Gospel according to Mark

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
New Testament
Acts of the Apostles
Paul's letters
Catholic letters
City church in Leonberg, relief on the outside of the main portal, Jesus calls fishermen to be fishermen of people (Gospel according to Mark, Chapter 1, verses 16 ff ), artwork by Ulrich Henn

The Gospel according to Mark (also Mark Gospel; short: Mark or Mk ) is the second book of the New Testament in the Christian Bible . With 16 chapters and 661 verses, it is the shortest of the four canonical gospels . In Greek it has the title euangelion kata Markon ( εὐαγγέλιον κατὰ Μᾶρκον ), thus: “Good news according to Mark”; however, above the oldest uncial manuscripts, only the shorter title kata Markon ( κατὰ ὰρκον ), ie: "after Markus".

It depicts the public work of Jesus of Nazareth , describes his person and especially his suffering and death. Jesus is portrayed as the servant of God, who proclaims the approaching rulership of God . He is represented as a person who serves, heals and teaches people. At the same time his Messiahship and sonship of God are proclaimed. According to Mk 4,11–12  EU , Jesus himself is the “mystery of the rule of God”, which is outlined using typical scenes from his life ( Thomas Söding ).

According to historical-critical majority opinion, the Gospel of Mark is the oldest gospel. According to the so-called two - source theory , in addition to a collection of sayings of Jesus ( logia source ), it served as a written template for the Gospels of Matthew and Luke .


The Gospel of Mark - like many testimonies from Jewish or early Christian literature - was originally handed down anonymously , because the gospel heading known to us, "Gospel according to Mark", was added later. Perhaps the authors in question were primarily interested in the teaching or the tradition they worked through, not so much their own fame as writers, which is why they stepped back behind their work. It is often typical of ancient texts that the author or authors cannot be clearly identified.

The oldest evidence for the composition by Mark can be found with the Bishop Papias of Hierapolis (around 100 AD), which Eusebius of Caesarea quotes in his church history :

"Mark was Peter's interpreter and carefully wrote down what he remembered".

Papias traces this tradition back to the apostles of Jesus:

“But when someone came anywhere who had succeeded the presbyters [apostles], I [Papias] asked about the reports of the presbyters: What did Andrew or what did Peter say, or what Philip or what Thomas or James or what John or what Matthew or any other of the Lord's disciples; what Aristion and the presbyter John , (both) the Lord's disciple, say. Because I was of the opinion that the (reports) from books would not be of as much use to me as the (reports) from the living and lasting voice. "

All later testimonies about the origin of the Gospel, for example by Tertullian , Clement of Alexandria or Hieronymus , refer to Papias and are therefore excluded as independent witnesses.

According to later old church tradition, the gospel was written by John Mark from Jerusalem (cf. Acts 12, 12  EU ), a companion of the apostle Paul. From 1 Petr 5.13  EU it is also deduced that this Johannes Markus later became a pupil of Peter . He is said to have been its interpreter in Rome and wrote down its proclamation. Against the assignment of the same Mark to Paul and to Peter there is the objection that no Pauline theology can be found in the Gospel of Mark. On the other hand, the fact that the geographically and chronologically widespread patristic testimony, which continuously and indisputably names a relatively unknown and non- apostolic person as the author, speaks for the authorship of John Mark. This is supported by the observation that Mark's account contains vivid and realistic descriptions that reveal familiarity with eyewitness details, so that the events described appear from Peter's point of view.

From the point of view of historical-critical research it seems questionable whether the evangelist could have been a Gentile Christian or a Jewish Christian of Palestinian origin, as would be assumed for John Mark and a companion of Paul and Peter. On the one hand, his Greek without Semitic linguistic influences is seen as a reference to a Hellenistic descent, on the other hand it is pointed out that he translated numerous Aramaic expressions correctly (e.g. Hephata in 7.34 EU ) and thus must have been able to speak Aramaic . Proponents of the assumption that Mark was a Gentile Christian also refer to his repeated criticism of Judaism; the opposing position, on the other hand, doubts that a former pagan could have developed such a great impact so early in Christian history. These considerations lead to the conclusion that the evangelist cannot be identical with John Mark of the Acts of the Apostles. Overall, however, no agreement on the person of the author could be reached in historical-critical research.

Text certificates

The oldest text that contains larger sections of the Gospel of Mark is the Chester Beatty papyrus after its collector Alfred Chester Beatty , " pChester Beatty I / P 45 ". It is dated to the end of the 2nd century to the beginning of the 3rd century (see also List of New Testament Papyri and List of Uncial Manuscripts of the New Testament )

Time of origin

There is broad consensus as to when the Gospel of Mark was written. Since an allusion to the destruction of the Jerusalem temple in 70 AD by Titus is seen in 13.2 EU , the majority of the more recent attempts at dating are grouped around this point in time. Some exegetes understand this verse as a real prophecy and thus assume that the Gospel came into being at a time when the outcome of the Jewish War was already foreseeable. For this thesis it is also suggested that in the verse mentioned the destruction of the temple is equated with the end of the world, which historically did not occur; thus it must be a real prophecy, since it still assumes the end of the world.

Another group refers to 13.14 EU , in which they see an allusion to the civil war-like situation between Sicarii and Zealots in Jerusalem in 68/69 and the Gospel thus dates to this period. Other interpreters consider this verse to be a piece of tradition from the time of the Caligula Crisis (40–50 AD). A third group assumes that 13.2 is a spurious prophecy (vaticinium ex eventu) , i.e. This means that here the event of the destruction of the temple that had already passed was put into Jesus' mouth afterwards and the gospel must therefore have arisen after the temple was destroyed. The main arguments of this group are that the conquest of Jerusalem was foreseeable before the end of the war, but the destruction of the second temple was not. Proponents of this thesis also like to emphasize that the writing of this verse cannot be equated with the genesis of the entire gospel and that the gospel must therefore be younger than this verse.

José O'Callaghan Martínez (1972) interpreted the text of the papyrus fragment 7Q5 as an early form of the Gospel of Mark. This would have meant that the gospel would have been written around AD 50. But this theory is controversial. Following him, Thiede (1984) and Jaroš (2008) advocated the thesis that it was about the one and a half verses Mk 6.52f  EU . Stefan Enste (2000) refuted the identity of the fragment with the Markus passage.

Jaroš sees the person of Mark, here as Johannes Mark also in the vicinity of the apostle Peter , whose interpreter and secretary (hermeneut) he is said to have been at times. So he appears in 1 Petr 5:13 a Mark as companion of Peter in the New Testament ( Simon Peter and John Mark ). Then in Jerusalem (Acts 12); later he was mentioned in the circle of Barnabas and Paul (Acts 15; Col 4:10; 2 Tim 4:11; Phlm 1:24). John Mark was taken on the first mission trip by Barnabas and Paul ( Acts 13.4  EU ), he broke off the mission and returned to Perge in Pamphylia . It took place around AD 47 and lasted about a year. Barnabas wanted to take John Mark with him for the second mission trip, but Paul refused and chose Silas as his companion, while Barnabas went to Cyprus with Mark ( Acts 15: 36-40  EU ). The second mission trip took place around the years 49 to 52. Around the year 49 to 50, John Mark is said to have contributed to the planting of the church in Alexandria , which means that his work in the Roman province of Aegyptus fell shortly before or after the trip to Cyprus with Barnabas. In the case of a stay in the 1950s, he could have been in Alexandria more often or for a longer period. Further trips to Rome and Asia Minor are described. Then Mark was replaced by Annianus in his leadership role in the community in Alexandria , which is determined to be the eighth year of the reign of Emperor Nero (61 AD). Again he traveled to Rome and within the Eastern Mediterranean. His death in Alexandria is suspected in 68.

Hypothetical origins of the Gospel according to Mark Adolf von Harnack (1851–1930) John AT Robinson (1919-1983) Werner G. Kümmel (1905–1995) Klaus Berger (* 1940) Mostly today
Markus ("Markus Johannes", "Cousin of Barnabas")      65 - . 70 AD.      45 - 60      approx. 70      before 70      at 70

Place of origin

According to ancient church tradition, Rome is named as the place of composition, which is justified with the use of numerous Latinisms (the most impressive example: conversion of lepton into quadrans in 12.42 ELB ). However, the objection is that these Latinisms originate primarily from the military and financial sectors and were therefore in use throughout the Roman Empire . Also the reference to the persecution of the Christian community in Rome under Nero (64 AD) seen in 13.11-13 EU can be countered with the above-mentioned description of the destruction of the temple, which rather points to the geographical proximity of the Markinian community to the events of the Jewish War (66-73 AD) would indicate. Quite a few exegetes argue that the problems of the Roman community dealt with in the letter to the Romans written 14 years earlier are not addressed in the Gospel of Mark. Syria , especially Antioch , as well as Galilee , the Decapolis or Asia Minor are suggested as alternative places of composition . Only Jerusalem and Palestine in general are rejected by all exegetes as the place of origin because the author shows insufficient knowledge of local conditions.


That the Gospel of Mark was written down primarily for a Gentile Christian community is deduced from the frequent explanation of Jewish customs and the translation of Semitic expressions. This church probably carried out missions among the Gentiles, which is inferred from the assumption that Mark wants to legitimize this by also allowing Jesus to work among the Gentiles (see above all Mk 7.24  EU ; 8.10 EU ). The fact that the congregation was active in the mission at all is deduced from 13.10 EU and 14.9 EU . In addition, it is generally assumed in exegesis that members of the Jewish Christian community were among the listeners / readers of Mark, which speaks for the treatment of topics that are particularly relevant for former Jews: e.g. B. the Sabbath question (cf. 2.23–28 EU and 3.1–6 EU ), the fasting question (cf. 2.19 f. EU ) or the question of purity (cf. 7.1–23 EU ).

Regarding the community situation, the assumption is made that Christian charismatics and prophets appeared in the community who proclaimed the dates and places of the parousia . The evangelist would oppose this in 13.21 f. EU argue. Should this assumption be correct, the Markinian congregation would probably have been shaped by a high end-time expectation , which the evangelist himself probably shared, for which 9.1 EU would also speak. In the demand for a great willingness to suffer in verses 8,34-38 EU one sees an indication that the congregation was also possibly exposed to persecution by Roman or Jewish authorities or other repression.

Language and style

In the Gospel of Mark, the special use of language and writing style are striking . Everyday Greek (so-called Koine ) is kept very simple with Markus and is colloquial.

On the other hand, Jaroš (2008) sees that the author has an excellent command of the Greek language and that his narrative and writing style has adapted the content to be treated in the text. It corresponded completely to the later formulated statements of the sophist Demetrios of Alexandria , who lived during the time of Marcus Aurelius and had set up criteria for the "simple style", such as the use of known words, clear sentence structure, clarity, accuracy, repetitions, secondary circumstances. Markus' narrative style is characterized by these criteria as well as by his lively tense or aspect change aorist , descriptive imperfect, historical present . His masterly command of the Greek text language is particularly evident in the change in the tense and the aspect in the narrative pieces. Ulrich Victor (2003) also takes this view, stating that he was a writer who knew how to use such means at the height of his time with high art. An indication of his masterful style, according to Jaroš, is precisely the use of the Asyndeton , i. H. of the connection without a connection word. You follow him according to the classical rules, the asyndetically ranked Participia conjucta shows his sovereign handling of the Greek language.

From the Septuagint he takes up theological terms in particular, which he builds into his gospel. There are also numerous Latinisms with him . The sentences are usually strung together paratactically and connected by the particles δέ de (but) and καί kai (and). Peripetia are often marked by the use of the narrative present and a predicate-subject sentence position. Typical of the style are also the definite article in proper names as well as a strong monotony in verbs of speaking. In general, Markus reports from the point of view of an authoritative narrator ; he built his gospel in an episodic-anecdotal style.

Mark clearly puts the human side of Jesus in the foreground: Jesus gets angry and sad (3.5 EU ), is hungry (11.12 EU ), is tired (4.38 EU ), loves children (10.16 EU ), knows fear of death (14.33f EU ).

Structure and content

There are different ways of structuring. The most common structure is presented here, which is roughly divided into two parts:

section content Summary
1.1-1.13 Jesus is introduced right at the beginning as the Son of God, but his appearance is brought into connection with John the Baptist , who appears as the forerunner promised in the Old Testament. In the baptismal pericope Jesus is revealed by God as his Son and after his trial in temptation he can appear with his messianic claim.
Powerful ministry of Jesus
1.14 - 3.12
(Powerful work before the people)
  • First appearance in Galilee (1.14–15 EU )
  • Calling the First Disciples (1.16-20 EU )
  • Exorcism in the synagogue of Capernaum (1.21–28 EU )
  • Healing of Peter's mother-in-law (1.29–31 EU )
  • Further healings (1.32–34 EU )
  • Departure from Capernaum (1.35–39 EU )
  • Healing of a leper (1.40–45 EU )
  • Healing of a paralyzed person (2.1–12 EU )
  • Calling Levi (2.13–17 EU )
  • Question about fasting (2.18-22 EU )
  • Tearing off the ears on the Sabbath (2.23–28 EU )
  • Healing on the Sabbath (3.1–6 EU )
Right at the beginning of his public ministry, Jesus calls the first four disciples, which indicates his orientation towards a community. Through the multiple reports of miraculous healings, his authority is also shown. These healings are initially very well received, but then lead to conflict with religious authorities who, as a result of Jesus' new interpretation of the law, finally make a first death resolution and thus give a first indication of the Passion.
3.13 - 6.6a
(teaching and miracle work)
Jesus' sphere of influence now extends beyond Galilee and also drives out evil in neighboring areas. Nevertheless, his work meets with resistance. In essence, four topics are dealt with in this section: First, Jesus' listeners are grouped by using the circle of twelve as his new family while separating himself from his family of origin. This is followed by the parable in which Jesus describes the kingdom of God. This is followed by the climax of Jesus' miracle work. The section closes with another rejection in his home country.
6.6b - 8.26
(Jesus' wandering)
The section begins with the sending out of the twelve disciples, which is presumably intended to refer to the church that continues Jesus' appearance. The martyrdom of the Baptist follows on from the rejection of Jesus at home and anticipates his passion. The following part is marked by a transition of Jesus' saving act from the Jews to the Gentiles. The entire first section of the gospel finally ends with renewed arguments with Jewish scholars.
Way to the cross
(way to Jerusalem)
In this section Jesus' journey to Jerusalem and thus into suffering begins. This is also made geographically clear in that the actions described are located from Caesarea in the north, via Philippi, Galilee, the Jordan Basin and Jericho to Jerusalem. The structural features of the content are the three prophecies of suffering, to which the disciples respond with incomprehension. The conclusion is the last miracle of healing of Jesus.
(Jerusalem Ministry)
The last appearance of Jesus in Jerusalem begins with a provocative entry into the city with the proclamation of Jesus as the Son of David and culminates in the so-called “ temple cleansing ”. This clearly shows the escalation of the conflict between Jesus and the Jewish authorities. After the first death resolution, there is an open conflict: emissaries from the synhedrium ask for the authority of Jesus, who counters with the parable of the evil winemakers. A further death resolution is then passed, followed by three further disputes about central theological issues. This is followed by Jesus' last speech, which, taking up Old Testament prophecies, prophesies the end of the existing world order. It essentially pursues three concerns: 1.) to characterize the disasters that are about to begin as the beginning of the end, 2.) to comfort and encourage the Christian community, 3.) to warn and admonish.
14.1 - 16.8
(Passion, Death and Empty Tomb)
The real Passion begins with a renewed consultation on how to kill Jesus. Mark describes the processes up to the arrest in chronological order, whereby the Lord's Supper scene with Jesus' interpretation of his death as a surrender for "the many" can certainly be seen as the climax of this path to the cross. Another highlight is the Getsemanis scene, in which the real horror of the Passion is marked as abandonment by people and rejection by God. The structuring keyword for the following parts of the Passion is the term “deliver”: Judas delivers Jesus to the Synhedrists, who deliver him to Pilate, who in turn delivers him to the soldiers. The forsakenness of Jesus from the Getsemanis scene is only broken after Jesus' death, which happens through wonderful signs and is expressed by the Roman centurion's confession of the Son of God. The gospel originally closes with the preaching of the angel in the tomb.
16.9-16.20 Secondary conclusion (see relevant section below)

Most of the structures of the Gospel of Mark are based on this scheme. They only differ in the assignment of the pericopes at the edges of the sections. There are also some differences in the allocation of the way to Jerusalem under the way to the cross: Some exegetes consider this to be a third main section of the Gospel. Further structuring options are much less common. Gnilka thus represents a possibility that is based on the younger generation's narrative.

Tradition and editorial

An Arabic translation of the Gospel of Mark (circa 1591)

It is assumed that Mark was able to fall back on numerous Christian traditions around Jesus when writing his Gospel, most of which are likely to come from the missionary sermon, liturgical use, congregational catechesis and apologetics . Many of these traditions are located in Hellenistic Jewish Christian communities in the Near East, especially in Galilee , Syrophoenicia , the Decapolis and especially in Jericho and Jerusalem . Some exegetes are of the opinion that some of these traditions have already been combined into larger units and may even have already been written down - due to the fairly uniform picture of the Gospel of Mark, this remains hypothetical at least until appropriate sources can be found. There is a broad consensus that the Passion Report was already available to the evangelist as a larger unit and was probably already written down. It is believed that this is based on traditions of the early Jerusalem community. Parts of the eschatological speech are also attributed to an early Christian apocalyptic church tradition. In addition, numerous other units are traded as a tradition, but it is controversial which proportions go specifically to the account of the evangelist and which are traditional. These include the disputes in Chapter 2 EU , the parables in 4 EU and the treatment of theological questions in Chapter 10 EU . The evangelist has certainly taken up numerous other small units and traditions, the identification of which, however, is very controversial. In the Gospel of Mark, stories of miracles and exorcism are mainly processed, while the words of Jesus appear rather seldom compared to Luke and Matthew. From this it is concluded that the author had primarily healing miracles as traditions, which probably came from missionary work. The evangelist, however, had only very limited access to the lodgings ; the source of the logia must have been completely unknown to him.

The evangelist pen is usually ascribed to the commandments of silence in 8.30 EU and 9.9 EU . The second and third announcement of suffering are also considered a composition by the evangelist from 8.31 EU . The overall composition of the gospel is unanimously attributed to the editors of the evangelist: the apparently historical framework of the gospel was created primarily for the development of its theology. Nevertheless, the editorial activity of the evangelist is seen in a moderate framework, otherwise there would not be so many content-related tensions in the Gospel, which must have arisen through the use of several different traditions.

Since the discovery of a letter attributed to Clemens of Alexandria in 1958, individual authors have argued that some passages from the Gospel of Mark have been shortened because they did not fit into the faith of the Church Fathers (see: Secret Gospel of Mark ).

Secondary conclusion

In the oldest manuscripts of the Gospel of Mark ( Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Vaticanus ) the Gospel of Mark ends with verse 16.8 EU . Even the minuscule 304 from the 12th century is missing 16.9–20 EU . In the Codex Bobbiensis a shorter ending is added, probably in the 4th / 5th. Century. Other manuscripts use the so-called "canonical ending" 16.9–20 EU , which is known to us and which is seen as a combination of elements from the Gospels of Luke and John as well as the Acts of the Apostles and is believed to have originated in the first half of the 2nd century. The interpretations of this abrupt end in 16.8 EU are contradictory: One possibility would be that the Gospel of Mark was originally published incompletely or that the original ending was lost. For this it is suggested that the word γαρ (“namely”) would be a literarily unsightly ending for the gospel. This is doubted by some exegetes, however, because Matthew and Luke used the Gospel of Mark as a template, but each wrote their own conclusion. Accordingly, the end of the Gospel of Mark between 80 and 90 AD, i.e. shortly after its creation, must have been lost, which in turn is judged to be unlikely. The opposite position notes that the grave angel expresses all the content of the early Christian Easter message and to that extent rounds off the gospel. The lack of a conclusion is then understood as a conscious means by the evangelist to underline his theological concern of a theology of the cross . Against this, however, it is again argued that after 14.28 EU an apparition of the resurrected one is actually to be expected and in this respect the possibility must be seriously expected that the conclusion was actually lost.


John the Baptist baptizes Jesus in the Jordan . Hand-colored etching "Die Taufe" by Adi Holzer 1997.

The Gospel of Mark tells the story of Jesus' ministry as a grown man. It is believed that the evangelist estimated it to be a year. At the beginning of this work there is the special election of Jesus, which manifests itself in the baptism in the Jordan and the revelation as the Son of God and which gives Jesus the ability to work in the first place. Based on this, it is described in more detail how Jesus affects his fellow human beings: Above all, he arouses astonishment and awe up to consternation and incomprehension. The center of Jesus' work, however, is his innocent death on the cross, to which the entire gospel is oriented. For this reason, the Gospel of Mark has already been referred to as the “Passion story with a detailed introduction”. Various theological ideas come into play in the Gospel of Mark:

Jesus and God

Already in the opening verse ( Mk 1,1  EU ) the Gospel of Mark testifies: Jesus is the Christ (i.e. the expected Messiah), he is the Son of God. In his humanity, Mark portrays Jesus as a real Jew who refers to the Old Testament God (cf. 12.28–30 EU parr. Dtn 6.4–5  EU ; 12.26 EU ). In this respect, the Markinian Jesus owes himself in his entire existence, his mission and in his authority to this God, which is described by the designation as “Son of God”. Mark refers to the First Testament again and again throughout his Gospel and tries to testify that the will of God described in the Old Testament is realized in Jesus - i.e. that is, that Scripture is fulfilled in Jesus. If he allows Jesus to always refer to the traditions of the First Testament in his teachings, the evangelist wants to express that Jesus' mission, way and message correspond to the counsel of God.

The direct action of God is indicated in the gospel text by the so-called passivum divinum . This denotes a linguistic habit common not only in early Christianity, according to which one avoids naming God by not naming his active actions, but making a passively formulated statement about those affected by his actions. In the opinion of most exegetes, this is likely to express the evangelist's shyness of the majesty of God.

John the Baptist

John the Baptist precedes Jesus in his death; "Johannesschüssel" in the brotherhood church St. Johann in Rot an der Rot

John the Baptist is understood by the evangelist as the forerunner of Jesus prophesied in the Old Testament. That is why he provided him with features of Elijah , who, according to Mal 3.23  EU , must precede the Messiah. The fact that Jesus followed in John's footsteps should mark him as the Messiah expected according to prophetic tradition. But even in his violent death, the Baptist precedes Jesus.

Kingdom of God sermon

An essential characteristic of Jesus' preaching about the gospel of God is the rule / the kingdom of God ( Βασιλεία του Θεού ). It is assumed that Markus understands this to mean two things:

  1. The noun actionis of the exercise of royal power by God
  2. The period of a majestic rulership of God as God established, everlasting and indestructible kingdom, as it is described in Dan 2,44  EU . An essential characteristic of this kingdom of God is eternal salvation, which will rule over all anti-divine tyranny after the judgment.

Mark sees this kingdom of God already dawning in Jesus' work, but does not understand Jesus as the trigger or initiator of this kingdom. The dawn of the kingdom of God in Jesus finds its expression in the miracles of healing and exorcisms in which the anti-divine powers are driven out. According to the Markinian understanding, this salvation can only be achieved for those who really believe in the coming of the kingdom of God in Jesus. This saving work of Jesus is not limited to Jews alone, which is to emphasize that God's salvation is aimed at all peoples. Therefore, in the opinion of its author, the gospel must also be preached to all peoples, which he then demands in 13.10 EU and 14.9 EU . Jesus' verbal proclamation of the kingdom of God is particularly present in his parables. In pictures of sowing, growing up and harvesting, he speaks analogously of the kingdom of God: It is important to look forward to the coming of the kingdom of God in the end times calmly and confidently (cf. 4, 26-29 EU ). The evangelist sees the preaching of the gospel as a prerequisite for the completion of the rule of God and “ eternal life ” as the goal of salvation (cf. 4.30–32 EU ).

Parabolic theory

The parabolic theory was originally seen as part of the Messiah's secret , but today it is rather viewed independently of it. It says that Mark understands the parables as riddles, the purpose of which is to conceal the truth about the kingdom of God in order to bring judgment on the stubborn and unruly people. This is mainly justified by the fact that Markus repeatedly criticizes Judaism, allows the parable speech to take place in front of a larger crowd and in 4.10–12 EU himself expresses an apologetic intention to “outsiders”. In the broader context of the Messiah's secret, this is then interpreted in such a way that the parables can only be understood by those to whom the Messiah's secret has been revealed, just as they can only then understand the work of Jesus. However, this theory has been questioned or interpreted differently in numerous recent statements. There is also the approach of ascribing a didactic character to the resolution of parables or of seeing it as the only means of communication adequate for humans, which at the same time preserves the fundamental inaccessibility of God. Other exegetes see the parabolic theory as a construct remaining from the pre-Markin tradition, which does not fit into the actual concept of the Gospel of Mark and was only adopted by the evangelist because he wanted to take up different traditions. The thesis that the mystery of parables is supposed to underline the graceful character of revelation and calling is highly valued by only deciphering those to whom God grants the grace of faith.

People of God

In the Gospel of Mark there are numerous verdicts against Judaism and the Jews, which increase sharply towards the end of the Gospel: For example, Mark understands the cleaning of the temple as the abolition of the Jewish cult, the commandment of neighborly love as a relativization of Jewish legal practice, he interprets the Sabbath commandment with the People are the focus of new and Jewish dietary rules are "nonsense". In contrast to this, Mark constitutes a new people of God, which consists of all the peoples to whom the gospel is to be preached. The fact that Mark opposes Galilee of all places as the starting point for salvation to Jerusalem, the center of the Jewish religion, underscores this criticism of Judaism. He sees the circle of twelve apostles as the progenitors of the new people of God. Even if this Markinian people of God includes the Gentiles, Jews who believe can still be accepted into this people.


The Markinian Christology knows different motives, some of which are controversially discussed in science.

Messiah secret

The Isenheimer Altar emphasizes the suffering of Jesus and thus corresponds to the Markinian theology of the cross

The Messiah secret is a theory of the Gospel of Mark that was first recognized by William Wrede as a dogmatic construct. However, he attributed this to the pre-Markinian tradition and named three elements of this theory: commands of silence to demons, the healed and disciples, incomprehension and unbelief of the disciples and the teaching of parables. Today one sees only the silence bids as the actual elements of the messianic secret and looks behind Jüngerunverständnis and parabolic teaching own theological statements that are related only indirectly to the messianic secret. There are e.g. B. in 1.25 EU , 7.36 EU or in 8.30 EU . Most exegetes assume that these should make it clear that Jesus cannot be fully recognized from his miracles. This understanding is justified with 9.9 EU , where the requirement of silence is only terminated until the resurrection. From this it is concluded that Jesus can only be fully recognized through the cross and resurrection. The confession of the Roman centurion is then considered to be the key scene for the knowledge of Jesus:

"When the centurion, who stood opposite Jesus, saw him die in this way, he said: Truly, this man was the Son of God."

- Mk 15.39  EU

The messiah's secret is therefore primarily understood as a defense against a “theologia gloriae” in favor of a “theologia crucis”. This is also put forward as an argument in the dispute about the secondary conclusion , since according to some exegetes the appearance of the risen Christ in the canonical conclusion would obscure the view of the cross.

Sovereign and minor titles

The most important sovereign title of Jesus in the Gospel of Mark is that of the Son of God . With this, Mark does not tie in with the Hellenistic or Stoic concept of the son, but with the Hebrew one that is encountered in numerous passages in the First Testament. With this term, Mark does not mean any physical descent of Jesus from God, but takes up a titular use of the predicate of the Son of God for the expected Messiah, which was at least prepared at the time. At the same time, Mark also developed this title further: While the enthronement of Jesus as the Son of God originally coincided with the resurrection in the Christian faith, Mark moved this to the beginning of Jesus' public activity through the baptismal pericope. Presumably, Markus understood Jesus' sonship as a unique relationship between him and God, in which he appeared as the last messenger of God, in the form of a charismatic miracle worker. In Jesus, Mark sees the Son of God both as a charismatic miracle worker and as a royal messiah or end-time savior and indeed from the beginning of his public work, but not in the form of a pre-existence idea . Another central title of Jesus is that of the Son of Man . This also comes from the Jewish apocalyptic tradition and describes a human figure in the final event who is close to God and is endowed with unique authority. Jesus often uses this title for himself, but then speaks of the Son of Man in the third person. In the case of Mark, this is a baseness title, which is primarily connected with the suffering of Jesus, which in 10.45 EU is ultimately also interpreted on the basis of this title. At the same time, the title refers to the powerfully acting Jesus (e.g. in 2.10 EU ) and to the eschatological judge (e.g. in 13.26 and 13.26 EU ). For the sovereign title is 14.61 f. EU interesting, where Mark Jesus not only openly confess his Messiahship and sonship of God, but also lets him reveal that the Messiah is identical with the eschatological judge, the Son of Man.

Discipleship and Discipleship

After Jesus' death, Peter succeeds him; shown here in a fresco by Filippino Lippi

The discipleship of Jesus comes mostly through calling (e.g. 1.16–20 EU ), but also through free association with him. Jesus 'call to join the disciples' circle is connected with a call to repent, which is fulfilled through the encounter with him, which is why his call is aimed particularly at sinners (cf. 2.17 EU ). This reversal is connected with a relativization of all natural ties to which the discipleship is opposed as "familia dei", in addition there is the unconditional orientation towards the commandment of the love of God and neighbor (cf. 3.35 EU and 12.28-34 EU ) . Accordingly, Markus wants discipleship to be understood primarily as a service in which there should be no dispute about authority. He lets his Jesus in 8.34 EU demand an absolute willingness to suffer and thereby emphasizes that following is above all following the cross. The Markinian concept of faith is closely connected to the subject of discipleship: the evangelist opposes unbelief and the rest of unbelief in faith on the part of people with the unconditional faith of Jesus. This is particularly symbolically developed in the healings of the blind and deaf. Those gathered under the cross are also finally divided into believers and unbelievers. Mark hereby emphasizes the grace character of faith: only those who are called by God can believe. Mark understands the twelve as witnesses of the life of Jesus, who ensure the connection between Jesus' work and the church's preaching. The Circle of Twelve of the Apostles is representative of the entire discipleship, in which Mark clarifies what his readers should heed and observe. In this way, his Jesus empowers the twelve to work similar to his own and thereby legitimizes the work of the Markinian community. At the same time, Mark teaches his congregation about what is expected of them and about the danger of failure in the discipleship. What is striking within the gospel is the failure of the disciples alongside their high calling. This was originally seen in connection with the Messiah's secret , but is now only counted as part of its wider framework and viewed separately from it. Here we see two main concerns of the evangelist:

  1. Here he makes it clear that his parishioners should only entrust themselves to Jesus and not to other role models, who are all affected by the danger of failure in following the cross
  2. shows the renewed calling of the disciples after their failure during Jesus' Passion that Mark wants discipleship to be understood primarily as graces given and, in this respect, as a matter of praying that is conscientious.

Recent trends in research

More recent statements on the Gospel of Mark are directed primarily against the theory of secrecy, which was central to Mark research in the 20th century. Some exegetes see Mark as a more conservative editor who has no independent christological conception, but is primarily determined by the christology of his traditions. Such an assumption would also invalidate the idea of ​​a Markinian theory of secrecy. Other researchers, however, hold on to the theory of secrecy and reinterpret it in a variety of ways. In general, today Markus is interpreted less in terms of the Messiah's secret; other aspects of his theology come to the fore. For example, one deals with the Markinian understanding of faith, the idea of ​​succession, soteriology , but also with its narrative structure, its integration into the literature of its time and the significance of its cultural-historical contribution.

Religious-historical position

The lion is considered to be the symbol of the evangelist Mark , here in the Bamberg Apocalypse

The Gospel of Mark occupies a central position in the history of religion because it marks two transitions: the transition from the oral tradition of Jesus to the writing of the Gospels and the growth of Christianity from the Jewish-Palestinian world into the Hellenistic-Roman cultural area. Before Mark, the tradition of Jesus often existed in oral form, for example in sermons, catechesis and liturgy, which also continued alongside Mark and then found their way into the later Gospels as a special item . Written traditions about Jesus certainly existed before Mark, for example in the source of the Logia or the Passion Report. These pre-Markin traditions, however, only exposed an anecdote from the life of Jesus, so that, as far as we know, Mark was really the first who tried to depict the life of Jesus from baptism to death on the cross in a chronological order. What made him do this is quite controversial. Recurring theses are that the Markinian community had to deal with various false teachers against whom Mark wrote his Gospel as an apologetic writing or that he wanted to put down in writing the Christian faith, which has undergone a change at that time, especially in the At the time of writing the generation of Jesus' contemporaries is increasingly extinct. To pass on the traditions, Mark created a new literary genre, which he calls εὐαγγέλιον ( gospel ). This genre also expresses the connection between the Hellenistic and the Semitic cultural area, which determines a first large section of church history: Mark takes up the idea of ​​a book of prophets from the Semitic (Old Testament) cultural area and at the same time arranges this in the form of a chronological biography, which is organized oriented towards the Hellenistic ruler's biographies. This new genre was later tried to imitate by Luke , Matthew , Johannes and various apocryphal authors.

Impact history

According to the two-source theory , the Gospel of Mark was the oldest of the three Synoptic Gospels ; it served as a template for the other two Gospels, the “Great Gospels” Matthew and Luke. A difficulty for the simple-sounding two-source theory arises from the fact that in the case of pericopes, which all three synoptics have in common, Matthew and Luke often agree with one another in their formulation, while Markus has a different formulation. One speaks of "minor agreements", ie "smaller agreements". It is extremely unlikely that Matthew and Luke arrived at the same change so often by chance when they adopted and edited their Mark template. Therefore, the two-source theory had to be changed in such a way that an assumed “original mark” was the template for Matthew and Luke. This original Mark contained the wording that was now recognizable in Matthew and Luke - and retained by them - while Mark often changed the wording when revising the original original Mark. Another possibility is that Matthew and Luke used a "Deutero-Mark", that is, a revision of the Gospel of Mark, as a template. The two-source theory thus contains a number of assumptions and is found to be unsatisfactory by many New Testament scholars. In the search for alternative theories, however, none has so far been found that meets with broad approval, so that the two-source theory - often in a modified form - continues to form the starting point for the considerations.

The Gospel of Mark was already used in the early Church - despite its (assumed) priority - in comparison to the other Gospels. On the other hand, it was an integral part of the nascent New Testament canon, there were apparently hardly any attempts to do without Mark with his small special property, which could have been justified by the fact that its content was already largely contained in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke.

The peculiarity of the Gospel of Mark was noticed late. If the presumption of priority of the Gospel of Mark is correct, its author was the creator of the literary genre "Gospel", the core of the New Testament. In this way, Mark would have contributed to the fact that Christian theology concentrated on the Passion of Jesus and that the cross was given a central meaning for the Christian faith. The Gospel of Mark has received a wide reception in art; B. in the plague crucifixes of the High Middle Ages or the conception of the Isenheim Altarpiece .



  • Kurt Aland et al. a. (Ed.): Text and textual value of the Greek manuscripts of the New Testament . Vol. 4/1: The Gospel of Mark.
    • Part 1: List of manuscripts and comparative description . Work on New Testament text research 26. ISBN 3-11-016169-9
    • Part 2: Results of the collation and main list . Work on New Testament text research 27. ISBN 3-11-016170-2
  • Eve-Marie Becker : The Gospel of Mark in the context of ancient historiography (Scientific studies on the New Testament, Volume 194), Mohr Siebeck Verlag, Tübingen 2006.
  • Detlev Dormeyer : The Gospel of Mark . Knowledge Buchgesellschaft, Darmstadt 2005 ISBN 3-534-15613-7 .
  • Heinrich Greeven, Eberhard Güting (ed.): Text criticism of the Gospel of Mark . Theologie 11. Lit-Verl., Münster 2005 ISBN 3-8258-6878-8
  • Andreas Lindemann: Literature on the Synoptic Gospels 1992-2000 (III). The Gospel of Mark . In: Theologische Rundschau 69 (2004), pp. 369-423. (Literature review)
  • Frans Neirynck: The Gospel of Mark. A Cumulative Bibliography 1950–1990 . BEThL 102. University Press, Leuven u. a. 1992 ISBN 90-6186-502-6
  • Watson E. Mills: The Gospel of Mark . Bibliographies for Biblical Research, New Testament Series 2. Mellen Biblical Press, Lewiston, NY et al. a. 1994 ISBN 0-7734-2349-4
  • Kevin W. Larsen: The Structure of Mark's Gospel. Current proposals . In: Currents in Biblical Research 3 (2004), pp. 140-160.

Comments - chronologically

  • Julius Schniewind : The Gospel according to Mark . The New Testament German 1st edition Göttingen 1936, 10th edition 1963. Munich / Hamburg 1968 (Siebenstern Taschenb. 107)
  • Adolf Schlatter : Markus. The evangelist for the Greeks. With a foreword by Karl Heinrich Rengstorf. Calwer Verlag, Stuttgart, 2nd edition 1984, ISBN 3-7668-0585-1
  • Eduard Schweizer : The Gospel According to Mark . The New Testament German. 18th edition Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht , Göttingen u. a. 1998, ISBN 3-525-51304-6 (generally understandable )
  • Rudolf Pesch : The Gospel of Mark . Herder's theological commentary on the New Testament 2. Herder, Freiburg i. Br. 1976-1977
    • Part 1: Introduction and commentary on chap. 1.1-8.26 . 1976. 5th edition 1989, ISBN 3-451-17336-0
    • Part 2: Commentary on chap. 8.27-16.20 . 1977. 4th edition 1991, ISBN 3-451-17975-X
  • Joachim Gnilka : The Gospel according to Mark . Evangelical-Catholic Commentary on the New Testament 2. Zurich, Einsiedeln, Cologne
  • Adolf Pohl : The Gospel of Mark . Wuppertal Study Bible New Testament, supplementary sequence 2. Brockhaus, Wuppertal 1986, ISBN 3-417-25022-6 (generally understandable , application-oriented)
  • Walter Schmithals : The Gospel according to Mark . 2 vols. Ecumenical paperback commentary on the New Testament 2. Gütersloher Taschenbücher Siebenstern 503. Gütersloher Verl.-Haus Mohn, Gütersloh u. a. 1979. 2nd edition 1986, ISBN 3-579-00503-0
  • Dieter Lührmann: The Gospel of Mark . Manual for the New Testament 3. Mohr, Tübingen 1987, ISBN 3-16-145258-5
  • Robert H. Gundry: Mark. A Commentary on his Apology for the Cross . Eerdmans, Grand Rapids 1993, ISBN 0-8028-3698-4
  • Fritz Rienecker: The Gospel of Mark . Wuppertaler Studienbibel.NT 2. Brockhaus, Wuppertal u. a. 1994 (generally understandable, application-oriented)
  • Karl Kertelge: Gospel of Mark . The new Echter Bible 2. Echter, Würzburg 1994, ISBN 3-429-01550-2 (generally understandable)
  • Gerhard Maier : Markus Gospel . Edition C Bible Commentary New Testament 3. Hänssler, Neuhausen-Stuttgart 1996 (generally understandable, application-oriented)
  • Bas MF van Iersel: Mark. A Reader-Response Commentary . JSNTSup 164. Academic Press, Sheffield 1998 ISBN 1-85075-829-8 (reception aesthetic exegesis)
  • Wilfried Eckey: The Gospel of Mark: Orientation on the way of Jesus. A comment . Neukirchener, Neukirchen-Vluyn 1998, ISBN 3-7887-1703-3 (generally understandable)
  • Fritzleo Lentzen-Deis : The Gospel of Mark. A comment for practice . Verl. Kath. Bibelwerk, Stuttgart 1998, ISBN 3-460-33121-6 (generally understandable , application-oriented)
  • William L. Lane: The Gospel according to Mark. The English Text with Introduction, Exposition and Notes . The New International Commentary on the New Testament. Eerdmans, Grand Rapids, et al. a. 1999, ISBN 0-8028-2502-8
  • Joel Marcus: Marks 1-8. A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary . The Anchor Bible 27. Doubleday, New York a. a. 2000, ISBN 0-385-42349-7
  • Étienne Trocmé: L'évangile selon Saint Marc . Commentaire du Nouveau Testament 2. Labor et Fides, Genève 2000 ISBN 2-8309-0972-0
  • Craig A. Evans: Mark 8: 27-16: 20 . Word Biblical Commentary 34B. Word Books, Waco et al. a. 2001 (Nelson, Nashville 2005 reprinted) ISBN 0-8499-0253-3
  • Amy-Jill Levine, Marianne Blickenstaff (Eds.): A Feminist Companion to Mark . Feminist Companion to the New Testament and Early Christian Writings 2nd Academic Press, Sheffield 2001 (feminist exegesis)
  • Ben Witherington III: The Gospel of Mark. A Socio-Rhetorical Commentary . Eerdmans, Grand Rapids, et al. a. 2001, ISBN 0-8028-4503-7 (socio-historical exegesis)
  • John R. Donahue, Daniel J. Harrington: The Gospel of Mark . Sacra pagina series 2. Liturgical Press, Collegeville MN 2002
  • James R. Edwards: The Gospel according to Mark . The Pillar New Testament Commentary. Eerdmans, Grand Rapids 2002, ISBN 0-8028-3734-4
  • Richard T. France: The Gospel of Mark. A Commentary on the Greek Text . The New International Greek Testament Commentary. Eerdmans, Grand Rapids, et al. a. 2002, ISBN 0-8028-2446-3
  • Camille Focant: L'évangile selon Marc . Commentaire biblique, Nouveau Testament 2. Les Éd. du Cerf, Paris 2005, ISBN 2-204-07407-1
  • Ludger Schenke: The Gospel of Mark. Literary quirks - text and commentary . Kohlhammer, Stuttgart 2005, ISBN 3-17-018938-7
  • Peter Dschulnigg : The Gospel of Mark . Kohlhammer, Stuttgart 2007. ISBN 978-3-17-019770-1 (Theological Commentary on the New Testament, Vol. 2)
  • Volker Stolle: The Gospel of Mark. Text, translation and commentary (with special attention to the narrative technique) . Oberurseler Hefte supplementary volumes Volume 17, Edition Ruprecht, Göttingen 2015, ISBN 978-3-8469-0175-5

Historical classification and background

  • Willi Marxsen : The Evangelist Markus. Studies on the editorial history of the Gospel , Göttingen 1956 (first editorial history work on the Gospel of Mark)
  • Joachim Schüling: Studies on the relationship between the source of the Logia and the Gospel of Mark . Research on the Bible 65. Echter, Würzburg 1991 ISBN 3-429-01368-2
  • Folkert Fendler: Studies on the Gospel of Mark. On the genre, chronology, messianic secret theory and tradition of the second gospel . Göttingen theological works 49. Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, Göttingen 1991 ISBN 3-525-87803-6
  • Harry T. Fleddermann: Mark and Q. A Study of the Overlap Texts. With an assessment by F. Neirynck . BEThL 122. University Press, Leuven u. a. 1995 ISBN 90-6186-710-X
  • Maurice Casey: Aramaic Sources of Mark's Gospel . MSSNTS 102nd Univ. Press, Cambridge et al. a. 1998 ISBN 0-521-63314-1
  • David E. Orton (ed.): The Composition of Mark's Gospel. Selected Studies from Novum Testamentum . Brill's Readers in Biblical Studies 3. Brill, Leiden u. a. 1999 ISBN 90-04-11340-1 (anthology with important articles from a scientific journal)
  • Dwight N. Peterson: The Origins of Mark. The Markan Community in Current Debate . Biblical Interpretation Series 48. Brill, Leiden u. a. 2000 ISBN 90-04-11755-5
  • Hermann Wilkens: Kata Markon. Jewish-Christian gospel in Hellenistic culture . EHS 23/674. Lang, Frankfurt a. M. u. a. 2000 ISBN 3-631-34879-7
  • Armin Daniel Baum : Papias' presbyter on a 'hermeneut' of Peter. To Eusebius, Hist. eccl. 3.39.15 . In: Theologische Zeitschrift 56 (2000), pp. 21–35. (to the oldest source about the author of the Gospel of Mark)
  • David J. Neville: Mark's Gospel - prior or posterior? A Reappraisal of the Phenomenon of Order . JSNTSup 222. Sheffield Academic Press, London et al. a. 2002 ISBN 1-84127-265-5 ( synoptic question )
  • Hendrika Nicoline Roskam (ed.): The Purpose of the Gospel of Mark in Its Historical and Social Context . Supplements to Novum Testamentum 114. Brill, Leiden u. a. 2004 ISBN 90-04-14052-2
  • James G. Crossley: The Date of Mark's Gospel. Insight from the Law in Earliest Christianity . JSNTSup 266. T. & T. Clark International, London et al. a. 2004 ISBN 0-567-08185-0
  • Francis J. Moloney: Mark: storyteller, interpreter, evangelist . Hendrickson, Peabody 2004 ISBN 1-56563-513-2
  • Robert H. Gundry : The Apostolically Johannine pre-Papian Tradition Concerning the Gospels of Mark and Matthew . In: ders .: The Old Is Better. New Testament Essays in Support of Traditional Interpretation. Scientific studies on the New Testament 178. Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen 2005, pp. 49–73.
  • Torsten Reiprich: Was the mk congregation in Egypt ?, in: Biblical Notes 119/120 (2003), 147–163

To the genre discussion

  • Detlev Dormeyer : The Gospel of Mark as the ideal biography of Jesus Christ, the Nazarene . Biblical contributions from Stuttgart 43. Kath. Bibelwerk, Stuttgart (1999) 2., verb. u. exp. Edition 2002 ISBN 3-460-00431-2
  • Michael E. Vines: The Problem of Markan Genre. The Gospel of Mark and the Jewish Novel . Academia Biblica 3rd Society of Biblical Literature, Atlanta 2002 ISBN 1-58983-030-X
  • Dirk Wördemann: The character image in the bíos according to Plutarch and the image of Christ in the Gospel according to Mark . Studies on the history and culture of antiquity NF 1/19. Schöningh, Paderborn u. a. 2002 ISBN 3-506-79069-2

Theological statements of the Gospel of Mark

  • Jan Rüggemeier: Poetics of Markinian Christology. A cognitive-narratological exegesis. Scientific studies on the New Testament / 2nd series, Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen 2017, ISBN 978-3161557507 .
  • Edwin K. Broadhead: Naming Jesus. Titular Christology in the Gospel of Mark . JSNTSup 175. Academic Press, Sheffield 1999 ISBN 1-85075-929-4
  • Christof Dahm : Israel in the Gospel of Mark . EHS 23/420. Lang, Frankfurt am Main a. a. 1991 ISBN 3-631-43657-2
  • Jens Dechow: Son of God and Lordship of God. The theocentrism of the Gospel of Mark . WMANT 86. Neukirchener Verl., Neukirchen-Vluyn 2000 ISBN 3-7887-1779-3
  • Frank Eibisch: "Your faith has helped you." Healing stories from the Gospel of Mark as paradigmatic narratives and their meaning for diaconal action. Reutlinger Theologische Studien Volume 4. Edition Ruprecht, Göttingen 2009. ISBN 978-3-7675-7124-2
  • Rupert Feneberg : The Jew Jesus and the Gentiles. Biography and theology of Jesus in the Gospel of Mark . Herder's Biblical Studies 24. Herder, Freiburg i.Br. u. a. 2nd edition 2001 ISBN 3-451-27250-4
  • Michael Hauser: The rule of God in the Gospel of Mark . EHS 23/647. Lang, Frankfurt am Main a. a 1998 ISBN 3-631-33903-8
  • Gudrun Guttenberger: The concept of God in the Gospel of Mark . BZNW 123. de Gruyter, Berlin a. a. 2004 ISBN 3-11-018129-0
  • Arnd Herrmann, Temptation in the Gospel of Mark . BWANT 197. Kohlhammer, Stuttgart 2011 ISBN 978-3-17-022024-9
  • Konrad Huber: Jesus in dispute. Exegetical investigations into the so-called Jerusalem disputes in the Gospel of Mark with a view to their christological implications . Research on the Bible 75. Echter, Würzburg 1995 ISBN 3-429-01641-X
  • Paul-Gerhard Klumbies: The myth with Markus . BZNW 108. de Gruyter, Berlin a. a. 2001 ISBN 3-11-017120-1
  • Ulrich Kmiecik: The Son of Man in the Gospel of Mark . Research on the Bible 81. Echter, Würzburg 1997 ISBN 3-429-01861-7
  • Volker Küster: Jesus and the people in the Gospel of Mark. A contribution to the intercultural conversation in exegesis . Biblical-theological studies 28th Neukirchener Verl., Neukirchen-Vluyn 1996 ISBN 3-7887-1581-2
  • Ulrich Mell: The "other" winemakers . An exegetical study on the authority of Jesus Christ according to Mark 11.27-12.34, WUNT 77, Tübingen: JCB Mohr (Paul Siebeck) 1994. ISBN 3-16-146301-3
  • Peter Müller: “Who is this?”: Jesus in the Gospel of Mark. Markus as narrator, publisher and teacher Biblical-theological studies 27. Neukirchener Verl., Neukirchen-Vluyn 1995 ISBN 3-7887-1538-3
  • Jacob Chacko Naluparayil: Jesus of the Gospel of Mark. Present State of Research . In: Currents in Research, Biblical Studies 8 (2000), pp. 191-226.
  • Torsten Reiprich: The mariage secret. Maria von Nazareth and the importance of family relationships in the Gospel of Mark, FRLANT 223, Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht 2008, ISBN 3-525-53086-2
  • Klaus Scholtissek: The authority of Jesus. Analysis of tradition and editorial history on a leitmotif of Markinian Christology . New Testament treatises NF 25. Aschendorff, Münster 1992 ISBN 3-402-04773-X
  • Johannes Schreiber: The Mark Passion. An editorial history investigation . BZNW 68. de Gruyter, Berlin a. a. 2nd edition 1993 ISBN 3-11-014153-1
  • Urs Sommer: The passion story of the Gospel of Mark. Reflections on the Importance of History for Faith . WUNT II / 58. Mohr, Tübingen 1993 ISBN 3-16-145754-4
  • Thomas Söding (Ed.): The Evangelist as theologian. Studies on the Gospel of Mark . Stuttgart Biblical Studies 163rd Catholic Biblical Works, Stuttgart 1995
  • Thomas Söding: Believe in Markus. Belief in the gospel, belief in prayer and belief in miracles in the context of the Markinian basil theology and Christology . Biblical contributions from Stuttgart 12. Kath. Bibelwerk, Stuttgart 1985 ISBN 3-460-00121-6
  • WR Telford: The Theology of the Gospel of Mark . New Testament Theology. Univ. Press, Cambridge et al. a. 1999 ISBN 0-521-43977-9
  • Alexander Weihs: The interpretation of the death of Jesus in the Gospel of Mark. An exegetical study of the proclamations of suffering and resurrection . Research on the Bible 99. Echter, Würzburg 2003 ISBN 3-429-02526-5
  • Werner Zager : God's rule and final judgment in the preaching of Jesus. An investigation into the Markinian Jesus tradition including the Q-parallels . BZNW 82. de Gruyter, Berlin a. a. 1996 ISBN 3-11-015263-0

Newer interpretive approaches

  • Ferdinand Hahn (ed.): The narrator of the gospel. Methodical new approaches in Markus research . Stuttgart Bible Studies 118/119. Catholic Biblical Works, Stuttgart 1985 ISBN 3-460-04181-1 ( narrative exegesis )
  • Dagmar Oppel : Healing narrative - healing narrative: the healing of the blood and the awakening of the daughter of Jairus in Mk 5.21–43 as an example of Markin narrative skill (= Bonner Biblical Contributions, Volume 102), Weinheim, Beltz, Athenäum 1995, ISBN 3-89547 -092-9 .
  • Robert M. Fowler: Let the Reader Understand. Reader-Response Criticism and the Gospel of Mark . Fortress Press, Minneapolis 1991 ISBN 0-8006-2491-2 (reception aesthetic exegesis)
  • Thea Vogt: Fear and Identity in the Gospel of Mark. A text psychological and socio-historical contribution . NTOA 26. Univ.-Verl., Freiburg, Switzerland a. a. 1993
  • Hans-Josef Klauck : Prelude in Heaven? Narrative technique and theology in the Markus prologue . Biblical-theological studies 32. Neukirchener, Neukirchen-Vluyn 1997 ISBN 3-7887-1643-6
  • Jerry Camery-Hoggatt: Irony in Mark's Gospel. Text and Subtext . MSSNTS 72nd Univ. Press, Cambridge et al. a. 1998 ISBN 0-521-41490-3 (rhetorical exegesis)
  • David Rhoads, Joanna Dewey, Donald Michie: Mark as Story. An Introduction to the Narrative of a Gospel Fortress Press, Minneapolis MN 2nd edition 1999 ISBN 0-8006-3160-9 (narrative exegesis)
  • Elizabeth Struthers Malbon: In the Company of Jesus. Characters in Mark's Gospel . Westminster John Knox Press, Louisville KY et al. a. 2000 ISBN 0-664-22255-2 (narrative exegesis)
  • Ched Myers: Binding the Strong Man. A Political Reading of Mark's Story of Jesus . Orbis Books, Maryknoll, NY 2000 (political exegesis)
  • Paul L. Danove: Linguistics and Exegesis in the Gospel of Mark. Applications of a Case Frame Analysis . JSNTSup 218. Studies in New Testament Greek 10. Academic Press, Sheffield 2001 ISBN 1-84127-260-4 (linguistic exegesis)
  • Thomas R. Hatina: In Search of a Context. The Function of Scripture in Mark's Narrative . JSNT 232. Studies in Scripture in Early Judaism and Christianity 8. Sheffield Academic Press, London a. a. 2002 ISBN 0-8264-6067-4
  • Robert L. Humphrey: Narrative Structure and Message in Mark. A Rhetorical Analysis . Studies in the Bible and Early Christianity 60. Mellen, Lewiston, NY u. a. 2003, ISBN 0-7734-6683-5 (rhetorical exegesis)
  • Whitney Taylor Shiner: Proclaiming the Gospel. First-Century Performance of Mark . Trinity Press, Harrisburg, PA et al. a. 2003 (narrative exegesis)
  • Brian J. Incigneri: The Gospel to the Romans. The Setting and Rhetoric of Mark's Gospel . Biblical Interpretation Series 65. Brill, Leiden u. a. 2003 ISBN 90-04-13108-6 (rhetorical exegesis)
  • Peter G. Bolt: Jesus' Defeat of Death. Persuading Mark's Early Readers . MSSNTS 125. University Press, Cambridge et al. a. 2003 ISBN 0-521-83036-2 (rhetorical exegesis)
  • Ohajuobodo I. Oko: "Who then is this?" A Narrative Study of the Role of the Question of the Identity of Jesus in the Plot of Mark's Gospel . Biblical contributions from Bonn 148. Philo, Berlin a. a. 2004 ISBN 3-86572-522-8 (narrative exegesis)
  • Susan Miller: Women in Mark's Gospel . JSNTSup 259. T. & T. Clark International, London et al. a. 2004 ISBN 0-567-08053-6 (feminist exegesis)
  • Christoph Rau: With the fire spirit of the lion - Basics for understanding the Gospel of Mark , Stuttgart: Urachhaus 2004, ISBN 978-3-8251-7469-9
  • Paul L. Danove: The Rhetoric of the Characterization of God, Jesus, and Jesus' Disciples in the Gospel of Mark . JSNTSup 290. T. & T. Clark, New York et al. a. 2005 ISBN 0-567-02810-0 (rhetorical / narrative exegesis)
  • Bridget Gilfillan Upton: Hearing Mark's Endings. Listening to Ancient Popular Texts through Speech Act Theory . Biblical Interpretation Series 79. Brill, Leiden u. a., Brill 2006 ISBN 90-04-14791-8 (linguistic exegesis)
  • Peter Klein: Markusevangelium - work report of the author. Lit-Verlag, Münster 2018 ISBN 978-3-643-13925-2 (br)

Popular and Spiritual Interpretations

Web links

Commons : Gospel according to Mark  - collection of images, videos and audio files

Read or listen to the Gospel of Mark online

Wikisource: Luther Bible from 1522  - sources and full texts

Overviews and further explanations

References and comments

  1. Rainer Riesner : From Jesus to the Gospel of Mark - The way of tradition. (pdf) In: Textsammlung. Institute for Faith and Science, December 19, 2015, p. 16 , accessed on June 23, 2019 : “The unusually worded title euaggelion kata Markon (εὐαγγέλιον κατὰ Μάρκον) or shortened kata Markon (Codices א and B ) does not come from the author itself, but goes back at least to the first half of the 2nd century. "
  2. Hans F. Bayer: The Gospel of Mark . In: Historical-Theological Interpretation, HTA . 3. Edition. tape 5 . Brockhaus, Holzgerlingen 2018, ISBN 978-3-417-29725-6 , p. 19 : "It is true that the heading (inscriptio) KATA MAPKON [KATA MARKON] was added to the Gospel later."
  3. For example Joachim Gnilka: The Gospel according to Mark . Part 1, 1994, p. 32.
  4. Silke Petersen: Bread, Light and Vine: Intertextual Analysis of Johannine I-Am-Words. Brill, Leiden / Boston 2008; ISBN 978-90-04-16599-1 , p. 70
  5. ^ Robert W. Yarbrough: The Date of Papias: A Reassessment. In: Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society. Volume 26, Number 2, 1983, pp. 181-191 ( PDF ).
  6. Enrico Norelli : Papia di Hierapolis, Esposizione degli Oracoli del Signore: I frammenti (= Letture cristiane del primo millennio. Volume 36). Paoline, Milan 2005, ISBN 88-315-2752-5 , pp. 38-54.
  7. Ulrich HJ KörtnerPapias of Hierapolis . In: Theologische Realenzyklopädie (TRE). Volume 25, de Gruyter, Berlin / New York 1995, ISBN 3-11-014712-2 , pp. 641-644.
  8. Eusebius of Caesarea : Church history. III, 39 (15).
  9. Eusebius, Church History 3,39,4.
  10. As such in Acts 13,5  EU ; 13.13 EU ; Col 4,10  EU and mentioned in Phlm 24  EU .
  11. The Gospel of Mark (Mk). In: WiBiLex Online, accessed on August 6, 2015.
  12. For example Udo Schnelle , 2007, p. 239, but already Rudolf Bultmann : Theologie des Neuen Testament. Tübingen 1980, 8th edition, § 56, p. 494.
  13. ^ Raymond E. Brown: An Introduction to the New Testament . In: Anchor Bible Reference Library . Doubleday, New York / London 1997, ISBN 978-0-385-24767-2 , pp. 159 : "If someone was inventing a tradition about authorship, why attribute the Gospel to such a minor Christian figure?"
  14. ^ A b Hans F. Bayer: The Gospel of Mark . In: Historical-Theological Interpretation, HTA . 3. Edition. tape 5 . Brockhaus, Holzgerlingen 2018, ISBN 978-3-417-29725-6 , p. 22 .
  15. Rainer Riesner : Jesus as a teacher . Tübingen 1988, p. 22 .
  16. Ingo Broer: Introduction to the New Testament. Study edition. Echter Verlag, Würzburg 2006, pp. 79-82.
  17. (Sun 4.36–52; 5; 16–26; 5.38–63; 6.15–25; 6.36–51; 7.3–15; 7.25–37; 8.10–26 ; 8.34–9.9; 9.18–31; 11.21–12.8; 12.13–28)
  18. For example M. Hengel: The time and situation of the Gospel of Mark . In: H. Canick: Markusphilologie. WUNT 33. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1984, pp. 1-45.
  19. For example W. Eckey: The Gospel of Mark: Orientation on the way of Jesus. Neukirchen: Neukirchener, 1998, pp. 6-9.
  20. For example J. Gnilka: The Gospel according to Mark. Part 1: Mk 1-8,26. EKK II / 1, 5th ed. 1994, pp. 32-35.
  21. ↑ In some cases the verse is completely dated back to pre-Markin times, for example in Brandenburger, Egon: Markus 13 und die Apokalyptik . FRLANT 134, Göttingen, 1984.
  22. José O'Callaghan: ¿Papiros neotestamentarios en la cueva 7 de Qumran? In: Biblica, 53, 1972, pp. 91-100
  23. Carsten Peter Thiede: 7Q - A return to the New Testament papyrus fragments in the seventh cave of Qumran. In: Biblica 65 (1984), pp. 538-559; Errata: Biblica 66 (1985), p. 261
  24. ^ Karl Jaroš : The New Testament and its authors. An introduction. (= UTB. 3087 Theology, Religion), Böhlau, Cologne / Weimar / Vienna 2008, ISBN 978-3-8252-3087-6 , p. 571
  25. Stefan Enste: No Mark Text in Qumran. An examination of the thesis: Qumran fragment 7Q5 = Mk 6.52–53. Universitätsverlag, Freiburg 2000, ISBN 3-7278-1286-9
  26. Armin D. Baum : The historical credibility of the New Testament history books from a scientific point of view. ! mpulse 2/09, pp. 6–9, here p. 8 PDF 303 kB, 4 pages on Armin-baum.de
  27. a b The historical figure of Paul and The historical figure of Paul and their significance for the history of early Christianity. Ludwig Maximilians University of Munich, Faculty of Catholic Theology, 2013, accessed on August 14, 2017 .
  28. a b Christoph Heil: A Probable Paulus Chronology. (No longer available online.) Institute for New Testament Biblical Studies, Catholic Theological Faculty, Karl-Franzens-Universität Graz, archived from the original on February 15, 2010 ; accessed on August 14, 2017 . Info: The archive link was inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. @1@ 2Template: Webachiv / IABot / www-theol.uni-graz.at
  29. Ingo Broer: Introduction to the New Testament. Study edition. Echter Verlag, Würzburg 2006, pp. 87-88.
  30. This is the case for Udo Schnelle (2007), pp. 244–246
  31. ^ Karl Jaroš : The New Testament and its authors. An introduction. (= UTB. 3087 Theology, Religion), Böhlau, Cologne / Weimar / Vienna 2008, ISBN 978-3-8252-3087-6 , pp. 50–51
  32. Ulrich Viktor, Carsten Peter Thiede, Urs Stingelin: Ancient culture and New Testament. Brunnen-Verlag, Basel / Gießen 2003, ISBN 3-7655-1324-5 , p. 23
  33. For example W. Eckey (1998), pp. 13-17.
  34. Joachim Gnilka: The Gospel according to Mark. EKK II / 1. 5th edition 1994, Zurich a. a., pp. 26-29.
  35. W. Eckey (1998), pp. 19–24, deals in more detail with sources and traditions of the Gospel of Mark.
  36. Roloff, Jürgen : Introduction to the New Testament refers to this argument . Reclam, Ditzingen 1995. pp. 154-156.
  37. See Udo Schnelle (2007), p. 248 f.
  38. So Martin Kähler: The so-called historical Jesus and the historical, biblical Christ . 1896, p. 80.
  39. For example in 1.2–3 EU on Jes 40.4  EU , Ex 23.20  EU and Mal 3.1  EU
  40. W. Eckey (1998), pp. 27–34, deals extensively with this topic.
  41. So z. B. “He was raised” instead of “God raised him” in 16.6 ELB
  42. W. Eckey (1998), pp. 27–34, deals with the Kingdom of God Sermon in more detail.
  43. Gnilka (1994), pp. 221–226, deals with miracle stories in more detail.
  44. A detailed description of the classical parabolic theory and various more modern interpretive approaches can be found in J. Gnilka (1994), pp. 170–172.
  45. According to Isa 8:23  EU "the territory of the Gentiles"
  46. J. Gnilka (1994), pp. 167–170, provides a detailed treatment of the Messiah's secret.
  47. Udo Schnelle (2007), p. 248 f.
  48. So with very different meanings and uses in Job 1.6  EU , Ex 4.22  EU , Weish 2.13–18  EU or in Weish 5.5  EU
  49. A similar usage can be found in the Qumran manuscripts 4QFlor 10–14 and 1QSa 2.11 f.
  50. So evident from 1 Thess 1.10  EU
  51. ↑ The title of the Son of God is dealt with in detail in J. Gnilka (1994), pp. 60–64.
  52. For example in Dan 7.13–14  EU , but also in Ethics 37–71 or in 4Esra 13
  53. W. Eckey (1998), pp. 34-40, explains various titles of majesty and humility in the Gospel of Mark in more detail, including the titles of the Son of God and the Son of Man.
  54. a b So in 10.46–52 EU
  55. See W. Eckey (1998), pp. 41-49.
  56. For example in 4.13 EU , 4.35–41 EU or 8.33 EU
  57. For example in 3.13–19 EU , 4.10 f. EU or 6.7 EU
  58. See Joachim Gnilka (1994), p. 169 f.
  59. Newer research trends are continuously presented in Gnilka (1994) and summarized in Schnelle (2007), pp. 255–260.
  60. A comprehensive description of the significance of Mark in the history of theology can be found in J. Gnilka (1994), pp. 17–24. For a more up-to-date presentation, see Klein (2018) passim.
  61. On the old church see Franz Stuhlhofer : The use of the Bible from Jesus to Euseb. A statistical study of the history of the canons (= Theological Publishing Association, monographs and study books 335). Wuppertal 1988, pp. 98-100.
This version was added to the list of articles worth reading on April 5, 2009 .