« EelmineJätka »
ST. MARK WRITES HIS GOSPEL-CHAP. X.
147 Jalian Pes' for his having written bis Gospel about this time, at the rc. Jerusalem. riod, 4756. quest, and for the use of the converts in that city. It will appear, Valgar Æra, I think, that the internal evidence arising from the Gospel about 43.
itself, and from the concurrent testimony of the fathers of the
Michaelis has collected, in a very perspicuous manner, the
“Further, as St. Mark wrote for the immediate use of the Romans, he sometimes gives explanations which were necessary for foreigoers, though not for the inhabitants of Palestine. For instance, chap. vii. 2. he explains the meaning of kavais xepoi: and ver. 11. of coptāv. In the same chapter, ver. 3, 4. ho gives a description of some Jewish customs; and chap. xv. 42. be explains the meaning of mapaoKEUT. At chap. xvi. 21. he mentions that Simon was the father of Alexander and Rufus, a cir. cumstance not mentioned by the other Evangelists; but to St. Mark's readers the circumstance was interesting, because Ru. fus was at that time in Rome, as appears from Rom. xvi. 13. See also Wetstein's notes to chap. vii. 26. xi. 22.”
St. Mark has more Latin words than the other evangelists: and these numerous Latinisms, not only show that his Gospel was composed by a person who had lived among the Latins, but also that it was writton beyond the contines of Judea. That this Gospel was designed principally for Gentile believers (though we know that there were some Jewish converts in the Church at Rome), is further evident from the explanations introduced by the Evangelist, which would have been unnecessary, if he had written for Hebrew Christians exclusively. Thus, the first time the Jordan is mentioned, tbe appellation“ river,” is added to the name, (Mark i. 5.) and instead of the word mammon, he uses the common term χρηματα, “ riches.” Again, the word Gehenna, which in our version is translated bell, (ix. 43.) ori.
Julian Pe- ginally signified the valley of Hinnom, where infants had been Jerusalem.
Evangelist adds the words "unquenchable fire,” by way of ex-
Lastly, the manner in which St. Mark relates the life of our
Many things seem to prove that St. Mark's Gospel was
viii. 14. are mentioned.
and Luke iv. 40, 41.
to pray. See Luke iv. 42.
Matt. viii. 4. and Luke v, 14, 15.
v. 18, 19.
Dr. Towoson too has fully proved, from a variety of minute
xii. 9-13. Luke vi. 6-11. iii. 17. The names omitted by the other Evangelists are
mentioned. iii. 21. This is peculiar to St. Mark. iv. 26. Parable of the growing corn, so applicable to
the call of the Gentiles, peculiar to St. Mark. iv. 34. Compared with Matt. xiii. 31–34. iv. 36. St. Mark relates the cause of our Lord's sleep in
the ship; that it was after the fatigue of the day. This is omitted Matt. viii. 24–26. Mark
iv. 37, 38. Luke viji. 23, 24. iv. 36. “ Other little ships" with them. iv. 38. He was in the binder part of the ship, asleep on
a pillow, are omitted by the others. Tbe particularities mentioned by St. Mark in his account of the Gadarene dæmoniacs, see Matt. viii. 28–34. Mark v. 119. Luke viji. 26-39.-The number of the swine-the mentioning of the very words which our Lord spake to the daugbter of Jairus, Talitha cumi, (chap. v. 31.)-the blind man casting
USE OF THE ROMAN CONVERTS-CHAP. X.
149 Jaian Pe- away his garment, (chap. x. 50.)--the mentioning of the names Jerusalem. riod, 4756. of those who came to him privately, (chap. xiii. 3, 4.) all which Valgar Æra, minutiæ could have been known only to a spectator and hearer about 43.
of our Lord's words and actions,
The Gospelof St. Mark contains much internal evidence that it was written at the time when the devout Gentiles were first admitted into the Church. In chap. vii. 14-23. The spirituality of the law is compared with St. Peter's address to Cornelius.
Chap. vii. 24–30. The Syrophenician women received ; a Greek having faith in Christ-so Cornelius was not a Jew, but accepted.
Chap. xii. l-12. The parable of the vineyard, descriptive of the calling of the Gentiles; the event which had now taken place.
Chap. xiii. Prediction of the fate of the temple-the reresult of the rejection of the Jews.
In chap. xiv. 24. is the expression, “My blood, which is shed for many;" which Dr. Lardner refers to the calling of the Gentiles.
Chap. iv. 30–32. The grain of mustard-seed, descriptive of the rapid progress of the Gospel which St. Mark had witnessed.
Chap. xvi. 15. St. Mark, says Dr. Lardner, evidently understood the extent of the apostolic mission.
Dr. Townson observes further, in confirmation of the opinion
St. Mark, to explain the meaning of this day, adds, even in
The testimony of the fathers confirms the internal evidence,
Eusebius, Histor. Eccles. lib. ij. c. 15. asserts that the Gospel of St. Mark was composed at Rome, in the reign of Claudius, at the request of the people in that city. He refers to Clemens, 6th book of Institutions, as his authority.
Clement of Alexandria (194,) says, that Peter's hearers at Rome intreated Mark, the follower of Peter, to leave a memorial with them of the doctrine wbich bad boen delivered to them by word of mouth, nor did they desist till they had prevailed with bim ().
Clement states that Mark's Gospel was written at Rome, at the request of the Christians there, who were hearers of Peter.
Tertullian observes (200,) the Gospel of St. Mark may be Jerusalem. riod, 4756. considered as that of St. Peter, whose interpreter he was. Vulgar Æra, Origen, Peter dictated bis Gospel to him. about 43. Eusebius (315,) Mark is said to have recorded Peter's relation
of the acts of Jesus. And all things in Mark are said to be me.
The synopsis attributed to Athanasius, fifth century, says, tbc
Gregory Nazianzen-Mark wrote his Gospel for the Italians,
Ebedjesu-the second Evangelist is Mark, who preached (or
Theophylact (1070,) and Euthymius (1110,)-the Gospel of St.
These testimonies seem to be sufficient to prove the early date
There are lwo considerable objections to this early date of St. Mark's Gospel. One that he is said (Acts xii. 25.) to bave gone to Antioch with Saul and Barnabas; the other, the allusion to the progress of the apostles, in the last verse of his Gospel. In reply to the first, it may be said that it is probable he would leave Rome immediately on hearing of the death of Herod, and arrive there at the time when Saul and Barnabas were about to return to Antioch ; which event is placed by Dr. Lardner at this period. It appears from the manner in which ver. 8. of chap. xvi. so abruptly terminates, and the evident commencement of a new sumining up of the evidence, that some extraordinary interruption took place wbile St. Mark was composing his Gospel. The verse terminates with the words époboūvto yàp; and many critics (as I have already shewn in the notes to the eighth Chapter of this arrangement,) have, from the rapid transition to the subject of the following verse, impugned the authenticity of the remaining verses of St. Mark's Gospel. I am inclined to impute this abrupt ending of the eighth verse of the sixteenth chapter, and the subsequent introduction of the contents of ver. 9. to the circumstances I have just related.
In all probability St. Mark returned to Jerusalem after the death of Herod with his unfinished Gospel; that he afterwards accompanied Saul and Barnabas, on their return to Antioch, (Acts xv. 35–37.); and after having attended the latter on his journey, he was finally settled at Alexandria, where he founded a church of great note.
We are told by Jeromo-Mark, at the desire of the brethren at Rome, wrote a short Gospel, according to what he had heard related by St. Peter. Taking with him the Gospel he had composod, Mark went to Egypt, and founded a Church at Alexandria. He died in the eighth year of Nero, and was succeeded at Alexandria by Apianus.
Chrysostom-Mark wrote his Gospel in Egypt, at the request of the believers there.
Eusebius also relates of St. Mark, that he went into Egypt,
The accounts are so brief, tbat the exact period of bis leaving
RELIEF IS SENT TO JERUSALEM-CHAP. X.
Antioch. riod, 4757, Volgar&ra, The Converts at Antioch, being forewarned by Agabus, about 44. send relief to their Brethren at Jerusalem, by the hands
of Barnabas and Saul.
to the progress of the Gospel, is supposed to be of a later date
The conclusion to which Dr. Townson has arrived, after con-
After considering the whole evidence respecting the Gospel of St. Mark, I cannot but conclude that it was written at a much earlier date than has been generally assigned to it by Protestant writers. The Gospel of St. Matthew was written in the first persecution, when the tidings of salvation were preached to the Jews only. The Gospel of St. Mark was published during the second persecution of the Christian Church, when the devout Gentiles, such as Cornelius, were appealed to. Both were mercifully adapted to these two stages of the Church's progress. The Gospel of St. Luke was addressed to the Gentiles of Asia; and tbat of St. John was the supplement to the rest, and completed and perfected the canon of the New Testament. Each was fitted to the condition of the Church at the time of their respective publication; and they now form unitedly one sublime and perfect system of truth, the immoveable foundation of the temple of God.
(a) Bishop Burgess' Inquiry into the Origin of the Christian Church ; reprinted in the Churchman armed against the Errors of the Times, vol.i. p. 319. (6) Wetstein in loc. and Kuinoel in lib. N. T. Hist. Comment. vol. iv. p. 419. (c) Clem. Strom. lib. vi. p. 636. Cave's Historia Literaria, tom. i. p.
5. Grabes Spic. tom. i. p. 67. Ap. Lardner, vol. iii. p. 167-8. (d) That St. Peter was certainly at Rome, is fully proved by the learned Pearson, in his Dissertation de Serie, et successione Primorum Romæ Episcoporum, Diss. i. cap. vii. Romæ fuisse S. Petrum probatur veterum Testimoniis, p. 33. Cave, however, remarks upon the theory of his going to that metropolis upon the present occasion-Quod vero de hoc Romam adventa somniant, gratis omnino dictum est. Altum de eo apud veteres silentiam. Silet imprimis historia apostolica, quæ de hoc aliove adventu ne verbulum habet, &c. &c.-See Cave, Historia Literaria, vol.i.p. 8. Bishop Burgess quotes with approbation the opinion of Bishop Stillingfleet, which is founded on a passage in Lactantíus, that St. Peter was never at Rome till the period of his martyrdom. Stillingfleet's Origines Britannicæ, fol. edit. p.48.-Barrow on the Pope's Supremacy, folio edit. p. 83. (e) See Bishop Marsh's Michaelis, vol.iii. part i. p. 212.; and vol. i. chap. iv. sect. x. p. 163.-Dr. Campbell's preface to Mark, vol. ii. p. 82, 83.-Horne's Critical Introduction on Mark. -Dr. Townson's Works, vol. i. p. 151. 163. ($) Ap. Lardner's Works, vol. iii. p. 177. vol. ii. p. 552. and vol, iii. p. 170. (9) Euscb. Eccles. Hist. lib. ii. cap. 16 and 24.-Ap. Lardner's Supplement to the Credibility.