The Gospel of Mark is my personal favorite because of the way in which
Mark depicts Jesus. He presents the most grounded, human-like view of Jesus,
while the other gospels present a more heavenly, mystical image of Jesus. Of
course, the healing powers and nature of Jesus are still present in Mark's
gospel. The primary difference is the diction used in his description.
Part of the reason for this is that “Mark’s Gospel was written in, with,
and for a particular community” (What the
Gospels Meant, 2008, p 15). Many references within the gospel are specific
to the community that Mark was writing for and are not understood by other
readers. While this community was the intended audience of Mark’s Gospel, it is
also very appealing to those that view aspects of religion as metaphors instead
of literally interpreting religious texts. I believe that this is why Mark’s is
the most important of the gospels.
Jesus is not referred to as God in Mark, and while it only happens
several times throughout the rest of the New Testament, it is notable in Mark.
Jesus also shows more emotion in Mark’s gospel. He is not nearly as stoic as he
is presented in the other books of the New Testament. Jesus displays anger and
pain.
Despite all these differences in the image of Jesus, Mark still
maintains the important aspects of Jesus’ nature. His healing abilities and
kindness are just as clear to the reader in this book as the others. An example
is when Jesus heals Simon’s mother-in-law. “Simon’s mother-in-law was in bed
with a fever, and they immediately told Jesus about her. So he went to her,
took her hand and helped her up. The fever left her and she began to wait on
them”[1]
Bibliography
Wills, Gary. “What the Gospels Meant.” New York: Viking Publishing,
2008.
No comments:
Post a Comment