Talk:Gospel of Mark

!

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Religion, an attempt to build a comprehensive guide to Religion-related articles on Conservapedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.

Where all Jesus's apostles children?

I read something elsewhere about the question if John was a child, and now see Mark being considered a child. Is there any reference to a theologian who could back this up? Looking at one's writing style may be misleading - the material being written for a younger audience by an older individual would also have this effect. Alternatively, writing for the poor and less educated adults in the Roman Empire, hoping to bring them the Good News would have the same effect. Using this line of reasoning that simpler writing is from a younger audience, CS Lewis would be potentially a child rather than the 50 years old he was at the time of the writing... or Dr Seus would be considered an infant with his writing style.

To me, making such wild assertions about the age of historical figures without any evidence whatsoever to back them up other than one person's reading of selected passages compromises the integrity of a trustworthy encyclopedia. --JohnnyS 21:18, 11 August 2009 (EDT)

Peter was not a child. But the evidence is overwhelming that Mark was. Peter even referred to Mark as his son! Mark's mother was a close friend of the Apostles, who were themselves young, suggesting that Mark was quite young.

Participate in analyzing the evidence with us. All you need is an open mind!--Andy Schlafly 21:23, 11 August 2009 (EDT)

JohnnyS, you mention suspicion that John was not a child, but consider: John was a disciple of Jesus in apprx. 30-33 AD, and it is widely beleived that the Gospel of John was written by John 'around' 90 AD, and given life expectancies in those days, John couldn't have been an adult when Jesus was alive! Since John was the brother of James, this also tells us something about Jame's age at the time.

There are of course disciples who weren't children - Peter was a fisherman, Matthew a tax collector, so they were definitely adults. But that we can determine their age at all goes to counter your claim that giving approximate ages for historical figures constitute "wild assertions."

Finally, it should be noted that Mark wasn't an apostle - although he was definitely a close disciple, since he hosted Jesus in his home. JacobB 21:43, 11 August 2009 (EDT)

So a close disciple of Jesus and a child owned a home? Under the same dating system, the Gospel of Matthew was written between 75 AD and 80 AD. To have the Gospel of Mark written between 60 and 80 AD doesn't put him any more a child than Matthew. To have a 20 year old (with a 40 year old mother) in AD 30 living another 40 years is not unreasonable. --JohnnyS 22:28, 12 August 2009 (EDT)

Mark's mother would presumably been about the age of Jesus, or younger. So perhaps she was 30. Today one would expect her son to be less than 5 years old. In those days, an age of 10 for Mark would be typical. If Mark had been much older, then he would have been an Apostle. He wasn't.--Andy Schlafly 22:54, 12 August 2009 (EDT)

Where is the reference for the age of Mark's mother? Why does she have to be the same age as Jesus? Why would Mark have been an Apostle if he was older? As mentioned by JacobB above, didn't Jesus have a number of disciples with no other criteria than they follow him (age not being a factor)? John 19:38 has St Joseph of Arimathea as a disciple of Christ, and yet he owned a tomb (not something a child would own). I really don't see any indication for age for any of these individuals. --JohnnyS 23:04, 12 August 2009 (EDT)

JohnnyS, the evidence is overwhelming. An open mind is required to see it. If Mark had been an adult, then:

• he likely would have been an Apostle
• he would not have likely run away naked when confronted
• his Gospel would have been more adult-like, as the others were
• his mother would have likely been too old to be a close friend of Jesus
• Mark would not likely have acted so impetuously in releasing his writing (Gospel) first, and in leaving Paul
• Mark would not have been so repetitious in his writing, as in using the same term more than 40 times

Proof in the sense of 2+2=4 is not available. But the evidence is overwhelming, and your resistance to accepting it begs this question: why do you insist on doubting it?--Andy Schlafly 23:16, 12 August 2009 (EDT)

• There are other disciples who are landholder (and tomb holders) who were not Apostles. Age was not a factor.
• I assume you are referring to Mark 14:51-52... and if you were wearing a linen cloth and all the others ran and people garbed you, you wouldn't leave your clothes and run off too? I would - better to be alive and naked than at the hands of Jesus's abductors too.
• Elsewhere you stated that John's Gospel was childlike. Mark's Gospel is simple and concise - not childlike.
• I have friends who are twice my age, and half my age. Jesus was known for his compassion and I would be surprised if he selected his close friends based on his age.
• How is it impetuously to release a Gospel earlier in an effort to get the Good News out to people as soon as possible?
• Repetition is common in ancient works as an aid for memorization. "Rosy-fingered dawn" was repeated again and again by Homer in the Odyssey. Also be sure to not confuse using the same Greek term with the same English term. Agapaō (Strongs G25 as in Matthew 5:44) phileō (Strongs G5368 as in Matthew 23:6) are both translated as "Love".