The Conflict between the Gospels of Mark and John - Essay Example

Conflict between the Gospels of Mark and John The gospels of Mark and John present different interpretations of the messages of Jesus that are not entirely compatible. In agreement with the statement, an analysis of the various interpretations is necessary. The Gospel of Mark, according to bible scholars does not have an author it can be attributed to (Muddiman and John 56). The gospel itself is all about action and follows events in Jesus’ life and eventual death. This aside, it offers lessons of how the life of Jesus relates to individuals in their day to day undertakings. The author of the gospel is believed with some degree of uncertainty to be a disciple of peter who was a disciple of Jesus (Muddiman and John 22). John Mark, the supposed author of this gospel is believed to have been tasked with recording in writing everything that he saw and heard as he followed Peter. The Gospel of Mark is assumed to be the oldest of the four gospels, namely Matthew, Mark, Luke and John by a number of decades, perhaps, according to scholars (Muddiman and John 34). The gospel of Mark provides references more on Jesus Christ’s adult life, and this might be part of the reason why the gospel is also the shortest of the four gospels. The gospel of Mark is deficient of accounting for the birth of Christ, which according to the other gospels was a virgin birth. Mark does not mention anywhere that Joseph was husband to Mary, the mother of Jesus and only refers to Jesus as the son of Mary (Muddiman and John 26). Mark is seen as an earliest of the four gospels, and his writings are narrative and to the point. The intended audience of the gospel of Mark is believed to be the Greek residents in the Roman Empire, also referred to as the gentiles in the bible (Muddiman, John, and John Barton 42). Mark strived to put emphasis on the life of Jesus and sought to provide proof that indeed Jesus was the messiah that the Old Testament predicted would come. Mark tried to prove that Jesus was the son of God by explaining that Jesus was sin-free. To the extent of showing that Jesus was sin free, Mark illustrated a number of miracles Jesus had performed to prove that Jesus had power of natural elements. Mark tries not to focus primarily on the power of Jesus over nature but on Miracles such as his resurrection and power over death (Muddiman and John 79). A debate has ensued over how the gospel comes to an abrupt end with some scholars believing that it was not concluded by John Mark himself but by some other author. The ending for the gospel does not include any appearances of Christ after the women’s visit to the tomb on the morning of Easter (Muddiman and John 36). The gospel simply comes to and after 16 chapters, compared to the 28 in Matthew. 24 in Luke and 21 in John The gospel of Mark further gives no reference of any individuals named in the other gospels especially in the book of John of anyone that saw Christ after the resurrection (Muddiman and John 46). According to the gospel, no one saw Christ, and this contradicts with the gospel of john. Future sighting of Christ after his death and resurrection are in the northern city of Galilee, in between the resurrection and Christ travel to Galilee, Mark mentions nothing of it (Muddiman and John 53). This deficiency in the events of the life of Christ influenced the placing of the book as second after Matthew, in spite of evidence pointing to the fact that Mark was the first gospel to be written. There exist a number of differences between the two gospels of Mark and john, the gospels end up giving different interpretations of Jesus’ teachings. The timings on the crucifixion of Christ differ in the two books (Muddiman and John 77). According to Mark, it took place at 9 O’clock a day after the Passover while John explains that the crucifixion took place at noon on the Passover date. John’s gospel is a theological one and explains that Jesus as a son of god was born of Virgin Mary. The gospel further selects miracles that were done by Jesus on individuals and tries to explain how the teachings and miracles of Jesus’ life impacted on individual’s lives (Muddiman and John 67). Miracles in the book of John are spiritual in nature as opposed to those in the gospel of Mark that sought to provide proof of Jesus being the son of God. Mark puts focus on the teachings of Jesus as the Son of Man while the gospel of John puts emphasis on Jesus teachings, giving him the title of Son of God (Muddiman and John 89). In the gospel of Mark, Jesus teachings have less parables and the book itself is intellectual with little narrative. According to the gospel of John, Jesus teachings were more focused on Jesus himself being the kingdom. John’s gospel explains Jesus cleansing of the temple at the beginning of his ministry while Mark places this event towards the end (Muddiman and John 102). The gospel of John on the other hand on omits important events such as the event of Jesus calling his 12 disciples. The gospel of John sets the resurrection of Jesus in Jerusalem while the gospel of Mark sets the same happenings in Galilee. John’s gospel delves more about what happened after Jesus’ resurrection while some of the teachings and miracles of Jesus such as the adulterous woman only feature in the gospel but are not found in the other gospels all together (Muddiman and John 113). John’s gospel focuses on Christ’s divinity, explaining that Jesus’ teachings are based on him being God in form of human flesh. The gospel fails to mention the temptation of Christ as well as the Lord’s Supper(Muddiman, John, and John Barton 106). John also fails to mention the episode of Jesus chasing demons or the Sermon on the Mount which form an important basis for the teachings of Christ. In conclusion, the two gospels differ greatly. Although the story is supposed to be about a single individual that is Jesus Christ, a number of variations in the teaching and timings of events are evident. The fact that all original copies of the gospels cannot be traced means that no amount of certainty can provide proof as to which gospel is more factual (Muddiman, John, and John Barton 115). The gospel of John is more spiritual and forms the basis of the Christian foundation. In the book, we see Jesus as God in human flesh and therefore seek to understand the teaching of Christ as Gods on words (Muddiman and John 122). The Gospel of Mark exhibits a messianic secret and according to the Mark, Jesus appears to have instructed him not to reveal the miracles Jesus had performed (Muddiman, John, and John Barton 119). At the end of the book, Mark finally reveals Jesus as the messiah. On the other hand, according to John’s gospel, the audience already knows Jesus is the messiah as Jesus already reveals to the world that he is the messiah at the beginning of the book (Muddiman and John 122). Work Cited Muddiman John and John Barton. The Gospels. Updated selection.ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010. Print. Read More