| parables, the Fruit-bearing Earth (4559);
prayer of the Gadarene demoniac, the complaint of John, the women bringing spices to the tomb, are given by Mark and Luke, but not by Matthew (Mk 12-7, Lk 493-37; Mk 18-89, Lk 44244; Mk 618, Lk 8%; Mk 988, Lk 949; Mk 160], Lk 241). While the peculiarity of Mark as compared with the other Synoptists is mostly in omissions, he has also certain additions. They are not many, but they are of importance. They include one of the two of the miracles, those of the deaf mute (7%), and the blind man at Bethsaida (8°); and such
| incidents or circumstances as the three questions
about the dulness of the disciples (817-15), the ques- tion about the disciples disputing (9%), the young man with the linen cloth (14°! 5), the smiting of Jesus by the servants of the chief priests (14%), Pilate’s wonder and his questioning of the cen turion (153).
Besides these, there is much additional matter in the form of striking detail in the narrative that iscommon to Mark and the other two, or to Mark and one of the two. This is seen especially in such cases as those of the paralytic, the de- moniac boy, the departure from Ephraim, the purgation of the temple, etc. In these Mark describes, as the others do not, the uncovering and breaking up of the roof (24); the pining and miserable condition of the boy, the question of Jesus, and the father’s ery for faith (9%-*6) ; the walking of Jesus before His disciples (10%); the prohibiting of the carrying of vessels through the temple courts (11!*).
While there are only four paragraphs (together with the opening verse) out of the 106 of which Mark’s Gospel may be said to consist, that are not found at all in Matthew or in Luke, the quantity of matter proper to Mark is calculated to amount, when all kinds of additions to the common record are taken into account, to about a sixth of the book. But in the strictest sense of incidents or sayings reported by Mark and not found in any form in either of the other Synoptists the case is different. In this sense the matter peculiar to the second Gospel does not extend to more than from twenty- five to thirty verses.
In the arrangement of the narrative this Gospel follows in some respects a course of its own. As regards the connexion in which it gives the narra- tive that is common to the three, its two main sections differ widely. In the report of the ministry in Galilee (114-9), Mark’s order of events diverges largely from Matthew’s on to the story of Herod (614) ; after this point the disagreement dis- appears for the most part. In the case of Luke the difference is much less. The second and third Gospels observe much the same order, yet with some notable exceptions. The incident of the blasphemy of the scribes, e.g., is introduced by Mark (322) before the coming of the mother and the brethren of Jesus, brt vy Luke (11) after that; and the parable oi the Mustard Seed is given by Mark (49°82) in connexion with that of the Sower, but by Luke (138-1) after the healing of the woman with the spirit of infirmity. The visit to Nazareth which Mark records (6!) would have to be added to these exceptions, if it were necessary to identify it with the visit reported by Luke (416-), But, in placing the visit which he has in view at the beginning of the ministry, Luke is so far supported by Matthew (4!*16) ; and the case recorded by Mark, which appears to be the same as is also given by Matthew at a later stage (1358), is possibly different. Im the second of the two main sections of his Gospel, from the journey to Jerusalem on to the Resurrection (101-168), Mark has generally the same order as
MARK, GOSPEL OF
the other Synoptists. There are some exceptions indeed, but they are of minor importance. Mark, e.g., reports the blasting of the fig-tree as witnessed the morning after the curse (11*’), while Matthew records the effect along with the pronouncement (218-19) ; and while Luke (22?!) gives our Lord’s declaration of the traitor as made after the giving of the bread and the cup, Mark (1415) introduces it before that.
iii, DicrioN AND STYLE.—As might be expected from the measure of agreement in contents, Mark has much in common with the other Synoptists in diction. More than a sixth of his entire vocabulary is found also in Matthew and Luke, or in one of them, and nowhere else in the NIT. The affinities with John are more limited. There are only 15 words peculiar to the second Gospel and the Fourth, and of these only a few are of distinct interest (e.g. ἀκάνθινος, ἐνταφιασμός, πιστικός, προσ- airns). Nor is the case much altered if we take words peculiar to Mark and John together with one or other of the remaining Gospels. There are only 7 words of all kinds peculiar to Mark with John and Matthew (ἐμβριμᾶσθαι, μοιχεία, ὄψιος, πλέκειν, ῥαββεί, σπόγγος, cavvd), and only 5 peculiar to Mark with John and Luke (ἄρωμα, γαζυφυλάκιον, ἱμάς, κράβαττος, φανερῶς). The similarity between the second Gospel and the Pauline Epistles is somewhat more marked. The number of words peculiar to these writings, together with the Epistle to the Hebrews, is about 23; while the measure of resemblance becomes much greater if words peculiar to Mark and the Pauline Epistles, together with Matthew or with Luke, are taken into account. The linguistic affinity is smallest between Mark and the Apocalypse, and between Mark and the Catholic Epistles, the peculiar words in the former case being only 5 (δρέπανον, λευκαίνειν. μεγιστάν, xAwpds, χοῦς), and in the latter only 2 (δαμάζειν, δωρεῖσθαι).