Mark's Choice of Stories

By Geok Hock Tan

It is commonly believed that Jesus' ministry lasted roughly three years. That approximates a thousand days. Yet Mark relates only about fifty events prior to Passion Week. Even if those events took place on separate days, it would still mean Mark covers only fifty days or five percent of Jesus' ministry.

It cannot be that Jesus did nothing significant on the other days. The apostle John said that if everything Jesus did were written down, the world would not have sufficient space for the books.

So why did Mark choose these fifty-or-so stories? Why did he not include more spectacular miracles like the raising of Lazarus? Or remarkable teachings like the Sermon on the Mount? This short commentary tries to answer these questions.

It concludes that Mark wants to provide guidance for believers at various stages of maturity. Therefore although the subject matter should interest all serious students of Mark, technical language is kept to a minimum so that this commentary can also be used for personal study and reflection.

• Language: English
• Publisher: Geok Hock Tan
• Release date: Sep 23, 2018
• ISBN: 9789671462928

Book preview

MARK’S CHOICE OF STORIES

By Tan Geok Hock

Copyright © 2018 by Tan Geok Hock

Email: [e-mail]

All Rights Reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior permission of the copyright owner.

ISBN 978-967-14629-2-8

To my wife Vivien,

for twenty-five happy years.

Also by Tan Geok Hock

Is There a Structure to Luke’s Travel Narrative?

Revelation: A Mid-Tribulation View

Daniel: Until the Last Thirty Days

Contents

Preface

Ch 1: Introduction

Ch 2: The Right Connections (1:1-13)

Ch 3: Cover the Basics (1:14-2:12)

Ch 4: Gently Does It (2:13-3:12)

Ch 5: On-the-Move Training (3:13-6:6)

Ch 6: Real and Present Danger (6:7-8:30)

Ch 7: Leaders are Made of This (8:31-10:52)

Ch 8: Not Just a Country Preacher (11:1-12:44)

Ch 9: How Far Ahead? (13:1-37)

Ch 10: The Foolishness of God... (14:1-15:47)

Ch 11: ...Is Wiser than Man’s Wisdom (16:1-20)

Ch 12: Appendix

Useful Reading

About the Author

Abbreviations

ESV  English Standard Version

GNB Good News Bible

KJV  King James Version

LXX  Greek version of the Old Testament

NASB New American Standard Bible

NIV  New International Version

NT  New Testament

OT  Old Testament

Preface

The gospels have always been my favourite part of the bible. Perhaps this is also true for most readers. Everyone loves stories more than didactic material. Therefore when I had to choose a topic for my Master of Theology thesis, I chose to write on Luke’s travel narrative. It turned out to be my first book.

Thereafter I branched out to examine things related to the end time. I felt that one cannot correctly understand the prophecies in the gospels without being able to reconcile them with what the rest of Scripture says about the last days. Hence my previous two books were on that topic. Having settled on a view of the end time that makes sense to me, I can return to the subject I love most—the gospels.

Initially the temptation was to expand my first book into a full-length commentary on Luke. It seemed a logical step and it would have required less time. However, I believe God has given me some insight into the way Mark composed and arranged his gospel and thus the message that he really wanted to convey. So I have decided to write on Mark because I think there is much to gain from using a different approach.

Mark is a delightful book. We can read it as an exciting novel without realising there are lessons embedded into the stories. These lessons are the hidden gems. They come to light as we discover how Mark introduces the theme of each section. It then helps us to understand his choice of stories and hence the role each passage plays in expanding those themes. This is broadly the procedure followed in this commentary. If it helps readers to be more confident in handling the Gospel of Mark, this commentary will have served its purpose.

Readers will immediately see that this is not a technical commentary. Other writers do a much better job than I can at examining the details. My aim is to draw out the practical value of this gospel. I believe Mark has written his gospel as a discipleship manual and it is an indispensible guide for believers in various stages of maturity. To this end, I have tried to insert thoughts for readers to ponder so that this commentary can be used for personal study and reflection.

I wish to thank all my students who have had to bear with me as I shared my sometimes unorthodox views on this gospel. Their questions and feedback have helped me fine-tune my thoughts on the biblical text. Their life experiences have enriched my appreciation of the relevance of these ancient stories to our modern situation. This book is a fruit of their invaluable contribution.

To God be the glory.

Kuala Lumpur,

September 2018.

Chapter 1: Introduction

Back to TOC

The author of Mark’s gospel does not identify himself. It was the early church that attributed this gospel to Mark. For the purpose of this commentary, we assume they knew what they were talking about.

Who was Mark? He was not one of the early disciples named in the gospels. He is first mentioned in Acts 12:12 as a member of the church in Jerusalem. He later accompanied Paul and Barnabas on their first missionary journey, but deserted them along the way (Acts 13:13). When Paul and Barnabas were about to embark on their second missionary journey, they argued over whether to take Mark along. They parted ways as a result (Acts 15:39).

Why then should we believe what Mark says? He demonstrated he was unreliable by deserting Paul and Barnabas. Now he writes about events during Jesus’ ministry of which he was not an eyewitness. Can we place any confidence in his reports?

Yes we can, because his primary source was very likely the apostle Peter. At some stage Mark became an associate of Peter (1 Pet. 5:13). An early church father named Papias, who was the bishop of Heirapolis until about AD130, said Mark acted as Peter’s assistant and wrote down what Peter taught about the things said and done by the Lord (Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History, 3.39.15). Therefore Mark’s gospel is probably based on Peter’s recollections, which we can trust.

Some writers argue the author was a different Mark who lived later. They say this probably to cast doubt on the accuracy of the gospel accounts. Readers interested in that debate are encouraged to refer to the technical commentaries. All I will say is that if the author was the one who ran away naked in 14:52—as seems likely—he should be the same Mark that we read about in Acts. Apart from that, we will not let this question detain us.

PURPOSE

Churches that heard Peter preach would understandably want a written record of his teachings so that they could refer to them when he was not around. This was indeed what happened. Eusebius (Eccl. Hist., 2.15.1) quoting Clement of Alexandria said the churches asked Mark to commit to writing the teachings of Peter. Mark agreed, and this became the Gospel of Mark. Eusebius also reported that Peter approved of the project.

Peter’s teachings would have included discussions and instructions like those we find in his letters in the NT. However, Mark’s gospel does not contain such material. Instead, he has chosen to record only the stories that Peter told about Jesus. And he has arranged them into a narrative of the final years of the life of Jesus during which he preached the good news of the kingdom of God. Therefore Mark’s purpose appears to be to present a historical account of Jesus’ ministry.

However, it is unlikely Mark included all the stories told by Peter. It is commonly believed that Jesus’ ministry lasted about three years. That equals around 1000 days. Yet Mark relates only about fifty events prior to Passion Week. Even if those events took place on separate days, it would still mean Mark covers only 50 days or 5 percent of Jesus’ ministry.

It cannot be that Jesus did nothing significant on the other days. Indeed John 21:25 says if everything Jesus did were written down, the world would not have sufficient space for the books. So there were many other stories which Mark could have chosen. How did he decide on these fifty-or-so stories?

If it were up to us, we would probably report Jesus’ most spectacular miracles and his most remarkable teachings. However, Mark does not include the account of Jesus raising Lazarus from the dead (John 11). That must rank as one of Jesus’ most astonishing miracles. It is hard to believe Peter never mentioned it in his preaching. Instead, Mark tells us that Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law of a fever. Not a particularly amazing miracle.

As for Jesus’ teachings, Mark does not include the Sermon on the Mount (Mt. 5-7). Many writers consider the latter to be one of the most beautifully crafted teachings in the gospels. Its omission by Mark is strange. These peculiarities imply Mark has other purposes in mind besides preserving a historical account of Jesus’ ministry.

What might these other purposes be? Many writers think Mark wants his gospel to be an evangelism tool. They infer this from Mark’s opening statement that he writes about the gospel, or good news, of Jesus Christ.

In particular, writers believe Mark aims to prove Jesus was the Son of God. He identifies Jesus as the Son of God in 1:1 and reports the centurion coming to this conclusion towards the end of the gospel (15:39). These writers think everything in between serves to lead readers to the same conclusion. For example, the story of Jesus calming the storm ends with the disciples asking in 4:41, Who is this? Even the wind and waves obey him! Mark does seem to have an evangelistic purpose in mind.

However, it does not mean the whole gospel focuses on evangelism. There are large tracts which do not fall into this category. For example, chapters 9-10 contain warnings against jostling for position (9:33) and divorce (10:1). Neither is intuitively evangelistic. They imply there is also an instructional purpose to the gospel.

I think the instructional purpose focuses on discipleship, and it is the main criterion Mark uses to choose the stories in the body of his gospel. When we discuss the structure of the book, we shall see that Mark picks stories that speak to disciples in different stages of maturity and he groups them accordingly. On the surface the stories tell us what Jesus did during various phases of his ministry but embedded into the stories are important lessons for disciples.

Therefore we should not read this gospel as a collection of discrete stories. Mark is not giving us the major highlights of Jesus’ ministry. Instead, we should look for common themes and progression in thought. We must ask how each story contributes to the theme of that section. Only when we do this would we be able to apply the gospel as intended by Mark.

DATE

A small majority of scholars believe Mark was the first gospel written. They think Luke subsequently wrote his gospel using Mark as a guide. Luke also wrote Acts which ends with Paul still in prison in Rome two years after arriving there.

The last of the above events can be fairly accurately dated to AD62. It implies Acts was completed at that point. Therefore Luke must have written his gospel some years earlier. We know Paul spent two years in prison in Caesarea, from AD57 to AD59, prior to his arrival in Rome. Luke was probably with Paul in Caesarea and many writers believe he occupied himself by writing his gospel. It was an ideal opportunity for him to check his sources.

Assuming Luke made use of Mark’s gospel, the latter must have been completed earlier. We allow time for it to be circulated and accepted before being adopted by Luke as the framework for his gospel. It points to a publication date for Mark in the early-to-mid AD50s. This is the view taken in this commentary.

The date seems early but nevertheless possible if the early church father Clement of Alexandria was right in saying that Mark wrote his gospel while Peter was still ministering in Rome (Eusebius, Eccl. Hist., 6.14.6). Eusebius (2.14.6) records that Peter arrived in Rome during the reign of Claudius, i.e. AD41-54. Therefore Mark’s gospel could have been written anytime after Peter’s arrival in Rome.

On the other hand, the majority of scholars date Luke’s gospel some time after AD70. They argue that the way Luke rephrases the Olivet Discourse in Luke 21 implies knowledge of the fall of Jerusalem in AD70. Working backwards, they date Mark’s gospel around AD70.

This commentary will not rehearse the arguments favouring the different possible dates for Mark. A more useful question is—does it matter? Admittedly it does not for the most part. However, we deduced above that Mark intended his gospel partly as an evangelism tool. There are a few crucial stories which he could not have expected unbelievers among his original readers to accept as true unless they could check with eyewitnesses. Among these stories are the Feeding of the Five Thousand, the Transfiguration and the events surrounding the Crucifixion.

If Mark was written later than the AD50s, those readers would have had difficulty finding witnesses who were still alive. It is commonly believed the average life span in the first century was only about 40 years. Even if eyewitnesses were just teenagers during Jesus’ ministry—which probably ended in AD30—they would likely be dead by AD70, the date of writing proposed by scholars.

AUDIENCE

We said the early church fathers indicated it was the church in Rome that asked Mark to compile a written collection of Peter’s teachings. Therefore this commentary assumes Mark’s original audience were Roman Christians. In a few passages, Mark does seem to expect his readers to be familiar with Latin terms, e.g. fist (7:3) and penny (12:42).

Roman Christians would have used Mark’s stories to witness to their unbelieving friends. In that way, the gospel also served as an evangelism tool. Perhaps church meetings in Rome were often attended by curious unbelievers. If so, they would have heard Mark’s gospel being read out.

Paul’s letter to the Romans, written in AD56-57, indicates the church in Rome was a mixed church comprising Jews and Gentiles. Despite this, the scholarly consensus is that Mark writes for a Gentile audience. Scholars quote the following as support:

1. Mark explains Aramaic expressions, e.g. talitha koum (5:41) and corban (7:11). These indicate the original audience did not speak Aramaic but probably only Greek. However, it also possible they were Jews who lived outside Israel all their lives and thus no longer spoke Aramaic. Many Chinese living outside China today cannot speak Chinese.

2. Mark explains some Jewish customs, e.g. the washing of hands and utensils in 7:4. Writers argue this would not have been necessary if his first readers were Jews. However, such customs might not have been common outside Israel. Writer RT France says there is no evidence those customs were observed by the general populace in Israel; he suggests only the Pharisees practised them. If he is right, Jews living in Rome would have needed Mark’s explanation as much as did Gentiles.

3. Mark explains the Jewish calendar. In 15:42, he notes the Preparation Day is the day before the Sabbath. Writers argue the clarification is unnecessary if readers were Jewish. However, based on that logic, Luke who very likely wrote for a Gentile audience should have needed to explain the term. Yet Luke 23:54 introduces the Preparation Day without any explanation. John 19:14 does this too, yet many writers believe John’s audience were Gentiles. Therefore the clarification or lack of it appears to bear no relevance to the race of the primary audience. Mark probably assumes some readers or hearers, e.g. occasional visitors to the church, might have little knowledge of the Jewish calendar.

Therefore none of the above arguments require us to believe Mark’s original audience were predominantly Gentiles. I think it more likely they were Jews. As noted earlier, the early church fathers said Mark wrote his gospel while he was assisting Peter in Rome. Paul called Peter the apostle to the Jews (Gal. 2:7). It implies Peter concentrated on evangelising Jews. Therefore those who initially asked Mark to record Peter’s teachings were probably Jews.

Again, readers may ask—does it matter? I think it matters more than does the date of writing. We may interpret some passages differently if we assume the first readers were Jews. This is especially relevant in the case of Mark 7-8 which describes Jesus’ ministry among Gentiles. Jewish readers would not view Jesus’ visit to Gentile territory in the same way that Gentile readers would. We will discuss this in greater detail when we look at those chapters. Overall, it stands to reason that since the vast majority of writers assume Mark’s first readers were Gentiles, our understanding of the gospel would be affected at least a little if we suppose they were actually Jews.

STRUCTURE

On the surface, Mark’s gospel gives us a brief history of Jesus’ life and ministry. Therefore many writers are inclined to break the text into the major phases of Jesus’ ministry. It often results in a historical outline like the one below.

1. Jesus prepares for ministry (1:1-13).

2. Starts preaching in Galilee (1:14-2:12).

3. Encounters opposition (2:13-3:12)

4. Continues to minister in Galilee (3:13-6:6).

5. Withdraws from Galilee (6:7-8:30).

6. Journeys to Jerusalem (8:31-10:52).

7. Teaches in Jerusalem (11:1-13:37).

8. Suffers arrest and execution, but is resurrected (14:1-16:8).

The above outline is useful because it is intuitive. As for the stories in each phase or section, those in Section 1 (Preparation) and Sections 7 and 8 (Passion Week) probably pick themselves. For Sections 2 to 6 which form the bulk of the gospel, I suggested earlier that Mark chose stories which applied to believers in different stages of their journey of faith. These are as follows:

2. Conversion

3. New believers

4. Disciples

6. Leaders

The exception is Section 5, which I think Mark employs to address a historical issue that troubled his Jewish audience. They would have been told that Jesus went to minister in Gentile territory. They probably wondered whether it was proper for him to do that. Mark explains in that section.

Apart from choice of stories, the limits of each section require explanation. Although I have indicated the extent of each section in the above outline, there is no universal agreement. Yet if Mark wants us to understand where the gospel moves from one stage of discipleship to the next, he must indicate clearly where a new section takes over. I think he does.

I believe Mark inserts section breaks

Reviews for Mark's Choice of Stories

[Victor Goh · Rating: 5 out of 5 stars]

Enjoyed learning from the way Geok Hock asked questions about the stories in Mark and answered them from his observation in Mark and the other gospels.