(1)
Scripture Reading: Isa. 42:1-4, 6-7; 49:5-7; 50:4-7; 52:13-15; 53:1-12; Mark 10:45
With this message we begin the Life-study of the Gospel of Mark. Mark is not as profound as the Gospel of John, and it does not contain as many teachings as are found in the Gospel of Matthew. Some readers of the New Testament may think of Mark as the “Galilee” of the four Gospels, and some may wonder what good can come out of Galilee. However, the Lord Jesus came from Galilee.
The Gospel of John is mainly a record of the Lord’s move in Judea and of His profound words spoken there. Mark, on the contrary, is a record mainly of the Lord’s ministry in Galilee. Mark does not record much of the Lord’s move or teaching in Judea.
If we would have a history of the Lord’s life and ministry on earth, we need to learn how to put together the Gospels of John and Mark. When these Gospels are put together, we can see the Lord’s move in the regions of Galilee and Judea. Judea was a highly respected province, and the city of Jerusalem was located there. But the province of Galilee was looked down upon and despised. The Lord’s move in Galilee covered a longer period of time than His move in Judea. We need to see that the record in the Gospel of Mark is a record primarily of the Lord’s move not in Judea but in Galilee.
In the first chapter of the Gospel of John we have a record of profound matters related to Christ’s incarnation. Verses 1 and 14 reveal that in the beginning was the Word, that the Word was with God and was God, and that the Word became flesh and tabernacled among us. According to John 1:14, the disciples also saw the Lord’s glory, glory as of an only begotten from a father. In the first chapter of his Gospel John goes on to say that the law was given through Moses, but grace and reality came through Jesus Christ (John 1:17). In verse 18 John says, “No one has ever seen God; the only begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, He has declared Him.” Furthermore, John tells us that in the Word was life, and the life was the light of men (v. 4). All these matters are very profound.
In contrast to the profound matters revealed in the Gospel of John, in Mark’s Gospel we see the Lord as the Slave-Savior. In the Gospel of Mark we do not have the God-Savior, as in John, the King-Savior, as in Matthew, or the Man-Savior, as in Luke. The Gospel of Mark presents a particular aspect of Christ, the aspect of the Slave-Savior. In John we have God; in Matthew, the King; in Luke, the Man; and in Mark, the Slave. We would hardly expect to hear excellent, profound, marvelous things about a slave. There is a sense in which it is not easy to speak on the Gospel of Mark.
In the Life-study of James we emphasized the contrast between the writings of Paul and the book of James. The writings of Paul are on a much higher level than those of James. Paul’s writings are on a divine level, on God’s level, and reveal the divine dispensing for the fulfillment of God’s eternal purpose. Therefore, in the Epistles of Paul we have a revelation of the divine economy. The book of James is on a much lower level. Whereas Paul’s writings are on a divine level, the book of James is on a human level and emphasizes practical Christian perfection. In his Epistle James deals with matters of godliness and character. The differences between the Epistle of James and the Epistles of Paul are actually very great. How could we compare something on the human level with something on the divine level? How can we compare practical Christian perfection with the divine economy, or compare living ethically with living Christ? There is no comparison.
If we would know the meaning of practical Christian perfection, we need to come to the Epistle of James. Concerning Christian perfection, nothing is better than the book of James. Consider, for example, what James says concerning wisdom: “But the wisdom from above is first pure, then peaceable, forbearing, compliant, full of mercy and good fruits, impartial, unfeigned” (James 3:17). James also says, “The fruit of righteousness is sown in peace by those who make peace” (v. 18). This teaching certainly is much higher than that of Confucius. Concerning Christian perfection and human ethics, the book of James is excellent. In this regard we all need to respect James. Nevertheless, no matter how excellent James’ writing may be regarding Christian perfection, he remains on the human level, and the human level cannot compare to the divine level.
To a certain extent we may use the contrast of the levels of the writings of Paul and James as an illustration of the contrast between Mark and the other Gospels. How, for instance, can we compare a slave with God? Furthermore, how can we compare a slave with a king? Apparently, the Gospel of Mark is on a much lower level than that of John, Matthew, and Luke. As recorded in John’s Gospel, the Lord says such profound things as “I am the life” (14:6), “I am the light of the world” (8:12), and “I am the resurrection” (11:25). Such words cannot be found in the Gospel of Mark. However, in the Gospel of Mark we have the excellent record of a wonderful Slave. In the Gospel of Mark we have something that cannot be found in John, Matthew, or Luke.
The Lord Jesus is wonderful and all-inclusive. Even His name is called Wonderful (Isa. 9:6). The Lord is wonderful not only in His divinity but also in His humanity. Where do we see a portrait of the humanity of the Lord Jesus? It is correct to say that the Gospel of Luke emphasizes the Lord’s humanity. In his Gospel Luke presents the Lord as a normal man, as a man fully up to standard. With such a man we see human virtue, excellence, and beauty. However, not even all this can compare with the aspect of the Lord’s humanity seen in the Gospel of Mark. In Mark we see a beautiful expression of Christ’s virtues in His humanity. I believe that more of the Lord’s excellent virtues in His humanity are seen in the Gospel of Mark than in the Gospel of Luke.
Only one of the four Gospels — the Gospel of John — is on the Lord’s divinity. The other three Gospels, called the synoptic Gospels, are on the Lord’s humanity. The word “synoptic” indicates that the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, and Luke all have the same view, the view of the Lord’s humanity. In these three Gospels we see different aspects of Christ in His humanity: the Lord’s humanity in being the King (Matthew), the Lord’s humanity in being a man who is up to standard (Luke), and the Lord’s humanity in being a Slave (Mark).
Suppose the President of the United States, after completing his term of office, would serve as a janitor. After being President, he would willingly lower himself to become a janitor to serve others. Would this not be excellent? The excellency of such a man in his presidency could not compare with the excellency in his becoming a janitor. I believe that most citizens would appreciate him more in his being a janitor than in his being a President. With him as a President we would not see as much of the beauty of his humanity. But if he would become a janitor to serve others, we would see the beauty, the virtue, in his humanity. How beautiful for a person, after occupying the high office of President of the United States, to become a janitor! I doubt that any of us would feel comfortable in the presence of a President, but we would all feel comfortable with a janitor. How excellent it would be to see a former President working as a janitor, for we would see in him excellent human virtue!
Which kind of person do you prefer — a President or a janitor? I would rather be with a janitor than with a President. If the President were to invite me to spend the night at the White House, I would not feel at home. But if a former President were to become a janitor and invite me into his home for the night, I would feel very comfortable.
I use the illustration of a President becoming a janitor to help us see the position of the Gospel of Mark in relation to the other Gospels. In the Gospel of Matthew we see the Lord Jesus in His kingship, but in the Gospel of Mark we see the Lord in His slavery. Which do you prefer — the Lord as a King or the Lord as a Slave? Do you prefer a King-Jesus or a Slave-Jesus? Naturally, we may be inclined to appreciate the Lord as a King more than as a Slave. But we all need to appreciate the Lord as the Slave-Savior revealed in Mark. If we appreciate the Lord in this way, then we shall understand the value of the book of Mark.
In the Gospel of Mark we have a vivid record of the Lord’s humanity as a Slave. The last chapters of Mark are especially long and detailed. The reason is that Mark’s purpose is to provide a detailed record to show the beauty of the Lord as a Slave in His human virtues.
A key to understanding the Gospel of Mark is that in this Gospel we see much more of the Lord’s acts than of His words. Mark does not record very much of the Lord’s teaching. For example, he does not include the message the Lord gave on the mountain (Matt. 5—7). Neither does Mark include the lengthy prophecies and many of the parables found in Matthew and Luke. For the most part, Mark gives us a detailed record of the Lord’s acts. He includes many small points in order to present a portrait of the beauty and excellence of the humanity of Christ as the Slave-Savior. If we see this, we shall love the Gospel of Mark.
The secret to understanding the Gospel of Mark is to see that this book describes in a vivid, detailed way the excellent and marvelous human virtues of the Lord Jesus. Actually, it is quite difficult to speak on this Gospel. More than twenty messages would be needed to cover what is revealed only in the first three chapters, because the record of the Lord’s humanity in this Gospel is so vivid and detailed. How marvelous is the picture of the virtues of the Lord’s humanity in the Gospel of Mark! We need a particular kind of utterance from the Lord to speak of these matters. Throughout the years I have become accustomed to speaking on the all-inclusive Christ, the church, and the compound, processed, indwelling Spirit. But when we come to the Gospel of Mark, I sense the need for a different kind of utterance, and I look to the Lord for it.
The writer of this Gospel was Mark, who was also called John (Acts 12:25), the son of one of the Marys (who was close to the Apostle Peter in the church at Jerusalem, Acts 12:12). He was also the cousin of Barnabas (Col. 4:10). He accompanied Barnabas and Saul in their ministry (Acts 12:25), and joined Paul in the first journey of his ministry to the Gentiles (Acts 13:5). However, Mark left Paul and turned back at Perga (Acts 13:13). Due to the fact that he had turned back, he was rejected by Paul in his second journey. Mark then joined Barnabas in his work, at which time Barnabas separated himself from Paul (Acts 15:36-40). However, Mark was close to Paul in his later years (Col. 4:10; Philem. 1:24) and useful to him for his ministry until Paul’s martyrdom (2 Tim. 4:11). He was close to Peter, probably continually, since Peter considered him his son (1 Pet. 5:13).
From the early days of the church Mark’s Gospel has been considered a written account of the oral presentation of Peter, who accompanied the Savior in His gospel service from its beginning (Mark 1:16-18) to its end (14:54, 66-72). The record is according to historical sequence and gives more details of historical facts than the other Gospels do. The entire Gospel is summarized in Peter’s word in Acts 10:36-42.
Concerning the Gospel of Mark we need to keep three matters in mind: first, that this Gospel is a written account of Peter’s presentation of the history of Jesus Christ, the Son of God; second, that this Gospel was written according to historical sequence; and third, that this Gospel gives more details of historical facts than the other Gospels do. The Gospel of Mark may actually be regarded as the Gospel of Peter. Peter presented the story of the Lord Jesus orally to Mark, and Mark put this story into writing. This Gospel also gives us a biography of the Lord according to historical sequence. The record in Matthew, on the contrary, gives us a record according to doctrine. If we would know the actual incidents of the Lord’s life according to historical sequence, we need the Gospel of Mark. Furthermore, Mark gives more details of historical facts than the other Gospels do. As we have already pointed out, Mark pays much more attention to the Lord’s action than to His speaking. This fits Mark’s purpose in portraying the Lord as a Slave. A slave is one who works, not one who talks a great deal. Therefore, Mark presents the details of the Lord’s actions.
John presents the God-Savior, emphasizing the Savior’s deity in His humanity. Matthew presents the King-Savior; Mark, the Slave-Savior; and Luke, the Man-Savior. Matthew, Mark, and Luke are synoptic concerning the Savior’s humanity in different aspects, with His deity. Since Mark presents the Savior as a Slave, he does not tell His genealogy and status, as the ancestry of a slave is not worthy of note. Mark also does not intend to impress us with the Slave’s wonderful words (as Matthew does with His marvelous teachings and parables concerning the heavenly kingdom, and John with His profound revelations of divine truths), but he impresses us with His excellent deeds in His gospel service, providing more detail than the other Gospels, in order to portray the Slave-Savior’s diligence, faithfulness, and other virtues in the saving service He rendered to sinners for God. In Mark’s Gospel is the fulfillment of the prophecy concerning Christ as the Slave of Jehovah in Isaiah 42:1-4, 6-7; 49:5-7; 50:4-7; 52:13—53:12, and the details of the teaching regarding Christ as the Slave of God in Philippians 2:5-11. His diligence in labor, His need of food and rest (Mark 3:20-21; 6:31), His anger (3:5), His groaning (7:34), and His affection (10:21) display beautifully His humanity in its virtue and perfection. His lordship (2:28), His omniscience (2:8), His miraculous power, and His authority to cast out demons (1:27; 3:15), to forgive sins (2:7, 10), and to silence the wind and the sea (4:39) manifest in full His deity in its glory and honor. What a Slave of God! How lovely and admirable! Such a Slave served sinners as their Slave-Savior, with His life as their ransom (10:45), for the fulfillment of the eternal purpose of God, whose Slave He was.
