Apologetics: Reliability of Mark’s Gospel

Having seen the reliability of the NT as a whole through documentary evidence, eye-witness account, chain of custody, corroborative evidence, and archaeological evidence, we now pass on to see the reliability of one of the 27 books of the NT, the Gospel of Mark as a sample case. The reliability of the other books also can be worked out similarly, but right now we will examine the case of the Gospel of Mark.

Background of Mark, the author:

Mark was also known as John, for in the 1^st century AD it was common for the Jewish people to have two names, one of Hebrew and the other Greek. Marcus, is Mark, his name in Greek and John was his Hebraic name. This we see in Acts 12:12, 25 and Acts 15:37. He was ‘John whose surname was Mark,’ and ‘John called Mark.’ From these verses, we infer that Mark was a Palestine Jew, whose mother Mary was well to do, whose house in Jerusalem was big enough to be the meeting place for the local church to gather. He also knew Peter the Apostle well, for Peter on release from jail by the miraculous intervention of the angel of God, headed straight to his mother’s house.[1] It is possible that he was converted by Peter.

Testimony about Mark writing the Gospel:

The Internal Evidences: The writing style of the Gospel (here Gospel of Mark) is that of one whose first language was a Semitic language like Aramaic.[2] He uses a number of Aramaic words, for example, Thalitha, cumi which was translated ‘Little girl, I say to you, arise;’[3] ‘Corban,’ which meant ‘a gift to God’;[4] ‘Ephphatha,’ meaning ‘Be opened,’ which Jesus said while  opening the eyes of the blind man;[5] Jesus addresses God as his Father endearingly as ‘Abba, Father,’ while praying at Gethsemane[6] and again Jesus from the cross cries out in agony, ‘Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani,’ which translated as ‘My Father, My Father, why have you forsaken me?’[7]

The outline of Mark’s Gospel correlates well with Peter’s outline as we see in his preaching at Acts 1:21-22 and Acts 10:37-41. Peter limited his preaching to the public life, death, resurrection and ascension of Jesus. Peter starts from the baptism of Jesus by John the Baptist and ends with ascension. Similar outline is followed by Mark; he omits the birth narratives of Matthew and Luke and starts his Gospel from the activities of John the Baptist. He gives a sharp, matter of fact, short and abridged version of the ministry of Jesus, ending it in his passion and ascension.

Mark also dilutes the instances where Peter shows indiscretion or less faith, may be just not to embarrass his mentor. This could be seen in a comparative reading of Mark’s Gospel along with that of Matthew’s or Luke’s or John’s Gospels. Examples that could be cited are Peter’s lack of faith on the lake – Mark 6:50 with Matthew 14:22-31, where Mark omits Jesus chiding the ever adventurous Peter, as “O you of little faith, why did you doubt?” which is brought forth by Matthew. Again Peter’s behavior at the feet washing by Jesus narrated by John is detail in John 13:2-9 is almost omitted by Mark. Peter’s denial of his Master is likewise put forth in milder terms than Matthew who mentions that at the third identification of him being with the accused Jesus, ‘he began to curse and swear’ that he did not know the Lord.[8]

Mark also gives personal details of Peter’s life, like his home in Capernaum and his mother-in-law being sick whom Jesus healed.[9] In all these internal evidences we see that Mark is writing a true narrative though abridged form of the teaching and preaching of Peter, the direct disciple of Jesus and the Apostle of Christ.

External Evidences: The early church fathers beginning with Papias attest about Mark and the Gospel he wrote. Papias, the Bishop of Hierapolis (AD 60-130) mentions that Mark was the interpreter of Peter and that he followed Peter and wrote it down. Irenaeus (AD 130-200) calls Mark the disciple and interpreter of Peter, who gave his preaching in written form. Justin Martyr (AD 150) calls Mark’s Gospel as the ‘Memoir of Peter,’ and mentions that Jesus renamed the sons of Zebedee, John and James as ‘Sons of Thunder,’[10] because both had impetuous temper. This information is given only by Mark in his Gospel.

Clement of Alexandria (AD 150-215) says people besought Mark, the follower of Peter to write and record Peter’s teachings. Eusebius, (260-340), the writer of Ecclesiastical History, who was also the Bishop of Alexandria, mentions that Peter preached in Rome and people requested Mark to write it out, and he wrote the Gospel. He further states that Peter knew about this but said nothing. That meant Peter was aware of Mark writing down his preaching and had no objection to the same.

Tertullin (AD 160-225), who wrote an Apologetics “Against Marcion,” affirms that Mark’s Gospel was written by Peter’s interpreter, Mark. The oldest fragment containing the list of NT books, Muratorian fragments dated 170 AD, affirms that Mark was present at Peter’s talks in Rome and that he recorded it.

Origen, (AD 185-254) says that among the undisputable gospels in the church, four are authentic, that of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John; regarding the Gospel of Mark he says, mark composed it in according to the instructions/teachings of Peter, who acknowledged him as his son.[11] It also indicates that many unauthorised apocryphal gospels were circulating along with the genuine ones. Of the three prologues written in Latin Bibles in 4^th century AD, known as Anti-Marcionite Prologue, Mark is referred to be ‘stump-fingered,’ that is, small fingers compared to his body and that he was the interpreter of Peter and that he wrote the Gospel in Italy.[12] Possibly what Peter spoke in Aramaic, Mark translated and wrote in Greek.

All these writings of the church fathers abundantly clarify that Mark wrote the Gospel of Mark and that he wrote it as a close associate of Peter and based on the preaching of Peter.  

Synoptic Gospels:

Of the first three Gospels, known as Synoptic Gospels,[13] Bruce points out that 606 out of 661 verses of Mark’s Gospel appears in Matthew’s Gospel. So also, 350 of Mark’s verse appear in Luke’s Gospel. That is to say Matthew has 50% of Mark’s material and Luke has 40% of it. Only 31 verses of Mark have no parallel in either Matthew or Luke. These show that Mark’s Gospel is the oldest and most probably the main source of both Matthew and Luke.[14]

Chain of Custody:          

As seen earlier, the gospels and other NT materials were faithfully passed on from reliable person to person, who were disciples of the previous person. In the case of Mark, he was the direct disciple of Peter, the disciple and Apostle of Jesus Christ; Mark worked in North Africa and left behind 5 disciples in Alexandria, who became bishops of Alexandra one after the other; the last one, Justus (AD 135), had a disciple named Pantaenus (AD 195), who passed on the baton to the famous Clement of Alexandria (AD 150-215), who had an equally famous disciple, Origen (AD 185-254) who wrote commentaries on all the books of NT; next in line was Pamphilus (AD 300), who wrote an apology for Origen and then comes the famous historian Eusebius (AD 263-339) and thereafter the book entered Codex Sinaiticus (AD 350).[15]

As we see there is a continuous chain of committed Christians who passed on the Gospel till it reached the stage where it was incorporated in the codex or the book in 4^th century AD, thus ensuring its careful transmission through ages. It does say a lot about the reliability of the Gospel of Mark as well of the other books of NT.

Mark’s life and death:

Mark must have been an educated, young man, who was associated with both Peter and Paul as their help and assistants. He must have written this gospel when Peter was still alive around 50s or the 60s. Peter and Paul perished in the persecution of Nero in 64 -65 AD. Mark, it is believed went to Alexandria in North Africa, carrying the gospel along with him and had his own ministry there until in 68 AD when he himself died a martyr.[16]

Thus ended a glorious life, life devoted to Christ and His teachings; but Mark passed it on to us as the Gospel of Mark, thus still remaining alive with us, testifying his faith in Christ to all of us.

Glory to be His name, who had raised such committed Christians and for having preserved His Word to the future generations for our benefit.

  

---

[1] Acts 12:5-12

[2] Aramaic was a Semitic language spoken by Middle East since early times. In 5^TH and 6^th centuries to became the official language of Persian Empire and the vernacular of the Middle East before being replaced by Greek after Alexander the Great. In Syria and Palestine, it survived and it is believed that Jesus and his disciples spoke Aramaic.

[3] Mark 5:41

[4] Mark 7:11

[5] Mark 7:34

[6] Mark 14:36. This endearing term is used by Paul twice in his letters at Romans 8:15 and Galatians 4:6.

[7] Mark 15:34 – a distinct quotation by Jesus of Psalm 22:1.

[8] Mark 14:66-72 and Matthew 26:69-75

[9] Mark 1:29-31

[10] Mark 3:17; according to Luke 9:54, the twosome wanted to call down fire from heaven to destroy the Samaritan village which refused to receive Jesus!

[11] 1 Peter 5:13

[12] For the writings of the church fathers, I have referred Wallace Warner, Cold Case Christianity.

[13] These are called Synoptic Gospels, because of their comparative coverage of Jesus’ life, teachings, public ministry, passion, death and resurrection.

[14] Bruce, pp.38-42

[15] Wallace, p.23

[16] Wallace, pp.18-23