MARK, JOHN
Mark, John
Townson conjectures that the young man introduced as fleeing and leaving his linen robe, fear overcoming shame (Mar 16:51-52), was Mark himself, on the ground that otherwise we see no reason for its introduction, being unconnected with the context. If the young man was the writer, awakened out of sleep by the noise near his house of men proceeding to seize the Savior, then going forth hastily in a linen cloth only, and being an eye witness of Jesus’ apprehension and suspected of being His follower, though not so then but afterward, he would look back on this as the most interesting circumstance of his life; though, like John, in humility he describes without mentioning himself by name. (See LAZARUS.) Mark was son of Mary, residing at Jerusalem, and was cousin (not “sister’s son’,” Col 4:10) of Barnabas. The relationship accounts for Barnabas’ choice of Mark as his companion; also for the house of Mark’s mother being the resort of Christians, Barnabas a leader among them attracting others there.
The family belonged to Cyprus (Act 4:36; Act 13:4; Act 13:13); so Barnabas chose Cyprus as the first station on their journey. Mark readily accompanied him as “minister” (hufretes, “subordinate”) to the country of his kindred; but had not the spiritual strength to overcome his Jewish prejudices which he probably imbibed from his spiritual father Peter (Gal 2:11-14), so as to accompany Paul the apostle of the Gentiles further than Perga of Pamphylia, in his first missionary tour to the pagan. Mark returned to Mary his mother at Jerusalem; he ought to have remembered Jesus’ words (Mat 10:37). Paul therefore (because “he went not with them to the work,” for his accompanying them to his native Cyprus was his own pleasure rather than zeal for pure missionary “work”) rejected him on his second missionary journey (Act 15:37-39). This caused a temporary alienation between Paul and Barnabas. The latter (realizing his name, “son of consolation”) took Mark again to Cyprus, like a tender father in Christ bearing with the younger disciple’s infirmity, until by grace he should become stronger in faith; also influenced by the He of relationship.
Christian love healed the breach, for in Col 4:10 Paul implies his restored confidence in Mark (“touching whom ye received commandments, if he come unto you receive him … my fellow workers unto the kingdom of God which have been a comfort unto me”). The Colossians, 110 miles distant from Perga, 20 from Pisidia, knew of Mark’s past unfaithfulness, and so needed the recommendation to “receive” him as a true evangelist, ignoring the past. So in Phm 1:11-24, he calls Mark “my fellow laborer.” Mark was two years later again in Colossae when Paul tells Timothy, then in Asia Minor (2Ti 4:11), “take Mark and bring him with thee, for he is profitable to me for the ministry.” A contrast: Demas, once Paul’s” fellow laborer,” fails away; Mark returns to the right way, and is no longer unprofitable, but “profitable (even to an apostle) for the ministry.” By his Latin knowledge he was especially likely to be “profitable” in preaching at Rome where Paul then was when he desired Timothy to “bring Mark.”
He was Peter’s “son” by conversion (probably converted in meeting the apostle in his mother’s house at Jerusalem), and was with his spiritual father when 1Pe 5:13 was written; his connection with Peter, by an undesigned coincidence which marks genuineness, appears in Act 12:12. After Paul’s death Mark joined Peter with whom he had been before associated in the writing of the Gospel. (See PETER.) Mark was with Paul intending to go to Asia Minor, A.D. 61-63 (Col 4:10). In 2Ti 4:11, A.D. 67, Mark was near Ephesus, from whence he was about to be taken by Timothy to Rome. It is not likely Peter would have trenched on Paul’s field of labour, the churches of Asia Minor, during Paul’s lifetime. At his death Mark joined his old father in the faith, Peter, at Babylon. Silvanus or Silas had been substituted for Mark as Paul’s companion because of Mark’s temporary unfaithfulness; but Mark, now restored, is associated with Silvanus (2Ti 4:12), Paul’s companion, in Peter’s esteem, as Mark was already reinstated in Paul’s esteem.
Naturally Mark salutes the Asiatic churches with whom he had been already under Paul spiritually connected. The tradition (Clemens Alex. in Eusebius’ H. E. 6:14, Clem. Alex. Hyp. 6) that Mark was Peter’s companion at Rome arose from misunderstanding “Babylon” (1Pe 5:13) to be Rome. A friendly salutation is not the place where an enigmatically prophetical title would be used (Rev 17:5). Babylon was the center from which the Asiatic dispersion whom Peter (1Pe 1:1-2) addresses was derived. Alexandria was the final scene of Mark’s labors, bishopric, and martyrdom (Nicephorus, H. E. 2:43).
Fuente: Fausset’s Bible Dictionary
Mark, John
mark, John (, Ioannes) represents his Jewish, Mark (, Markos) his Roman name. Why the latter was assumed we do not know.
1. Name and Family:
Perhaps the aorist participle in Act 12:25 may be intended to intimate that it dated from the time when, in company with Barnabas and Saul, he turned to service in the great Gentilecity of Antioch. Possibly it was the badge of Roman citizenship, as in the case of Paul. The standing of the family would be quite consistent with such a supposition.
His mother’s name was Mary (Act 12:12). The home is spoken of as hers. The father was probably dead. The description of the house (with its large room and porch) and the mention of the Greek slave, suggest a family of wealth. They were probably among the many zealous Jews who, having become rich in the great world outside, retired to Jerusalem, the center of their nation and faith. Mark was cousin to Barnabas of Cyprus (Col 4:10) who also seems to have been a man of means (Act 4:36). Possibly Cyprus was also Mark’s former home.
2. His History as Known from the New Testament:
When first mentioned, Mark and his mother are already Christians (44 AD). He had been converted through Peter’s personal influence (1Pe 5:13) and had already won a large place in the esteem of the brethren, as is shown by his being chosen to accompany Barnabas and Saul to Antioch, a little later. The home was a resort for Christians, so that Mark had every opportunity to become acquainted with other leaders such as James and John, and James the brother of the Lord. It was perhaps from the latter James that he learned the incident of Mar 3:21 which Peter would be less likely to mention.
His kinship with Barnabas, knowledge of Christian history and teaching, and proved efficiency account for his being taken along on the first missionary journey as minister (, huperetes) to Barnabas and Saul (Act 13:5). Just what that term implies is not clear. Chase (HDB) conjectures the meaning to be that he had been huperetes, attendant or hazzan in the synagogue (compare Luk 4:20), and was known as such an official. Wright (English translation, February, 1910) suggests that he was to render in newly founded churches a teaching service similar to that of the synagogue hazzan. Hackett thought that the ka of this verse implies that he was to be doing the same kind of work as Barnabas and Saul and so to be their helper in preaching and teaching. The more common view has been (Meyer, Swete, et al.) that he was to perform personal service not evangelistic, official service but not of the menial kind – to be a sort of business agent. The view that he was to be a teacher, a catechist for converts, seems to fit best all the facts.
Why did he turn back from the work (Act 13:13)? Not because of homesickness, or anxiety for his mother’s safety, or home duties, or the desire to rejoin Peter, or fear of the perils incident to the journey, but rather because he objected to the offer of salvation to the Gentiles on condition of faith alone. There are hints that Mark’s family, like Paul’s, were Hebrews of the Hebrews, and it is not without significance that in both verses (Act 13:5, Act 13:13) he is given only his Hebrew name. The terms of Paul’s remonstrance are very strong (Act 15:38), and we know that nothing stirred Paul’s feelings more deeply than this very question. The explanation of it all may be found in what happened at Paphos when the Roman Sergius Paulus became a believer. At that time Paul (the change of name is here noted by Luke) stepped to the front, and henceforth, with the exception of 15:12, 25, where naturally enough the old order is maintained, Luke speaks of Paul and Barnabas, not Barnabas and Saul. We must remember that, at that time, Paul stood almost alone in his conviction. Barnabas, even later than that, had misgivings (Gal 2:13). Perhaps, too, Mark was less able than Barnabas himself to see the latter take second place.
We hear nothing further of Mark until the beginning of the second missionary journey 2 years later, when Paul’s unwillingness to take him with them led to the rupture between Paul and Barnabas and to the mission of Barnabas and Mark to Cyprus (Act 15:39). He is here called Mark, and in that quiet way Luke may indicate his own conviction that Mark’s mind had changed on the great question, as indeed his willingness to accompany Paul might suggest. He had learned from the discussions in the council at Jerusalem and from subsequent events at Antioch.
About 11 years elapse before we hear of him again (Col 4:10 f; Phm 1:24). He is at Rome with Paul. The breach is healed. He is now one of the faithful few among Jewish Christians who stand by Paul. He is Paul’s honored fellowworker and a great comfort to him.
The Colossian passage may imply a contemplated visit by Mark to Asia Minor. It may be that it was carried out, that he met Peter and went with him to Babylon. In 1Pe 5:13 the apostle sends Mark’s greeting along with that of the church in Babylon. Thence Mark returns to Asia Minor, and in 2Ti 4:11 Paul asks Timothy, who is at Ephesus, to come to him, pick up Mark by the way, and bring him along. In that connection Paul pays Mark his final tribute; he is useful for ministering ( , euchrestos eis diakonan), so useful that his ministry is a joy to the veteran’s heart.
3. His History as Known from Other Sources:
The most important and reliable tradition is that he was the close attendant and interpreter of Peter, and has given us in the Gospel that bears his name account of Peter’s teaching. For that comradeship the New Testament facts furnish a basis, and the gaps in the New Testament history leave plenty of room. An examination of the tradition will be found in MARK, THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO (which see).
Other traditions add but little that is reliable. It is said that Mark had been a priest, and that after becoming a Christian he amputated a finger to disqualify himself for that service. Hence, the nickname , kolobodaktulos, which, however, is sometimes otherwise explained. He is represented as having remained in Cyprus until after the death of Barnabas (who was living in 57 AD according to 1Co 9:5 f) and then to have gone to Alexandria, founded the church there, become its first bishop and there died (or was marthyred) in the 8th year of Nero (62-63). They add that in 815 AD Venetian soldiers stole his remains from Alexandria and placed them under the church of Mark at Venice.
Literature.
Chase, HDB, III, 245 ff; Rae, DCG, II, 119 f; Harnack, Encyclopedia Brit; Zahn, Introduction to the New Testament, II, 427-56; Lindsay, Salmond, Morison and Swete in their Comms.
Fuente: International Standard Bible Encyclopedia
MARK, JOHN
(Marcus) son of Mary, “The Young Man who Recovered himself”
Act 12:12; Act 12:25; Act 13:5; Act 13:13; Act 15:37; Col 4:10; 2Ti 4:11; Phm 1:24; 1Pe 5:13
–Facts Concerning
Had Godly Mother
Act 12:12
Related to Barnabas
Col 4:10
Helper of Paul and Barnabas
Act 12:25
Early years apparently vacillating
Act 13:13; Act 15:38
Later years became a faithful co-worker with Paul
Col 4:10; 2Ti 4:11
Companion of Peter
1Pe 5:13