Bibliotheca Ephemeridum Theologicarum Lovaniensium
Bib Biblica
BNTC Black New Testament Commentary
BTS Biblical Tools and Studies
BZNW Beiheft zur Zeitschrift für die neuetestamentliche Wissenschaft
CBQ Catholic Biblical Quarterly
CBQMS Catholic Biblical Quarterly Monograph Series
ExpT Expository Times
HNT Handbuch zum Neuen Testament
HTR Harvard Theological Review
HTS Harvard Theological Studies
JANES Journal of the Ancient Near Eastern Society of Columbia University
JBL Journal of Biblical Literature
JBT Jahrbuch für biblische Theologie
JETS Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society
JSJSup Supplements to the Journal for the Study of Judaism
JSNT Journal for the Study of the New Testament
JSNTSup Journal for the Study of the New Testament Supplement Series
JSOT Journal for the Study of the Old Testament
JSOTSup Journal for the Study of the Old Testament Supplement Series
JSS Journal of Semitic Studies
JTS Journal of Theological Studies
LNTS Library of New Testament Studies
LSJ A Greek-English Lexicon. By H. G. Liddell and R. Scott, new edn by H. S. Jones and R. McKenzie. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1940 (supplement, ed. E. A. Barber, 1968)
NA28 Novum Testamentum Graece, 28th edn, ed. E. Nestle, K. Aland et al, Stuttgart: Deutsche Biblestiftung, 2012.
NICNT New International Commentary on the New Testament
NIGTC New International Greek Testament Commentary
NovT Novum Testamentum
NovTSup Novum Testamentum Supplement Series
NTOA Novum Testamentum et Orbis Antiquus
NTS New Testament Studies
NumenSup Numen Supplements
PNTC Pillar New Testament Commentary
RB Revue biblique
SBEC Studies in the Bible and Early Christianity
SBLDS Society of Biblical Literature Dissertation Series
SBLSP Society of Biblical Literature Seminar Papers
SBLSS Society of Biblical Literature Semeia Studies
SBT Studies in Biblical Theology
SHBC Smyth & Helwys Bible Commentary
SNTSMS Society for New Testament Studies Monograph Series
SOTBT Studies in Old Testament Biblical Theology
TDNT Theological Dictionary of the New Testament. 9 vols. Ed. G. Kittel and G. Friedrich. ET. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1964-74.
TGST Tesi greogariana, Serie theologia
TZ Theologische Zeitschrift
WBC Word Biblical Commentary
WUNT Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament
ZNW Zeitschrift für die neuetestamentliche Wissenschaft
Introduction
Larger works have detailed discussions on what is usually known as “Introduction.” Consequently, we will provide only a sketch of where this commentary stands in relation to such matters.
Authorship
There is no explicit mention of who the author is in the text of the Second Gospel1 but we believe him to be Mark. The case for this is based mainly on two considerations: the superscription and the external testimony.
Superscription
In ancient times the author’s name is found usually in the superscription—something that precedes the actual work, and may be treated as the equivalent to the title page in modern books. The text proper seldom identifies the author.2 All the available Greek manuscripts of this Gospel featuring a superscription unanimously name Mark as the author.3 The earliest manuscripts that have this feature come from the fourth century.4 Later manuscripts contain superscriptions in different forms, usually expanded from the simple kata Markon.5 Some scholars use this to infer that all superscriptions are artificial, leading to the thesis that this Gospel circulated anonymously at the first until a couple of centuries later.6 What remains significant, however, is that despite the varied forms, all of them consistently state that Mark is the author. Such consistency cannot be ignored.
Moreover, Mark is not the name of an apostle, or an important figure in the history of earliest Christianity. Why should a rather obscure name be passed off as the author of this important work, when there were better candidates? Indeed, the two-document hypothesis7 adds strength to this argument, as it means our Gospel was significant enough to be utilized by both Matthew and Luke. If a name has to be fabricated to identify a significant anonymous work, we would not have expected “Mark.” The name “Mark” therefore carries with it a ring of authenticity.
Furthermore, written Gospels started circulating as early as the first century. We may use John’s Gospel as an illuminating example. This work was already being copied in Egypt by AD 125,8 a mere thirty years or so after its composition, which is usually believed to be in Ephesus. Although we do not have similar evidence in the case of the Second Gospel, we may posit that it must have started circulating in the first century, since it was used by Matthew and Luke. Early circulation of Gospels necessitated some sort of labelling, so as to distinguish the one from the other.9
All the above observations mean that even if the Second Gospel was published anonymously, this anonymity would have disappeared almost from the very start, when it started circulating. In other words, even if we deem the superscriptions as secondary, we will still have to accept that they may very well have enshrined a truth. Significantly, there is only one name offered by them as the author: Mark.
Early Patristic Testimonies
The earliest and most-discussed testimony comes from Papias, the bishop of Hierapolis in the early second century. His work, Exegesis of the Lord’s Oracles, was written around AD 110,10 but it is now lost except for excerpts that are cited in Eusebius’s book, Ecclesiastical History, written in the fourth century. Papias testifies that Mark wrote the “oracles of the Lord,” dependent on Peter’s memories.11 Of course, this does not necessarily mean that our current Gospel is being referred to. That said, it is clear that as early as the beginning of the second century,
