Mark 1:1

Introduction: Current perception of the book of mark.

It is a travesty that in our time the book of Mark my well be the underrated gospel of the four accounts.

Luke is known as the detailed account of the doctor.

Matthew is the messianic argument for Jesus’s fulfilment of prophecy.

John is the the theologically packed evangelistic book which has as its stated purpose that the reader believe and have life.

Mark is the fast paced one which is short, emphasis on the word immediately.

I had a pastor once tell me that mark is the gospel for student ministry.

Before we go into the background of the book I think we should dispel this common perception of Mark’s gospel. To accomplish this task we will consider why treating the book of mark as the second string gospel is an unfortunate pitfall which some seem to have fallen into. Let us consider the claim in light biblical text so that our thinking on the issue can be best informed by an infallible source.

Practical considerations:

Mark has priority on the dynamic doings of Christ over doctrinal discourse

While some prefer to have the implications easily discernable to them through descriptive pros, Mark requires more of the reader to understand not by lining up the propositions of Christ, but by evaluating the actions of our Lord.

For example.

It is often more difficult to read a room than a pamphlet

His life is cumezerate with his doctrine.

Background

Author.

The universal witness, that is testimony, of the early Church attributes authorship to Mark.

An early patristic [expl] named Papias of Hieropolis, who wrote in the late first century to mid second century, explained that Mark his recollections of Peters sayings.

Justin Martyr, another patristic, who lived in the second century, explains that Mark wrote the gospel as a response to people who desired not only the auditory but the written form of the Apostle Peter’s account of Christ.

So while the circumstantial motives of why he wrote what he wrote when he did are not written for us in Scripture, we know from the inward testimony of the Spirit and the concensus of our early church brethren, that this is indeed Scripture and written by Mark.

Mark is not an obscure character drawn out of church history, but is mentioned in the Scripture.

[Acts 12:12; 25] he is referenced as John who is also called mark.

His mother, Mary, a common name at the time, housed early meetings of the church.

Barnabas, his cousin [Col. 4:10] had a sharp words with Paul over whether or not he should come along due to having deserted the brothers in Pamphylia. This led to Barnabas’s and Paul’s separation in the work of ministry [Acts. 15:37-41].

Paul and Mark would be reconciled as is evident in Paul’s letter to the Colossians [Col. 4:10-11 “Aristarchus, my fellow prisoner, sends you his greetings; and also Barnabas’s cousin Mark (about whom you received instructions; if he comes to you, welcome him); and also Jesus who is called Justus; these are the only fellow workers for the kingdom of God who are from the circumcision, and they have proved to be an encouragement to me.”

Audience and Date.

The timing of Mark’s gospel is estimated to be prior to 70 A.D. and though modern scholarship claims that it is the first gospel to be written, the early church testifies to Matthew being written prior to Mark.

It is generally assumed by the way he writes, translating of aramaic terms, that the audience was Roman.

The idea is that if this was to a jewish or Palistinain audience then the words would not have needed to be translated since these groups would not have needed the words to be translatedd.

Overview