Back Evangelie volgens Markus Afrikaans Godspell Marces ANG إنجيل مرقس Arabic ܟܪܘܙܘܬܐ ܕܡܪܩܘܣ ARC انجيل مرقس ARZ مرقس اینجیلی AZB Evangelium noch Markus BAR Buku Markus BBC Ebanghelyo ni Marcos BCL Паводле Марка Святое Дабравесце Byelorussian

Gospel of Mark

Mark 1:7–9, 16–18 on Papyrus 137 (recto and verso; c. 200 AD)[1]
Part of a series on
Books of the
New Testament
Papyrus 46, one of the oldest New Testament papyri, showing 2 Cor 11:33–12:9
Gospels and Acts
Four Evangelists
Lukan Acts
Epistles and Apocalypse
Pauline epistles
Catholic epistles
Apocalypse
Authorship
Related topics

The Gospel of Mark[a] is the second of the four canonical Gospels and one of the three synoptic Gospels. It tells of the ministry of Jesus from his baptism by John the Baptist to his death, the burial of his body, and the discovery of his empty tomb. It portrays Jesus as a teacher, an exorcist, a healer, and a miracle worker, though it does not mention a miraculous birth or divine pre-existence.[4] Jesus refers to himself as the Son of Man. He is called the Son of God but keeps his messianic nature secret; even his disciples fail to understand him.[5] All this is in keeping with the Christian interpretation of prophecy, which is believed to foretell the fate of the messiah as a suffering servant.[6]

The end of Mark 15 (excluding verse 47), along with Mark 16:1 in Codex Sinaiticus (c. 350 AD)[7]

Traditionally attributed to Mark the Evangelist, the companion of the Apostle Peter,[8] the gospel is anonymous,[9] and scholarship is inconclusive on its authorship.[10] It is dated to around 70 AD[11] and was likely written in Rome for a gentile audience.[12] Mark is classified as an ancient biography and was meant to strengthen the faith of its readers.[13] The hypothesis of Marcan priority is held by the majority of scholars today, and as the earliest of the four gospels, it was used as a source by both Matthew and Luke, whose similarities to one another have led to the study of what is termed the Synoptic Problem.[14] Mark has therefore often been seen as the most reliable gospel,[15][16] though this has recently been challenged.[17][18]

There is no agreement on the structure of Mark, but a break at Mark 8:26–31 is widely recognised.[19] Most scholars view Mark 16:8, which ends with a resurrection announcement, as the original ending.[20] Mark presents the gospel as "good news", which includes both the career of Christ as well as his death and resurrection.[21] Mark contains numerous accounts of miracles, which signify God's rule in the gospels, [22] the motif of a Messianic Secret,[23] and an emphasis on Jesus as the "Son of God".[24]

  1. ^ Hixson, Elijah (30 May 2018). "Despite Disappointing Some, New Mark Manuscript Is Earliest Yet". Christianity Today. Archived from the original on 17 May 2025. Retrieved 17 May 2025.
  2. ^ ESV Pew Bible. Wheaton, IL: Crossway. 2018. p. 836. ISBN 978-1-4335-6343-0. Archived from the original on 3 June 2021.
  3. ^ "Bible Book Abbreviations". Logos Bible Software. Archived from the original on 21 April 2022. Retrieved 21 April 2022.
  4. ^ Boring 2006, pp. 44.
  5. ^ Elliott 2014, pp. 404–406.
  6. ^ Boring 2006, pp. 252–53.
  7. ^ Aland, Kurt; Aland, Barbara (1995). The Text of the New Testament: An Introduction to the Critical Editions and to the Theory and Practice of Modern Textual Criticism. Translated by Rhodes, Erroll F. (2nd ed.). Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co. p. 159. ISBN 978-0-8028-4098-1. Archived from the original on 5 October 2023.
  8. ^ Sanders 1995, pp. 63–64.
  9. ^ Watts Henderson 2018, p. 1431.
  10. ^ T&T Clark Social Identity Commentary on the New Testament. T&T Clark. 2020. p. 70. ISBN 9780567667861.
  11. ^ Telford 1999, p. 12.
  12. ^ Perkins 2007, p. 241.
  13. ^ Aune 1987, p. 59.
  14. ^ Edwards 2002, pp. 1–3.
  15. ^ Powell 1998, p. 37.
  16. ^ Williamson 1983, p. 17.
  17. ^ Cite error: The named reference :0 was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  18. ^ Thiessen, Matthew (2024). "The Historical Jesus and the Temple: Memory, Methodology, and the Gospel of Matthew by Michael Patrick Barber (review)". The Catholic Biblical Quarterly. 86 (1): 167–168. ISSN 2163-2529.
  19. ^ Cole 1989, p. 86.
  20. ^ Edwards 2002, pp. 500–01.
  21. ^ Aune 1987, p. 17.
  22. ^ Twelftree 1999, p. 57.
  23. ^ Cross & Livingstone 2005, p. 1083.
  24. ^ Telford 1999, pp. 38–39.


Cite error: There are <ref group=lower-alpha> tags or {{efn}} templates on this page, but the references will not show without a {{reflist|group=lower-alpha}} template or {{notelist}} template (see the help page).

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia · View on Wikipedia

Developed by Nelliwinne