Papias, a bishop of Hierapolis, writes that Mark had served as a disciple to the apostle Peter in Rome. According to Papias, Mark had not heard the Lord or been one of his followers. Two important historical observations were made by Papias. The first was that the author, Mark depended on second hand oral preaching, and Marks accounts of Jesus’ activities is not in proper chronological order (Harris, 2014, p.136, & 137).
The traditional view is that the second gospel was written by John Mark. This acceptance is based on the preaching by the apostle Peter. Mark was a disciple of Peter, and he was a trusted companion of Paul (ROGERS, 2015).
Scholars have differing views regarding the authorship of Mark. Some believe the work to be that of a later Paulinist author, but others believe the evangelist was Mark, Paul’s co-worker (Kok, 2014).…show more content… They believe his writings came from a large collection of oral teachings about Jesus in his region (Harris, 2014, p. 137).
Scholars caution that Papias is an early witness to Christianity, and there is not a way to substantiate the historicity of his claims. The author of the Gospel of Mark does not identify himself. This Gospel is considered anonymous (Harris, 2014, p.138).
The traditional place of composition is Rome, but an increasing number of scholars believe Mark wrote for an audience in Syria or Palestine. Some critics favored a Palestinian origin due to Mark’s emphasis on the Jewish Revolt (66-73 CE). He issued warnings to believers that were affected by the uprising. Mark believed the destruction of Jerusalem was a sign signaling Jesus’ return to heaven (Harris, 2014, p.138).
