Mark, who had been Peter’s interpreter, wrote down carefully, but not in order, all that he had remembered of the Lord’s sayings and doings. For he had not heard the Lord or been one of His followers, but later, as I said, one of Peter’s. Peter used to adapt his teachings to the occasion, without making a systematic arrangement of the Lord’s sayings, so that Mark was quite justified in writing down some things just as he remembered them. For he had one purpose only – to leave out nothing that he had heard, and to make no misstatement about it.

The late 2nd century philosopher-theologian Clement of Alexandria offers additional information on the composition of this gospel. Clement’s comments are paraphrased by the fourth century historian Eusebius this way:

He (Clement) used to say that the earliest gospels were those containing the genealogies, while Mark’s originated as follows. When, at Rome, Peter had openly preached the word and by the spirit had proclaimed the gospel, the large audience urged Mark, who had followed him for a long time and remembered what had been said, to write it all down. This he did, making his gospel available to all who wanted it. When Peter heard about this, he made no objection and gave no special encouragement.

Third century theologian Origen also commented on the circumstances of Mark’s composition, noting that Mark: "… followed Peters’s instructions in writing it." The fourth century church historian Eusebius suggests that Mark may have written his gospel under a bit of duress:

So brightly shone the light of true religion on the minds of Peter’s hearers that, not satisfied with a single hearing or with the oral teaching of the divine message, they resorted to appeals of every kind to induce Mark (whose gospel we have), as he was a follower of Peter, to leave them in writing a summary of the instruction they had received by word of mouth, nor did they let him go till they had persuaded him, and thus became responsible for the writing of what is known as the Gospel according to Mark.

Eusebius also notes that Mark served as bishop of Alexandria in Egypt, around whom a large following of men and women was established, practicing "an extremely severe rule of life." This may have placed the seeds of divergent practices between later ascetics versus a more pragmatic and orthodox church leadership. In this comment, we sense the parodox presented by Mark and his Jesus – with elements both of action and mystery.

Dimwitted Disciples
There are at least a couple of dozen interactions between Jesus and his disciples that Mark records. In all but one instance, Jesus is dismissive – if not demeaning – in attitude towards his disciples.

A typical example occurs the evening after Jesus feeds the 5,000. The disciples take to a boat; Jesus arrives by walking on water. The disciples are terrified. All three synoptic gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke) record that Jesus calls out: "Take heart, it is I; do not be afraid." Only Mark adds this editorial note: "And they (the disciples) were utterly astounded, for they did not understand about the loaves, but their hearts were hardened."

There are several such incidents where the accounts of Matthew or Luke suggest a more positive view of the disciples than does Mark. A noteworthy example is provided by Jesus’ response to the disciples’ request for a private interpretation of the Parable of the Sower. Alternative versions of Jesus’ response as told by the three synoptic writers follow:

Mark: "Do you not understand this parable? Then how will you understand all the parables?"

Matthew: "To you it has been given to know the secrets of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it has not been given."

Luke: "To you it has been given to know the secrets of the kingdom of God; but to others I speak in parables...."

In other words, while Mark’s Jesus is critical of the disciples’ question, Matthew and Luke portray a Jesus who is pleased to share secrets of the kingdom with his select dozen.

Jesus’ response to a group of children and their parents provides a third example. All three synoptics have Jesus asking the children to come to him; only Mark also reports that Jesus was indignant with the disciples for trying to keep the children and their parents away.

Mark’s Jesus comes across as dismissive not only toward his disciples but his larger public. For example, Mark has Jesus saying that he talks in parables in part so that those "outside" "may indeed look, but not perceive, and may indeed listen, but not understand, so that they may not turn again and be forgiven." Luke’s gospel deletes the hardened (italicized) portion of Jesus’ statement.

A final example occurs with the conclusion of Mark’s gospel – which ends before the risen Jesus even re-establishes contact with his disciples. The earliest extant manuscripts of this gospel end with an angel telling the women who visited the tomb: "But go, tell his disciples and Peter that he is going ahead of you to Galilee; there you will see him, just as he told you." Subsequently, the women "…fled from the tomb, for terror and amazement had seized them; and they said nothing to anyone, for they were afraid."

And so the gospel account (in its earliest form) abruptly ends – with the women, the disciples and the rest of us left to figure out the meaning for ourselves.

Acceptance of Mark: Christian writers of the first and second century generally give less play to Mark than other gospels. Not only are most of the events recounted by Mark also found in the lengthier synoptics, but Mark is also less favored as a text because it appears to be doctrinally light. Specifically missing from Mark are the extensive discourses (or sayings) of Jesus that provide more insight into his views or theology.

At first blush, Mark’s Jesus appears strong on action, weak on thought. Yet this conclusion would miss the well-crafted narrative, clearly meant to leave certain impressions on the reader. To his readers, Mark appears to have wanted to convey the sense of a man of action and mystery, albeit surrounded by adherents (both men and women) who just never quite seem to get it.

Mark in Summary
Far from being a simple narrative, Mark’s terse gospel is carefully crafted, generating powerful undercurrents pushing their way down through the last two millennia. Mark’s Jesus is a man set within yet apart from the milieu of the last decades of temple Judaism.

Jesus is routinely misunderstood by what are routinely portrayed as dimwitted disciples. If his disciples don’t understand, how much less so will he be understood by the general public – to whom Jesus deliberately speaks in parables to be sure they won’t get it.

While it is unclear whether Mark was written before or after the writings of Paul, Mark’s gospel does provide useful cover for the teachings of Paul. As an outsider, Paul’s ministry depends on confronting and ultimately superceding the influence of Jesus’ original disciples.

Paul’s ascendancy certainly is not hurt and may well have been abetted by a gospel portraying the initial Church leaders as ones not much deserving of emulation. It is the doctrine of Paul’s Jesus – seen through a vision – that has lasted down through two millennia.

With inept disciples, it is Jesus’ brother James and then Paul the convert who step in to fill the void. With the execution of James, Paul is essentially granted an unchallenged license to interpret (or reinterpret) the message of Jesus as he sees fit.

While not directly claiming divinity for Jesus, Mark’s portrayal of the disciples goes a long way to set the Son of Man apart from mere man. Mark’s God is a very task-oriented deity. This is divinity focused on delivery of "good news" – aimed at preparing us for the kingdom of God. And, paradoxically this is a God who’s own son beseeches the almighty God in endearing terms even at the point of death – as "Abba (or daddy), father."

If there is an upside to the heresy of Mark’s gospel, this is it. The church of believers is not to place full reliance in other earthly leaders – even those closest to Jesus.

The downside is that the message of those closest to the Son of Man could be readily swept aside by other upstarts who had little or no direct contact with the earthly Jesus. We are left with an unknown: If early church leadership would have remained in the hands of the remaining eleven disciples, what might be different about the Christianity we know and practice today?

This excerpt is adapted from the "The Heresy of Mark: Dimwitted Disciples," further detailed in the approximately 360 page book 12 Heresies of Christianity.

Please click here for more information on the 12 Heresies of Christianity.