history of this book is interesting and at times controversial in nature. This essay will attempt to analyze the findings of some major scholars in the field of early Church history. Of the four gospels, Mark is the shortest with 16 chapters. The account of Jesus Christ and his activities are in agreement with the other three gospels-Mathew, Luke and John. The book details the baptism, temptation, miracles, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. Researchers assert that the gospel of Mark was anonymously written but by tradition has been attributed to John Mark, the evangelist. It is also claimed that the content is thought to be the report of Simon Peter. Researchers also agree that the book was probably written between 50 and 70 A.D. in Italy or in Rome. Further, there is an indication of a secret book of Mark which so far has not had any significant impact on the history of Mark. The main evidence about the authorship and date of the gospel of Mark comes from the writing of Eusebius of Caesarea. Wettereau (as cited in Wikipedia) proposes that Eusebius of Caesarea was the bishop of Caesarea. Eusebius is often referred to as the father of Church history because of his recording of the history of the early Christian Church. Eusebius used sources such as Papias to obtain his information. Papias was a church leader in the first half of the second century and was later canonized as a saint. Eusebius (as cited in Kirby 2007and Malick 2007) quotes Papias as reporting that, 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. Two other sources ascribing the authorship of the gospel of Mark to John Mark include the writing of Peter himself in the book of Acts and the motivation of the early church. Kirby 2007 posits that the speech of Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ, in Acts 10:34- 40, can serve as a synopsis for the book of Mark. Thus, contributing to the argument that Mark, the disciple of Peter may have authored the book. Secondly, scholars believe there is no viable motivation for the early Church to ascribe the authorship of the gospel of Mark to a disciple of Peter and not to an apostle. Further, Malick 2007 adds that Mark was not even an individual of high standing in the early church. Kirby argues that these two sources as well as the evidence from Eusebius should be strong enough evidence to prove that Mark, a disciple of Peter is in fact the author of the gospel of Mark. Although the writing of the book of Mark has traditionally been ascribed to John Mark, many scholars claim that the author of the gospel of Mark lacks authentic data of the geography of Palestine. Dennis Nineham (as cited in Kirby 2007) argues that Mark “was not directly acquainted with Palestine.” Both Nineham and Randel Helm, agree that Mark was unaware of the location of the villages of Bethany and Bethphage in relation to the Jericho road. For in the gospel of Mark 11:1, the author writes that Jesus came first to Bethphage before Bethany when in reality one must first come to Bethany when approaching Jerusalem from Jericho. Consistent with the controversial nature of authorship is the questionable date of Mark. Contemporary researchers believe that both Mathew and Luke used the gospel of Mark as a reference. Therefore, if both Luke and Mathew were written around the year 80 A.D. then the book of Mark would not have been written past 75 A.D. (Wikipedia and Malick 2007) On the other hand, traditional scholars believed that Mark was the second gospel to be written. They propose that Mathew was written first. Hence, they affirm that the gospel of Mark was considered to be an “abstract of Mathew.” (Malick 2007) Scholars cite additional evidence for Mathew as the first written gospel in that Mathew was an apostle. Therefore in writing a gospel, he did not need to depend on the details described by another eyewitness account. (Malick 2007) Further, if Mark, the disciple of Peter, is the author, then given the nature of the oral tradition, the book would not have been written before the death of Peter in 65 A.D. Moreover, the gospel of Mark is known by scholars as “The Little Apocalypse” (Kirby 2007). The book was assigned this name due to its repeated reference to the revolt of the Jews. In Mark 13:1-2, Jesus predicts the total ruin of the temple. Thus, scholars such as Robert Einsenman suggest that the book was written after the fall of the temple in 70 A.D. (Kirby 2007) The Wikipedia, encyclopedia suggests there is no definite way of determining how early the book of Mark was written since scholars found Callaghan and Thiede claim that fragments of Mark was found among the Dead Sea Scrolls as lacking in evidence. Jose O’Callaghan and Carsten Peter Thiede were two papyrologists. They designated lettering on a small piece of papyrus found in a cave at Qumran to a portion of the gospel of Mark, specifically Mark 6:52-53. However, many papyrologists dispute Callaghan and Thiede findings as dubious. Raymond Brown (as cited in Wikipedia) argues that the fragment of papyrus was written on a scroll and all early manuscripts come from codices. Papyrologists also claim that the fragment could have been left in Qumran by a Christian who lived there around the time of the destruction of the Qumran community. Remarkably, researchers believe that there may be a secret gospel of Mark. Stephen 2005 and Peter 2006 (as cited in Wikipedia) suggest that Clement of Alexandria is believed to have written a Mar Saba letter containing references to a formerly unknown Secret Gospel of Mark. Kirby 2007 posits that this letter found in 1958 by Morton Smith was published in 1973 and gives insight into the possible origin of the gospel of Mark in Rome. Although many scholars deem the letter authentic, there are those who remain skeptical that an early Secret Mark existed. They believe the letter to be a “modern-day forgery.” Stephen 2005 and Peter 2006 (as cited in Wikipedia) Hence, the verdict is still out for the inclusion of this Secret Mark into the history of the gospel of Mark. Ambiguity also exists in the determination of the place of origin of this gospel. Scholars believe that Mark’s main purpose was to write to the Gentiles, particularly, those in Rome. Mark 12:42 is one example of this belief. Further support for Rome as the place of origin for the book of Mark is that it was written in Greek, which is considered to be the language of the early Roman Christians. However, authors of the Gospel of Mark in the Wikipedia encyclopedia suggest that the Latinized vocabulary used throughout Mark prompts critics to believe that it may have been written in any one of the provinces of the Western Roman Empire. Interestingly, Malick 2007 posits that the Anti-Marcionite Prologue to Mark (A.D. 160-180) mentions “Mark as the Gospel writer…wrote down this same gospel in the regions of Italy.” (Malick 2007) Nevertheless, Reginald Fuller, (as cited in Kirby 2007) proposes that many scholars have accepted Irenaeus’ statement on Rome as the place of origin of the gospel of Mark. Irenaeus was the bishop of Lugdunum. Like Papias he was canonized and is considered to be a father of the church. Fuller concluded, “We are drawn to suggest Antioch as the most likely place of origin.” (Kirby 2007) In conclusion, the author of this paper has discovered that the history of the gospel of Mark is highly volatile. There is strong evidence to support the writings of Mark between 50 A.D. and 60 A.D. Conversely, there is also data to verify the date of Mark’s writing to be between 60A.D. and 70 A.D. Thus, one can only conclude that the gospel of Mark was written within a twenty year range that is between 50 A.D. and 70 A.D. No scholar has yet presented proof for Mark’s gospel to be written before 50 A.D. or after 70 A.D. In addition to the debate on the exact date of the gospel, there is also disagreement about the author. Certain scholars have provided data to show that the author of the gospel of Mark was indeed John Mark. Yet others claim that the author of this gospel is anonymous. However, although John Mark has traditionally been ascribed the authorship he demonstrates little knowledge of the geography of Jerusalem. (Malick 2007) In light of these various fragment of evidence one can only conclude that the verdict is still out on a definite history of the gospel of Mark. In spite of the discovery of a possible secret book of Mark and the conflicting nature of its history one has been given adequate data to determine whether or not one would focus on the content of the gospel of Mark as has been passed on from generation to generation. Works Cited AllAboutJesusChrist.org 2002. 25 November 2007. Gospel of Mark.Wikipedia: The Free encyclopedia. 23 November 2007. < http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel_of_Mark> Kirby, Peter. 2007. Gospel of Mark. Early Christian Writings. 24 November 2007. http://www. earlychristianwritings.com/mark.html Malick, David. An introduction into the Gospel of Mark. Bible.org. 24 November 2007 New King James Version. Jack Hayford. gen.ed, Nashville: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1991. Crosswalk.com. Read More