Bible Study - St Mark
An Introduction to the Gospels
MARK’S GOSPEL
1. Why the Gospels? We need to saturate ourselves in the Gospels, to know the mind of Christ and to find the best place for starting to read the Bible.
2. How does each writer approach writing?
They are all writing about the same man; all seeing different facets of the same diamond. How do they approach their task?
Mark’s has the breathless pace of an adventure story. One of his key words is “immediately”; and scene after scene rushes on towards an oddly mysterious ending.
John presents what looks like a drama with staged dialogues around significant events. The drama is introduced by an impressive prologue which sets out the major themes of the whole work.
Luke purports to be writing a carefully researched history; while Matthew produces an ethical/devotional guide book for Christian living.
The adventure story; the drama; the history; and the Christian guide book- and yet there is so much more to each of these books than can be neatly summarised.
The extent to which these books are biographies has long been debated. What they do possess in common is the attempt to present a picture of the life of Jesus from the standpoint of faith. They could be described as biographies infused with theology; lives of Jesus written to inform and encourage the growing Christian community.
3. Why Mark’s Gospel? The first to be written, which has influenced profoundly the next three. Provided the basic framework for Luke and Matthew. It is the nearest to the events themselves. I believe it gives the clearest indications of the actual personality of Jesus. I have a personal love of this gospel, shown by setting the whole of it to music when I first had a Sabbatical.
4. Who wrote it? There is a strong tradition that Mark’s Gospel was associated with Peter. In the second century between 120-130 a writer called Papias wrote, “Mark, who became Peter’s interpreter, accurately wrote, though not in order, as many of the things said and done by the Lord as he had remembered”. Another writer, Eusebius, explained that Mark collected anecdotes from Peter, but did not possess an ordered account from Peter.
Since “Mark” was a common name, we cannot narrow down the definite person who wrote the Gospel. The New Testament refers to a Jewish Christian called John Mark who was initially associated with Paul. 1 Peter 5:13 refers to Mark as an associate of the imprisoned Peter.
5. Who was it written for? With many of these areas there is continued debate rather than absolute certainty. There is a good case to be made out that it was written for the churches that met in people’s houses in Rome. But others think it more likely that it wad intended for Gentile communities in Palestine or Syria. The truth is we really don’t know. A certain amount can be conjectured by the internal evidence of the Gospel itself, but not to the extent of commanding universal support.
6.
7. Why? Not simply as a biography, although it is the first time that what happened in Jesus’ life was written down. Mark 1:1 refers to what follows as “the beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ”. In Paul’s letters, “gospel” refers to the message of salvation that the apostle preached. Mark’s Gospel retains that sense of Gospel as preached message. Gospel literally means good news. The account of Jesus’ life reveals God’s purposes.
8. How? Rev. Dr. David Palmer, in his book “The Markan Matrix”, believes that Mark’s Gospel is very carefully constructed around a pattern of 4 series of 7 days in between a prologue and an epilogue.
Mark’s style is strong on action. Jesus’ teaching and values are often incidental to the narration. Significant theological points are often introduced subtly.
In some ways it is the least supernatural gospel. In some ways the personality of the man Jesus emerges even more strongly than in the other gospels.
The gospel contains various motifs which weave their way throughout the document- motifs such as “the kingdom of God”, Jesus as “the Son of God”.
The characters of the disciples are powerfully drawn, especially that of Peter. The second century writing of Papias is fascinating, in saying that
“Mark, who was Peter’s interpreter, wrote down accurately, though not in order, all that he recollected of what Christ had said or done. For he was not a hearer of the Lord or a follower of his. He followed Peter, as I have said, at a later date, and Peter adapted his instruction to practical needs, without any attempt to give the Lord’s words systematically. So that Mark was not wrong in writing down some things in this way from memory, for his one concern was neither to omit nor to falsify anything that he had heard.”
If Papias’ information is correct, it would explain why Peter’s character is so clearly drawn; and why the unfolding relationship between Jesus and his disciples has such a central role in the gospel, with no attempt to paint the disciples in a favourable light.
If Papias is also correct in how the gospel was constructed, the chronological order of events may not have been exactly how it happened. Luke’s comments at the beginning of his gospel seems to imply this as well.
That “Peter adapted his instruction to practical needs” may also make sense of the kind of issues that receive some prominence in Mark’s gospel. The weight given to all foods being declared clean in Mark 7 may well have resonance with Peter’s experience in Acts 10 and all that followed from that.
There is a breathlessly exciting quality about this gospel from its first moments. The passion narrative is particularly powerful and moving. The Jesus of Mark’s gospel, who had drawn a huge following, dies in terrible loneliness.
The facet of the diamond that emerges is of a remarkably strong human personality, speaking and acting with a great depth of authority; a person of considerable intelligence; rapid wit; communicative ability; sheer dedication and courage.
9. What’s it about?
Let’s look at it together.
Enter Mark’s house and read his adventure story.
Let’s look at 3 snapshots of the unfolding Gospel-
10. How it begins (Mark1:1- 3: 6)
(1:1) It begins with a brief statement as to what it is –“The beginning of the gospel about Jesus Christ, the Son of God.” “The beginning” –did Mark envisage others would come along to create more elaborate structures and take the gospel about Jesus Christ further, expanding what he had written and incorporating material from other sources, which is what, in fact, happened? Does his “beginning” have a thematic link with the Hebrew Bible’s book of origins, “Genesis”? Is he establishing some sort of deliberate parallel with that book in a way that John will do much more explicitly with his “In the beginning”?
Did Mark put this statement at the front of his gospel anyway? Was it provided by someone editing his work as a summary statement of faith?
If we assume that the statement in its entirety originates with Mark, then he is, from the start, setting out his stall as to whom he believes Jesus to be.
He is creating a new literary form, a “gospel”; literally a declaration of good news.
The gospel is centred on Jesus, described in terms of committed faith as “Christ, the Son of God.”
This facet of the diamond is about to be revealed. We, as readers, are being prepared to read the beginning of good news about Jesus, who is much more than merely a man.
(1:2-13) After a quotation from Isaiah, along comes John the Baptist directly fulfilling that prophecy. The prophecy, people’s response to John, his radical act of baptising, and his words about one coming after him (who is more powerful than he and who will baptise with the Holy Spirit) create a heightened expectation in a very few words.
And then Jesus comes, like one bursting onto the scene. Mark does not spend much space on explanation; his narrative is action-packed. Jesus arrives, is baptised, receives the affirmation of the Spirit descending and the voice from heaven. And “immediately” the Spirit “thrust him out” into the desert. Mark’s vocabulary is powerful and explosive as one major event follows another in rapid succession. The overall impression he creates is of dynamism and significance. The first hints of Jesus’ personal struggle occur here. The narrative is compelling and gripping, urging the reader to read on.
(1:14-15) Following the forty days in the wilderness, (described in a single sentence so that the pace of the narrative is not allowed to relax), Jesus proclaims “the good news of God.” The word for “good news” is the same one Mark uses to describe the document he is writing from the beginning.
John’s arrest highlights danger for Jesus, who continues, to some extent, what John has started. Repentance, at least, is a common key element in their proclamation. The “good news” motif is repeated as part of Jesus’ message. The heightened expectation of an utterly unique time of opportunity and crisis is spelled out in the first words Jesus utters in Mark’s gospel: “The time is fulfilled, and the Kingdom of God has come near.”
(1:16-20) The calling of Jesus’ first four disciples is described concisely, concentrating on essentials. Mark’s first attempt at explanation is to point out that Simon and Andrew were fishermen. Both pairs of men follow “immediately”. There is no slackening of pace in Mark’s narrative.
(1:21-34) Mark then encapsulates within the framework of a single day the healing of a man with an unclean spirit, the healing of Simon’s mother-in-law and the healing of all in need in Capernaum at sundown. Within these stories important characteristics of Jesus receive emphasis. The healing of the man with an unclean spirit is sandwiched between people’s astounded reaction at the highly unusual degree of authority with which Jesus speaks. The demons’ awareness of Jesus’ true nature is referred to in this incident and in the healings at sundown. Mark has the gift of writing a very readable story using few words, and of dropping into his rapidly told narrative nuggets of information which confirm the specialness of the person about whom he is writing.
(1:36-39) The next incident takes place on the early morning of the very next day. Jesus’ praying in a deserted place clarifies for him the direction he is to take. The readers are privileged to share Jesus’ plan of action and the reasoning behind it before it takes place through the dialogue between Peter and Jesus. Dropped into the narrative are indications of the huge impact Jesus is making upon people (“everyone is searching for you”) and Jesus’ self-understanding of his purpose (“that is what I came out to do.”)
Because Mark’s story telling is so direct, the description of Jesus “going throughout Galilee, proclaiming the message in their synagogues” reads almost as if it were all happening that same day. The activity of weeks? Months? Years? Is compressed into the immediate. Mark does not give a precise time scale to his narrative. Doing so would slow his story down. A history cries out for such precision; an adventure story does not.
(1:40-45) The incident of the leper coming to Jesus could be happening at any point. The sense of watching a fast moving film, where frame follows frame in quick succession, continues. The leper’s disobedience to Jesus’ command thwarts the plans that Jesus had earlier set out for himself- (“let us go to the neighbouring towns, so that I may proclaim the message there also; for that is what is what I cam out to do.”) Now the leper’s enthusiastic blabbering means that “Jesus could no longer go into a town openly, but stayed out in the country; and people came to him from every quarter.” For the first time Jesus is not in control of his mission and has to react to changed circumstances.
(2:1-12) Mark’s “When he returned to Capernaum after some days” is delightfully imprecise and maintains the high speed of the story. This incident is the longest to be told so far, but there is still no pausing for breath.
The story not only highlights Jesus’ healing power, but his authority on earth to forgive sins, which God alone can do. For the first time Jesus’ self-designation “the Son of Man” is used. Also for the first time a critical opposition accusing Jesus of blasphemy (the charge on which he will be executed) emerges. We are not long into Mark’s story before opposition and danger enter his account.
(2:13-14) Already Mark is building into the structure of his house the building blocks of Jesus’ multi-varied activities. He is healer, preacher, teacher, forgiver, caller (one who summons a person to leave their old way of life to follow him).
(2:15-17) The relentless pace continues as Levi, having been called, gets up to follow Jesus and invites Jesus to dinner. Another distinctive aspect of Jesus’ ministry is now presented; his concentration upon the moral outcasts. These are the focus and the priority for his energies. There has already been one statement of personal intent-(“Let us go to the neighbouring towns, so that I may proclaim the message there also; for that is what I came out to do.”) Now there is another- “I have come to call not the righteous, but sinners.” The sense of a critical, scandalised opposition is growing.
(2:18-22) The vivid word-pictures and parables used by Jesus break through Mark’s narrative here. All the time Mark is presenting a wider picture of who Jesus is, of the wonder of his personality and the range of his activities. Mark does this by making such information and impressions incidental to the ongoing story, in the way that a novelist fills out the personality and concerns of central characters as the story itself proceeds.
In describing himself as “the bridegroom”, Jesus is highlighting his personal significance alongside a sense of fulfilled promise and realised destiny. The self-designation denotes one who celebrates the goodness of life and may even hint at being the source of love and joy himself.
Jesus’ words contain the first hints of his death-“the days will come when the bridegroom is taken away from them”. Mark’s adventure story already contains strong indications of struggle, conflict and death as tragic motifs woven into what is otherwise a a positive, exciting, celebratory, highly popular and expanding mission.
The parable about not patching up an old coat with new (unshrunk) cloth and not putting new wine into old wineskins, makes plain in context that it is inappropriate and impossible for Jesus to merely follow traditions and conventions. His time is one of unique destiny (“The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God has come near.”) A new situation requires a totally new approach.
(2:23-3:6) Two incidents are recounted concerned with controversy arising from the actions of Jesus or his disciples on the sabbath. The radical action of one who does not put new cloth onto an old coat or new wine into old wineskins achieves logical consistency with his refusal to be bound by sabbath conventions. The ridiculously petty legalism of the Pharisees, who are looking for some reason to accuse Jesus and his disciples, is met by an answer, quoting a Scriptural example that human need takes precedence over what is lawfully permitted or deemed to be sacred. (The priority of human need is even more pointedly the focus of the second incident.) The first story ends with two powerful and interlocking statements –“The sabbath was made for humankind, and not humankind for the sabbath” and, as a consequence, “the Son of Man is lord even of the sabbath.” The first startling conclusion is that religious rites exist to serve people’s needs. The second one is that Jesus has a freedom unlimited by traditions because he is greater than any of those traditions.
In the second incident his opposition are watching to see “whether he would cure” a man who had a withered hand “on the sabbath, so that they might accuse him.” Jesus’ question is direct, logical and unanswerable- “Is it lawful to do good or to do harm on the sabbath, to save life or to kill?”
It is also a deliberately provocative question as to what is lawfully permitted on the sabbath (Jesus having made it very plain that he does not consider himself bound by what is lawful on that day.) Jesus’ emotions are described in strong language as “he looked around at them with anger; he was grieved at their hardness of heart.” The man is healed and “The Pharisees went out and immediately conspired with the Herodians against him, how to destroy him.” The Herodians are introduced as a grouping for the first time in this narrative. The chips are down; the scene is set; Jesus’ life is in mortal danger from two distinct groups in alliance with each other. Everything which follows in Mark’s gospel will be against this background. The conspiracy to destroy Jesus has entered Mark’s story at an early stage.
11. A brief look at a second snapshot from near the centre of the Gospel: -Chapter 8
(8:1-10) A second feeding miracle is deliberately paralleled to the first. Jesus’ compassion is again his overriding motive for action. His disciples’ question in verse four seems to be unbelievably obtuse in view of what had happened previously.
(8:11-13) Again the Pharisees are the principle opposition. They also are obtuse. Wasn’t Jesus giving enough signs as it was, for anyone with eyes to see?
(8:14-21) The disciples’ memory is not their strong point! Jesus attempts to warn them of the growing influence of both the Pharisees and Herod (recalling the unholy alliance described in 3:6). The disciples totally misunderstand Jesus’ picture language and Jesus has to remind them (through questions suitable for slow witted children) of what had happened previously. Their inability to connect experiences must leave him exasperated.
(8:22-26) Mark now supplies an example of Jesus bringing healing to a blind man. By placing it between an account where the disciples seem unable to see and one where Peter expresses deep insight, the man’s healing seems to be an enactment of the process of gradually receiving inner sight.
(8:27-9:1) Mark describes very briefly the first dawning of real understanding on the disciples’ part concerning the authentic nature of Jesus.
The key moment of recognition is followed by a very specific description of what Jesus will go through. In Jesus’ prediction, Mark is summarising the passion in advance.
Peter may have received insight at one moment; the next he is far from being attuned to Jesus’ thinking!
Jesus makes it plain how dangerous it will be to follow him and how this will need to be a matter of courageous choice.
12. The final snapshot is from the Passion Narrative (Mark 14:1-15.39)
(14:1-2) The action of the drama resumes with the chief priests and scribes plotting to arrest Jesus by stealth and kill him. They have ruled out doing this during the festival, fearing that the people may riot, although, as we will see later, that is when Jesus is arrested and a riot does not take place.
(14:3-11) Immediately after mentioning this plot, Mark describes an incident which appears to act as the decisive turning point for Judas Iscariot. The woman’s anointing of Jesus creates great anger among some of the disciples (Judas is not mentioned specifically).
Judas’ decision to betray Jesus is a continuation of the plot story of verses 1 and 2. The anointing incident is sandwiched between the plot and Judas’ initiative to show it as the cause of Judas’ action, and perhaps also to draw a contrast between the woman who gave a gift worth a huge sum and Judas’ betrayal for which the chief priests promise to give him money. Money is presented as a reason for betrayal; in the first instance anger at its apparent misuse by the woman and Jesus’ defence of her; in the second place as a reward for what Judas is prepared to do.
The sense of adventure and tension is raised by the statement “So (Judas) began to look for an opportunity to betray (Jesus)”. The dynamics have altered; the die has been cast; the action moves on.
(14:12-31) Adventure and tension are heightened when Jesus needs to arrange by a secret sign the Passover meal he will eat with his disciples. Thinking ahead, in a situation of danger (as he did in 11:1-6), Jesus has already made preparations.
The meal begins with Jesus warning that one of hem will betray him. Mark does not indicate that Jesus knows Judas will be the betrayer. The warning of one sharing intimately in the meal becoming a traitor is a dire one.
Jesus’ other words at the supper are in the context of his death and self-giving.
At the end of the meal, Jesus now warns them that they will all desert him.
His words, (which the disciples may have interpreted as increasing paranoia), contain the promise, “But after I am raised up, I will go before you to Galilee.” Peter’s claim that he will never desert Jesus is met by a specific warning that “this very night, before the cock crows twice, you will deny me three times.” All the disciples (presumably including Judas? We are not told when he leaves the group of disciples, which makes his sudden appearance with an armed crowd in 14: 43 more of a shock) say vehemently with Peter that they will never desert nor deny Jesus.
The tension is now at breaking point, and the narrative moves rapidly and memorably on.
(14:32-42) Jesus has previously been depicted as praying alone, and, though he still does so here, he was hoping for support from the inner circle of three disciples, which they fail to provide.
Mark uses very powerful words to describe the depth of distress Jesus is experiencing. This poignant struggle and resolve moves straight into the next stage of the passion with terse sentences warning of imminent betrayal.
(14:43-52) The catchword “immediately” takes us into the triumph of Jesus’ opposition. The armed crowd are sent from the chief priests, the scribes and the elders.
Judas betrays Jesus with signs of respect and affection, which makes his betrayal even worse.
In a context of violence Jesus exposes the cowardice of the opposition and is the strong person in control. The fulfilment of the scriptures is his motivation now.
As he predicted, Jesus’ disciples universally desert him.
“A certain young man” has often been supposed to be Mark himself. There does not seem to be any purpose in asserting this passage at this point if it is not a veiled reference to the author, because it would be superfluous after verse 50’s summary statement.
(14:53-65) The opposition are well organised and already all the chief priests, elders and scribes are assembled at the high priest’s house, where Jesus is taken.
Mark slips in the detail about Peter following into the courtyard. He will return to what happens when he has first described Jesus’ trial.
The opposition are not able to get enough witnesses to agree a suitable charge. Jesus is silent in his defence. There is a real chance that their case will collapse.
The high priest directly confronts Jesus regarding his identity. Throughout the gospel Jesus has been telling demons, people he has healed, and his own disciples not to say in public who he is. Now he reveals his own identity, with the consciousness that he will bring about his own death sentence.
Jesus is condemned on the charge of blasphemy (of which he has been accused as early as 2:7). The members of the “court” then resort to torture and violence, followed by further beating by the guards.
(14:66-72) It is now that Mark picks up the story of Peter in the Courtyard again. Peter’s denial is told vividly, with the mention of the cockcrow. The universal failure of Jesus’ disciples to support him, whatever their intentions, is made very clear by juxtaposing this denial with the scene in which Jesus is condemned to death and is being beaten. It is at the point when Jesus is being beaten by the guards that Peter denies him.
(15:1-15) The action moves inexorably on. Jesus offers no self defence to Pilate.
Mark emphasises that Barabbas is a murderer; that Pilate discerns that the chief priests’ motivation is jealousy; that the chief priests incite the crowd to demand Barabbas’ release and Jesus’ crucifixion.
Mark’s account is swiftly told, but containing all salient details; and is powerfully moving as a result of his clear, concise style.
(15:16-20) Including a brief explanation, Mark describes the mockery of the soldiers in detail.
(15:21-24) The narrative surges forward under a huge momentum of its own, presenting a compelling account of the passion.
Simon and his sons are named, as, the sons at least, are known to Mark’s readership.
A translation of Golgotha is included.
Although sparing about some areas (simply writing “they crucified him” –which would not have required explanation, as Mark’s readers would know well enough what that involved), the account is quite detailed.
Mark tends not to make many explicit scriptural references.
(15:25-32) Mark’s presentation of Jesus is of someone bearing suffering alone in terrible isolation. Not only the chief priests and scribes, but those crucified with him and passers by all join in mocking him.
(15:33-39) Mark gives Jesus’ words in Aramaic and translates them. He may have done so partly to explain the misunderstanding around “Eloi” and “Elijah”.
Mark presents his gospel largely without interpretation. It is for his readers to decide whether the cry of Jesus is one of utter dereliction of a person totally abandoned by all living beings, including the God he had trusted all his life; or whether these words, directly quoting Psalm 22, are for people to take note of, as a description of what is happening before them, and as a vindication of Jesus’ suffering.
The mention of the curtain in the temple being torn in two, from top to bottom, is of considerable theological importance; as is the comment of the centurion which directly follows it. The intended meaning presumably is that the old practices of Jewish religion have been dramatically rendered null and void; Jesus opens direct access to God; Jesus’ death receives God’s vindication; even the man in charge of Jesus’ crucifixion recognises who Jesus actually was. Both of these happenings, directly following on Jesus’ death, are highly significant moments in Mark’s gospel.