Distant Shores Media/Sweet Publishing, CC BY-SA 3.0 <https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0>, via Wikimedia Commons
For someone seeking Jesus, intimacy with him is most important. And, ordinarily, our best means of gaining intimacy with him is knowing him in the Scripture. This makes the knowledge of the historicity of the Gospel very important. In this informal essay, I will present some evidence on the historicity of The Gospel According to Mark.
Quick Facts
From the Encyclopedia Britannica, it is certain that “…[The Gospel According to Mark] is the shortest and the earliest of the four Gospels…”. Furthermore, it was “presumably written during the decade preceding the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 CE” (Britannica).
Looking at Primary Sources
I wish to introduce an early witness, Papias, regarding the authorship of the Gospel, for authorship influences its reliability greatly. Papias, according to Britannica, flourished in the 2nd century and was a bishop of Hierapolis, now in Turkey. He was thus an early Church leader, whose view reflects the early Church’s belief, at least in general. Furthermore, “According to the 2nd-century theologian St. Irenaeus, Papias had known the Apostle John.” (Britannica). Papias would thus be a second-generation Christian, having heard the apostle.
Going Deeper:
Having now known briefly about Papias, let us look at what he wrote. The below photo is from the book (p.15-16) Jesus and the Eyewitnesses (2006) by Professor Bauckham, a historian at the University of Cambridge.
I will highlight that Papias has integrity and that he can ascertain his information. He has integrity because he says he is writing what he had “learned carefully in the past from the elders and noted down well, for the truth of which I vouch.” He has the ability to know reliable information because he acquired his information from the elders, who either knew the disciples of the Lord—e.g. the apostles Andrew or Peter—or were the disciples of the Lord themselves—Aristion and the elder John (note, this elder John is different from the Apostle John, who had been mentioned separately in the text). Thus, Papias’s testimony regarding certain facts is trustworthy.
Finally, let us look at what Papias’s testimony is (picture is from Bauckham, p.203).
Papias testifies that the Elder, who was either a disciple of the Lord or a disciple of the disciple, taught that Mark heard what Peter taught, and in turn wrote down the Gospel. Peter gave his teachings in chreiai form, which basically means anecdotal form (Bauckham, p.216), corresponding to how the Gospel comprises discrete pericopes and units of speeches of Jesus. Mark “made it his one concern not to omit anything he had heard or to falsify anything.” Thus, Mark reproduced what Peter said accurately, though the narrative may not be in strict journalistic chronology. For example, perhaps we can discern textual evidence in the Gospel that the sequence of certain episodes is arranged thematically rather than chronologically. In short, Mark was an honest person, and he was in a position to ascertain what Peter had taught. Thus, his Gospel is a reliable source of eyewitness accounts.
Distant Shores Media/Sweet Publishing, CC BY-SA 3.0 <https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0>, via Wikimedia Commons
Thus, Mark’s contemporary fellow disciples loved it and preserved this document, reflecting their trust in Mark’s reproducing accurately Peter’s testimony. The Elder’s testimony regarding Mark, reported by Papias, should not be singular, but rather should reflect the early Church’s common belief. If not, then there would probably be dissension regarding its apostolicity among the second-generation and first-generation disciples. Yet, Papias, who knew disciples from those generations, did not report such a dissension but instead advocated the Elder’s tradition. Thus, there was probably no dissension regarding the apostolicity of the Gospel. Therefore, one can safely believe in Mark’s historicity.
Андрей Николаевич Миронов (A.N. Mironov), CC BY-SA 4.0 <https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0>, via Wikimedia Commons
Conclusion
Imagine you were a contemporary of Papias, respecting him as a bishop who knew the Apostle John. Now, Papias the Bishop testifies to you that, after careful examination with various disciples of Jesus or disciples of the disciples of Jesus, he found that it has been testified among these first and second generation disciples that Mark wrote the Gospel, following Peter’s words accurately. You would have good reason to trust, then, that the Gospel indeed reproduced what Peter said regarding Jesus. And Peter was an eyewitness to Jesus. So, from the Gospel According to Mark, you would be seeing what Jesus did and taught. Amazing!
Distant Shores Media/Sweet Publishing, CC BY-SA 3.0 <https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0>, via Wikimedia Commons
Of course, this brief presentation of the evidence alone is far from the whole case for the historicity of the Gospel; much more can be said, such as an argument from modern miracles. But this is solid evidence. Therefore, the Dogmatic Constitution Dei Verbum (1965) taught, “Holy Mother Church has firmly and with absolute constancy held, and continues to hold, that the four Gospels just named, whose historical character the Church unhesitatingly asserts, faithfully hand on what Jesus Christ, while living among men, really did and taught for their eternal salvation until the day He was taken up into heaven (see Acts 1:1). ” (#19).
May we be closer to the Lord day by day!
