Background Information

By this I mean what was his writing style. Although the gospel was directed to Christians in Rome, it was written in Greek, not Latin. This shouldn’t  surprise us. Although Latin was the official language in Rome, Greek was also widely spoken there, much like English is widely used today in major urban areas. By writing in Greek, Mark could reach a larger audience. 

​

However, even though he writes in Greek, when we analyze his style, it is clear that he is writing for Latin-speakers. He uses many Latinisms, that is, Latin vocabulary, such as “census” (Mk 12:14), “centurion” (Mk 15:39), and “flagellate” (Mk 15:15) and idioms, such as consilium dederunt—to give counsel— (Mk 3:6) and genua ponentes—bending the knees— (Mk 15:19). We don't find these idioms used elsewhere in the New Testament.

​

It is also evident that Mark didn’t write to a Jewish audience because he often explains Jewish terms and customs. For example,

​

Looking up to heaven, he sighed, and said to him, “Ephphatha,” that is, “Be opened.” (Mk 7:34)

​

They saw that some of his disciples ate with hands defiled, that is, unwashed. (For the Pharisees, and all the Jews, do not eat unless they wash their hands, observing the tradition of the elders; and when they come from the market place, they do not eat unless they purify themselves; and there are many other traditions which they observe, the washing of cups and pots and vessels of bronze.) (Mk 7:2–4)

​

And a poor widow came, and put in two copper coins, which make a penny. (Mk 12:42)

​

This would have been superfluous if his intended readers had been Jews, as they would have known this already.

​

The gospel’s grammar and vocabulary, however, are quite simple, which suggests that the author was not a native speaker. It appears that Mark was well acquainted with the colloquial Greek that was spoken by the common people, because he didn’t use the more polished style of contemporary Greek authors or even that of the other gospels. To put it bluntly, his Greek is quite basic, and he certainly wouldn’t have won any literary prizes.

​

Mark’s style is also quite simple and direct. He wrote like children do. He reported what happened in a direct way, joining many sentences together with the conjunctive “and.” He also mixed tenses by switching from the past to the historical present. The historical present recounts events of past using the present tense.

​

In general, Mark is much more interested in showing us who Jesus is through what he does than what he says. In comparison to the other gospels, this one is action packed. Although it is the shortest of the four, its accounts are often longer because they contain more details. For example, both Mark and Matthew tell us about the anointing of Jesus at Bethany, but only Mark tells us that the ointment consisted of pure nard, that it could have been sold for over 300 denarii, that the woman broke the jar, that others reproached her, and that Jesus defended her by saying she had done what she could.  

​

At around 11,300 words, Mark’s gospel is by far the shortest of the synoptic gospels. By comparison, Luke’s gospel is about 19,500 words long and Matthew’s is 18,300. Mark’s gospel is shorter because he omits many stories, such as Jesus’ birth and infancy as well as many details about the resurrection. The gospel also lacks many of Jesus’ longer speeches. The longest speech of the gospel, in chapter 13, is about the imminent destruction of Jerusalem. It is almost 700 words long. By comparison, Matthew’s gospel is structured around 5 long speeches. The most extensive of these is the Sermon on the mount, which is about 2000 words long.

​

Mark’s favorite word seems to be “immediately,” as things in his gospel always seem to be happening at once. All of these factors add vividness and drama to his narrative.

​

In short, Mark’s writing style is easy to understand. His grammar and vocabulary are quite simple, and he narrates things in a straightforward manner. It is an easy and pleasant read. No one feels overwhelmed by the text, but don’t let this fool you. It is very profound and theological, as you are about to find out.