Covenant History
Mark: Behold My Servant
Sunday, May 17, Anno Domini 2009
Author
We come today to the second of the four Gospels. Like the others, Mark is anonymous. That is, the author of the Gospel doesn’t identify himself. It is the case with all four Gospels that the authors are known to us only by tradition. The church father, Papias, bishop of Hierapolis, writing about a.d. 120, says that he had received from the apostle John that “Mark became Peter’s interpreter and wrote down accurately, but not in order, all that he remembered of the things said and done by the Lord.”
The early church historian, Eusebius of Caesarea, says,
Peter’s hearers, not satisfied with a single hearing or with the unwritten teaching of the divine message, pleaded with Mark, whose Gospel we have, to leave them a written summary of the teaching given them verbally, since he was a follower of Peter. Nor did they cease until they persuaded him and so caused the writing of what is called the Gospel according to Mark. It is said that the apostle was delighted at their enthusiasm and approved the reading of the book in the churches.
And there is other testimony to the same effect.
So the picture that emerges is that Mark is recounting the teaching of Peter concerning the life and ministry of Christ. Mark is Peter’s scribe, as it were.
What evidence we have in the book is at least consistent with this.
“Mark’s account is especially vivid when recounting incidents involving Peter. It presents the weaknesses of Peter as well as the disciples as a whole, and omits praiseworthy or noticeable references to Peter reported in Matthew and Luke.”
For instance, Mark includes Peter’s recognition and confession of Jesus as the Christ, but omits the blessing Jesus gave him on account of this, and the promise of the keys of the kingdom of heaven (comp. Matt. 16:13-20 with Mk. 8:27-30). Mark omits these things but includes the severe rebuke Jesus directed toward Peter when he attempted to dissuade the Lord from going up to Jerusalem to be crucified. Jesus said to him, “Get behind me, Satan! For you are not setting your mind on the things of God, but on the things of man” (Mk. ).
We see here something of Peter’s humility, don’t we? He was not one to toot his own horn. At first he was. At first he was quick to say things like, “I will never desert you, Lord!”
Jesus: “Are you sure Peter?”
Peter: “Absolutely! Even if everyone else should, I won’t! You can count on me, Lord.”
Jesus: “Peter, not only are you going to desert me; you’re going to deny me, too.”
Peter: “No way, Lord! Not me!”
Jesus: “Yes, Peter, you. And not once or twice; but three times you will deny me.”
Peter was quick to proclaim his own loyalty, quick to set himself apart from the others, quick to distinguish himself from them, especially from their failings. But when it was all said and done, Peter was humbled. He was chastened. He was corrected. He doesn’t lift himself above the others any more. When he gives his account of the ministry of Christ in Mark’s Gospel, Peter doesn’t stand out above the rest. He appears there with all of his weaknesses, but few of his strengths.
We see this humility in his first epistle, also. “I exhort the elders among you, as a fellow elder and a witness of the sufferings of Christ…” A fellow elder. Not a lord in the church. Not the Pope. An elder. “Shepherd the flock of God…not domineering over those in your charge, but being examples to the flock” (see 1 Pet. 5:1-5).
Perhaps it should also be mentioned that there is a vividness of detail in Mark’s Gospel that gives the impression the story is being told by an eyewitness, which of course Peter was.
It appears, then, that the Gospel of Mark is closely associated with the apostle Peter, and might not be inappropriately called, “The Gospel According to Peter”, Peter being the principle source of the information, but Mark doing the actual writing.
Mark Who?
But who was this Mark? In the case of Matthew, we know that he was one of the original twelve. Likewise for Peter. But who was Mark?
We encounter Mark several times in the NT. He is first mentioned in Acts 12:12.
From this passage we gather that his family had some prominence in the Jerusalem church. His mother (perhaps a widow) seems to have been a wealthy woman with a large home which was regularly used as a meeting place for the gathering of the church. Why else would Peter think of going there? Of all the places Peter could have gone upon being released from prison, he goes to Mary’s house, where the church is gathered for prayer. One early tradition has it that the upper room where Jesus celebrated the Last Supper, and where the 120 were gathered on the day Pentecost, was in Mary’s house.
The next thing we learn about Mark is that he accompanied Paul and Barnabas on their first missionary journey (Acts 13:5). Early on in the journey, however, he backed out (Acts ). This became a source of contention between Paul and Barnabas when the time came to go on their second missionary journey—Barnabas wishing to take Mark, Paul thinking he had proved himself unreliable (Acts -41).
One of the reasons Barnabas was willing to give Mark a second chance was because Mark was his cousin, as we learn from Colossians ().
It’s very interesting that later, we find Paul speaking very highly of Mark. In Philemon, for instance, he mentions him together with Aristarchus, Demas, and Luke, as his “fellow workers” (Philemon ). He also commends him to the church at Colossae and encourages them to welcome him (Col. 4:10). But the clincher is when, late in life, in his last correspondence, not long before his martyrdom, Paul writes in 2 Timothy, “Get Mark and bring him with you, for he is very useful to me for ministry” (4:11).
Peter also mentions him (1 Pet. ).
One other thing I want to point out is an incident recorded in the 14th chapter (-52). This is the only Gospel that records this incident (the young man fleeing), leading many biblical scholars to conclude that this was Mark—that he had been a follower of Jesus, was with him when he was arrested, was nearly apprehended himself, but escaped with his skin. The fact that he wore a “linen” cloth implies that he was well off, which seems to fit what we know of his mother Mary. One wonders why the event would be recorded. It’s not otherwise a significant thing. It was often the case that a writer who wished to be otherwise anonymous would include some small detail of his involvement in the events he records. (Similar to some famous painters who would sometimes put their face on a minor figure in a painting; e.g., Sandro Botticelli Adoration of the Magi; Piero della Francesca’s The Resurrection)
Intended Audience
Mark seems to be writing for a largely non-Jewish audience; or at least he anticipates that a good number of his readers will not have had a Jewish background. We draw this conclusion from a couple of facts:
First, there are numerous translations of Aramaic words
v James the son of Zebedee and John the brother of James (to whom he gave the name Boanerges, that is, Sons of Thunder) ()
v Taking her by the hand he said to her, “Talitha cumi,” which means, “Little girl, I say to you, arise” ()
v But you say, “If a man tells his father or his mother, Whatever you would have gained from me is Corban” (that is, given to God)—(Mark )
v And looking up to heaven, he sighed and said to him, “Ephphatha,” that is, “Be opened” (Mark )
v And they brought him to the place called Golgotha (which means Place of a Skull) (Mark )
v And at the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, “Eloi, Eloi, lema sabachthani?” which means, “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?” (Mark )
Also, there are several explanations of Jewish terms and customs:
v Mark 7:1-3
v Mark
v Mark 15:42-43
In addition, the location of the Mount of Olives in relation to the Temple is pointed out for the readers: “And as he sat on the Mount of Olives opposite the temple…" (Mark 13:3). Presumably this is done because the intended audience was unaware of this, which would have been an obvious geographical fact for those acquainted with the region.
These things suggest that the intended audience did not consist primarily of Jews or those who had a close acquaintance with Jerusalem.
Style
Let us talk for a moment about the style of the book. Mark’s is the shortest of the four Gospels and presents us with a much faster paced narrative than any of the others. There are 119 pericopes (or discrete literary units) in Mark. The average length of the pericopes in Mark is shorter than in any other book, meaning that he is giving us a briefer account of each event and quickly moving on to the next episode.
| # Words | # Pericopes | # of words/ pericope |
Matthew | 18,345 | 184 | 99 |
Mark | 11,304 | 119 | 94 |
Luke | 19,482 | 192 | 101 |
John | 15,635 | 96 | 163 |
This fast pace of Mark is evident also in the repeated use of the word immediately, which occurs 35 times in the book (e.g., , 12, 18, 20, 21, 23, 29).
“Mark tends to include vivid descriptive details, and he prefers Greek verbs that portray an action in process.” The book is full of action. There is more emphasis in Mark on our Lord’s works than there is on his words. You might remember that I said Matthew arranges the material in his Gospel around 5 major blocks of teaching (discourses). The words of Christ receive greater emphasis than his works in Matthew. Just the opposite in Mark. There are really only two major discourses in Mark (chaps. 4 and 13). They correspond to two of the discourses in Matthew (chaps. 13 and 24). But they are much briefer accounts in both instances.
Again, the emphasis in Mark is on the action. Jesus is working, doing, acting. And this brings us to the theme of the book.
Theme
When we were discussing the Gospel of Matthew I mentioned that it is traditional to identify the theme of each of the Gospels like this.
Matthew—Behold your King!
Mark—Behold my Servant!
Luke—Behold the Man!
John—Behold your God!
Mark presents us with a picture of Jesus as the Servant of the Lord.
Matthew begins his Gospel by giving us a genealogy of Christ, emphasizing his royalty. Matthew begins by saying, “The book of the genealogy of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham” (1:1). Right out of the chute Matthew identifies Jesus as the Son of David; and, as we have seen, throughout his Gospel he emphasizes the point.
Mark doesn’t give us a genealogy. His emphasis is on Jesus as the servant of the Lord. No one cares about the genealogy of a servant. Nobody cares about the ancestry of a servant. It’s not important. What’s important to know about a servant is, “Is he faithful? Does he do the work required of him? Is he diligent?” Not, “What family does he come from”?
Mark presents Jesus as the faithful servant, doing the will of the Lord. He’s preaching and teaching; he’s shepherding the flock of God; he’s healing the sick, raising the dead, casting out demons, and working other miracles.
Mark’s selection of material and the way in which he presents it suggests that he has Isaiah’s Servant Songs in mind. There are four passages in Isaiah which are known as the “Servant Songs.” These speak of the coming Messiah as the Lord’s Servant.
Isaiah 42:1-7
Isaiah 49:1-6
Isaiah 50:4-9
Isaiah 52:13-53:12
Conclusion
The last thing I want to mention about Mark is the fact that he devotes more space (in terms of the percentage of the overall material) to the Passion of Christ, than any of the other Gospels. In fact, someone has said that the Gospel of Mark is about the Passion of Christ, with a long introduction.
Matthew: 12%
Mark: 17%
Luke: 11%
John: 12%