Cart 0
The Gospel of Mark, though coming after Matthew, was probably the first of the four Gospels to be written. And as the title of the book indicates, it is John Mark’s account of the life and ministry of Jesus Christ. But besides the title how do we know that Mark really wrote this Gospel? Determining the authorship for NT books comes from three lines of evidence.
- Many of the books include an introduction with the author’s name.
- Early and long-held tradition identify the author.
- Internal evidence.
Although none of the Gospels identify the name of its author within its text, early church tradition accepted without question the current names ascribed to them. And significantly no other names have ever been attached to these gospels. And Mark is no exception. In fact, the early church fathers universally and repeatedly identified Mark as the writer and that, as Peter’s associate, his account was really a record of Peter’s eyewitness observations.[1] Papias (ca. AD 70-ca. 163), for example, wrote that “Mark, having become the interpreter of Peter, wrote down accurately, though not indeed in order, whatsoever he remembered of the things said or done by Christ.”[2] Similarly, Irenaeus (ca. AD 115-202), who was a student of Ignatius and Polycarp (who were both students of the apostle John) said that “Mark, the disciple and interpreter of Peter, did also hand down to us in writing what had been preached by Peter.”[3]
Despite this long-held tradition though, as detective Warner Wallace writes in his book Cold-Case Christianity, “It’s been fashionable recently to question the authenticity of the Gospels and the claims of the early church fathers related to their authorship. Were the Gospels intentionally misattributed to the apostles or their associates? Was there a conspiracy of some sort to make the Gospels seem authoritative?”[4] To answer these questions, Wallace has applied to the Gospels the very same methods he’s used to crack countless homicide cases. And significantly his investigation revealed that the internal textual evidence does support the claims of the early church.
“Mark, the disciple and interpreter of Peter, did also hand down to us in writing what had been preached by Peter.”
Irenaeus (ca. AD 115-202)
Regarding Mark’s gospel, for example, he documented several “Peter-related” features in the text which make sense if Peter was Mark’s source of information. Let me share with you just some of his discoveries:
- First, notice that Peter takes prominence in Mark’s gospel as he is mentioned more frequently than in the other gospels (twenty-six times in only sixteen chapters, in fact).
- Also, Mark seems more familiar with Peter as he never refers to him by his formal name “Simon Peter” as the other gospel writers do. He only ever calls him Simon or Peter “the briefest [and] most familiar versions of [his] name.”[5]
- “Mark also seemed to respect Peter more than any other gospel writer did [as] he repeatedly painted Peter in the kindest possible way, even when Peter made a fool of himself. Matthew’s gospel, for example, describes Jesus walking on water and Peter’s failed attempt to do the same (Matt. 14:22–33). In Matthew’s account, Peter began to sink into the sea; Jesus described him as a doubter and a man ‘of little faith.’ Interestingly, Mark respectfully omitted Peter’s involvement altogether (Mark 6:45–52).”[6] Again and again, Mark protects Peter from embarrassment.
- Also, Mark and “Mark alone included a number of seemingly unimportant details that point to Peter’s involvement in the shaping of the text. Mark alone told us that ‘Simon and his companions’ were the ones who went looking for Jesus when He was praying in a solitary place (Mark 1:35–37). Mark is also the only gospel to tell us that it was Peter who first drew Jesus’s attention to the withered fig tree (compare Matt. 21:18–19 with Mark 11:20–21). [And] Mark alone seemed to be able to identify the specific disciples (including Peter) who asked Jesus about the timing of the destruction of the temple (compare Matt. 24:1–3 with Mark 13:1–4).”[7]
- Mark also appears to have followed Peter’s practice of omitting details related to Jesus’ private life. Whenever Peter preached about Jesus (in Acts for example), “he limited his descriptions to Jesus’s public life, death, resurrection, and ascension. Mark also followed this rough outline, omitting the birth narrative and other details of Jesus’s private life that are found in Luke’s and Matthew’s gospels.”[8]
- Another thing Wallace points out is how Mark used Peter as a set of bookends. “Unlike in other gospel accounts, Peter is the first disciple identified in the text (Mark 1:16) and the last disciple mentioned in the text (Mark 16:7). Scholars describe this type of ‘bookending’ as ‘inclusio’ and have noticed it in other ancient texts where a piece of history is attributed to a particular eyewitness.”[9]
Hence, textual analysis supports the early church’s conviction that Mark is the author and that his gospel is indeed the eyewitness testimony of Peter.
Ryan Hembree is a daily co-host, speaker, and writer of Bible Discovery. He also hosts a YouTube channel that shows the unity of the Bible and how science and Scripture fit together. Ryan also has an honorary Masters of Ministry in Creation Science from Phoenix University of Theology.
[1] Warner Wallace, Cold-Case Christianity, P.94.
[2] Papias, quoted in Eusebius, “Church History,” Nicene and Post Nicene Fathers, editors Philip Schaff and Henry Wallace (New York: Cosimo, 2007), 172.
[3] Irenaeus, quoted in The Ante-Nicene Fathers: Translations of the Writings of the Fathers down to A.D. 325, editors Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson, vol. 1, The Apostolic Fathers—Justin Martyr—Irenaeus (Buffalo: Christian Literature, 1885), 414.
[4] Warner Wallace, Cold-Case Christianity, P.97.
[5] Warner Wallace, Cold-Case Christianity, P.94.
[6] Warner Wallace, Cold-Case Christianity, P.95.
[7] Warner Wallace, Cold-Case Christianity, P.95.
[8] Warner Wallace, Cold-Case Christianity, P.96.
[9] Warner Wallace, Cold-Case Christianity, P.94-95.
