I. The Author
Even though the author of this Gospel is not named in the book itself, and the passages that reveal his identity and interests are few, thanks to the book of Acts and some of the epistles we know considerably more about him than we do about Matthew. Church tradition identifies him as John Mark, a descendant of a Christian family from Jerusalem, a helper and disciple of Barnabas, Paul, and Peter. He was the son of Mary, a fellow worker of the apostles, who is mentioned in Acts 12. The prayer meeting for Peter’s release took place in her house. This was probably the headquarters of the Christian leaders in Jerusalem. It is striking that after he had been miraculously freed from prison, Peter, after a brief reflection, went straight to Mary’s house, which shows that he was certain he would find his friends there at that very hour (Acts 12:11-12).
11 Then Peter came to himself and said, “Now I know without a doubt that the Lord has sent his angel and rescued me from Herod’s clutches and from everything the Jewish people were hoping would happen.” 12 When this had dawned on him, he went to the house of Mary the mother of John, also called Mark, where many people had gathered and were praying. (Acts 12:11-12)
It is possible that this was the house with the upper room where Jesus held the Last Supper with His disciples and where the church gathered after the Ascension. If so, then Mark personally knew the principal leaders of Christianity from its very beginning.
Mark’s family was evidently well-to-do, since his mother was able to own her own house and keep servants. His uncle Barnabas was also a man of means. According to Acts 4:36-37:
36 Joseph, a Levite from Cyprus, whom the apostles called Barnabas (which means “son of encouragement”), 37 sold a field he owned and brought the money and put it at the apostles’ feet. (Acts 4:36-37)
The original home of Mark’s family was evidently Cyprus, from which at some point they moved to Jerusalem. By all appearances John Mark was raised and brought up in a devout and cultured environment.
He was introduced into spiritual ministry by his uncle Barnabas, who, after his visit with the apostle Paul to Jerusalem recorded in Acts 11:30, took Mark with him when he returned to Antioch (Acts 12:25):
25 When Barnabas and Saul had finished their mission, they returned from Jerusalem, taking with them John, also called Mark. (Acts 12:25)
When Barnabas and Paul set out on their first missionary journey, they took Mark with them as a helper and disciple (Acts 13:5):
5 When they arrived at Salamis, they proclaimed the word of God in the Jewish synagogues. John was with them as their helper. (Acts 13:5)
Mark stayed with them throughout their work on the island of Cyprus, but when they set out for the province of Galatia, he separated from them and returned to Jerusalem (Acts 13:13):
13 From Paphos, Paul and his companions sailed to Perga in Pamphylia, where John left them to return to Jerusalem. (Acts 13:13)
The reason for this turning back is not known to us, but what is implied is that either he did not feel called to this work, or that some emotional reaction had arisen in him. Perhaps he did not like Paul, or he showed no interest in the mission among the Gentiles. But whatever the case, he did not continue on with the apostles.
After the end of the first missionary journey and the council in Jerusalem that followed, Barnabas proposed that they take Mark again for their second mission, but Paul objected. The disagreement between them was so sharp that they parted ways. Barnabas took Mark with him and sailed for Cyprus, while Paul, accompanied by his new helper Silas, set out for new territories in the province of Asia (Acts 15:36-40):
36 Some time later Paul said to Barnabas, “Let us go back and visit the believers in all the towns where we preached the word of the Lord and see how they are doing.” 37 Barnabas wanted to take John, also called Mark, with them, 38 but Paul did not think it wise to take him, because he had deserted them in Pamphylia and had not continued with them in the work. 39 They had such a sharp disagreement that they parted company. Barnabas took Mark and sailed for Cyprus, 40 but Paul chose Silas and left, commended by the believers to the grace of the Lord. (Acts 15:36-40)
After this moment, probably around A.D. 50, the evangelist Mark disappears from the New Testament narrative, only to reappear about ten years later. From the epistle to the Colossians it becomes clear that he had restored his relationship with Paul and had joined his fellow workers in Rome. In that same epistle the apostle Paul commends him to the Colossian church (Colossians 4:10):
10 My fellow prisoner Aristarchus sends you his greetings, as does Mark, the cousin of Barnabas. (You have received instructions about him; if he comes to you, welcome him.) (Colossians 4:10)
A little later Paul describes him as “helpful” in his ministry (2 Timothy 4:11):
11 Only Luke is with me. Get Mark and bring him with you, because he is helpful to me in my ministry. (2 Timothy 4:11)
The old disagreement must have been smoothed over. Mark had evidently regained the trust that Paul had placed in him at the beginning and had once again won his respect.
It is also quite likely that Mark was connected with Peter at this time (1 Peter 5:13):
13 She who is in Babylon, chosen together with you, sends you her greetings, and so does my son Mark. (1 Peter 5:13)
From everything we have seen so far, it can be said that Mark was without doubt part of the church from its very beginning and was actively connected with the spread of the gospel from Jerusalem to Rome in the years between A.D. 30 and 65. According to Eusebius, he founded the churches in Alexandria (Ecclesiastical History – Book 2, ch. 16).
II. Time, Place of Writing, and Audience
The earliest testimony concerning the Gospel of Mark is usually associated with the preaching of Peter in Rome during the seventh decade of the Christian era. Papias (ca. A.D. 115), quoted by Eusebius (ca. A.D. 375), says:
“And the presbyter (John) said this also: that Mark, having become the interpreter of Peter, wrote down accurately whatever he preached, though not in the order in which it was spoken or done by our Lord, for he himself neither heard the Lord nor followed Him. But, as was said, he accompanied Peter, who gave him the necessary instructions, yet not so as to compose an ordered account of the Lord’s words. Mark therefore made no mistake in writing down some things just as he recalled them, for he was especially careful about one thing – neither to omit anything he had heard, nor to state anything false in his writings.” (Ecclesiastical History III. 39)
Eusebius (Ecclesiastical History II.15) also quotes Clement of Alexandria (ca. A.D. 180), according to whom the hearers of the apostle Peter urged Mark to write down the teaching that Peter had preached to them orally, and that the apostle Peter approved the Gospel to be read in the churches. Origen – the successor of Clement (ca. A.D. 225) – says that Mark wrote his Gospel just as Peter had explained it to him (Ecclesiastical History IV.25). Irenaeus confirms this tradition, saying that “after the death of the apostles Peter and Paul, Mark left us in writing what the apostle Peter had preached” (Irenaeus, Against Heresies III. i.1.).
The reliability of these traditions may be disputed, since they do not originate directly from the first century, but a fact worthy of attention is that they all agree that Mark is the author of the second Gospel and that they all connect it with the preaching of the apostle Peter in Rome.
Tradition is not unified regarding the relation of the Gospel to the time in which Peter lived. The Anti-Marcionite Prologue to the Gospel and Irenaeus (both generally dated ca. A.D. 180) agree that it was written after Peter’s death in Rome, probably between A.D. 65 and 68, while Clement and Origen maintain that it was composed while Peter was still alive and that he approved it. There is no doubt, however, that this Gospel was written by a man who knew at least several of the apostles and who had prolonged and direct contact with their preaching.
From the facts mentioned so far, the following conclusions can be drawn:
1) Mark was brought up in the religious atmosphere of Judaism.
2) He could have been an eyewitness to some of the events he mentions in the Gospel that bears his name.
3) He was a close fellow worker of the leaders of the apostolic church and was fully acquainted with their preaching about Jesus and with the gospel they were spreading.
4) He himself was among the preachers and was a witness to the beginning of the missionary work among the Gentiles.
To these facts a few more things can be added, to which the Gospel itself bears witness.
1) The author places greater emphasis on the facts than on the themes or the words of Jesus.
2) It is possible that he was a witness to the arrest of Jesus in Gethsemane.
In Mark 14:51-52 a young man is mentioned who was following Jesus. Nothing is said about his identity, nor is his role in the account clear. His mention seems to interrupt the flow of the narrative. Omitting him would not disturb the development of the thought. For this reason it is hard to resist the temptation to see in this young man the person of the author himself.
51 A young man, wearing nothing but a linen garment, was following Jesus. When they seized him, 52 he fled naked, leaving his garment behind. (Mark 14:51-52)
None of the other synoptic writers mentions such a young man. If this passage refers to Mark, then he was a witness to the last hours of Jesus’ life, and the Christian world is certainly grateful to him for recording them.
3) In Mark 15:21 Simon of Cyrene is mentioned, “the father of Alexander and Rufus.”
21 A certain man from Cyrene, Simon, the father of Alexander and Rufus, was passing by on his way in from the country, and they forced him to carry the cross. (Mark 15:21)
Alexander and Rufus have no role in the narrative and are mentioned only here. Why? Probably because they were personally known to the author and to his readers. If this is so, the date of the Gospel’s writing must be placed within the generation of the eyewitnesses of the crucifixion, even if we assume that Alexander and Rufus were children at that time.
4) The resemblance between Peter’s sermon in Acts 10:34-43 and this Gospel is intriguing.
Eusebius maintains that Mark was for a time a helper and interpreter of Peter, which we find confirmed in 1 Peter 5:13. Peter’s sermon, recorded by Luke, corresponds closely to the outline of the contents of the Gospel of Mark. This can be taken as a confirmation of the tradition that in his Gospel Mark recorded the substance of Peter’s sermons.
Mark wrote mainly for the Gentiles, as can be seen from his explanations of Jewish customs, his use of Roman monetary equivalents, and the absence of Old Testament prophecies after the first chapter. A truly dynamic storyteller, he describes the events vividly, simply, and accurately.