Why Matthew and Luke Hated the Gospel of Mark

Why Matthew and Luke Hated the Gospel of Mark | James D. Tabor PhD

Sign up for 👉 "Creating Jesus: Why Mark’s Gospel Was Forgotten?"

Gospel of Mark is the most influential piece of literature from the ancient world. Even though Paul’s letters are written earlier, they offer us no “Jesus Story.” Mark is our earliest narrative presentation of the figure of Jesus. However, it is purposely constructed as a “riddle, wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma.” And even though it is now embedded in the New Testament, it is essentially lost and forgotten.

Matthew and Luke are essentially “rewritten Mark.” These writers use Mark as their main source, but utterly deconstruct and, as a result, essentially “destroy” it. Even though they incorporate up to 80% of Mark as their core story—once edited and embedded in their narrative, Mark as Mark basically ceases to exist. In that sense it has remained “unread” for the past two millennia.

Mark is in fact a kind of anti-gospel or counter-gospel. It could even be seen as “anti-Christian.” It stands in opposition to the master narrative of the Jesus Story that becomes the heart and core of the Christian Gospel—cobbled together from Matthew, Luke, and John—and the early Christian Creeds, all of whom completely lose—and even reject—Mark’s presentation.

In this course Dr. Tabor pulls Mark out of the New Testament, strips it from later forms of orthodox and dogmatic Christianity, and places it in its original historical context—as a post-War apocalyptic treatise following the destruction of Jerusalem. Its view of God, of Israel, and of the Messiah, is utterly opposite to and opposed to what emerged as early Christianity.

The focus of the course is a detailed exposition of the Mark as Mark. Mark is a skillfully constructed as a three-part drama, with clear literary motifs that move the story along in very carefully worked out directions, ending with a dead messiah, forsaken by God, his contemporary Jewish culture, and even his closest followers and disciples. The reader is left alone at the end, to try and sort out what it all means, with no direction home. And yet, embedded in the narrative, is a certain “understanding” of the message, but only for those who have eyes to see and ears to hear.

==============================

**RECOMMENDED ONLINE COURSES HERE**

Sign up for 👉 "Creating Jesus: Why Mark’s Gospel Was Forgotten?"

Sign up here for Dr. M. David Litwa's course - The Ancient Greek Mysteries & Christianity - -

Sign up for Dr. Bart D. Ehrman's course – Finding Moses - -

Sign up for Dr. Bart D. Ehrman's course - Other Virgin Births In Antiquity - -

============================

============================

Please consider helping support MythVision's work by joining the Patreon or contributing a one-time donation through my links below:

Cashapp: 👉 $rewiredaddiction
Venmo: 👉 @Derek-Lambert-9

===========================

👉👉 Checkout Our Other YouTube Channel:

👉👉 Checkout MVP Courses to find new and upcoming online courses:

===========================

#Gospel #mythvision #MythVisionPodcast #mvp #dereklambert

[MythVisionPodcast]

Sign up for 👉 "Creating Jesus: Why Mark’s Gospel Was Forgotten?"

[RY-rzfg]

It's amazing how the gospel of mark has been under our noses for 2000 years, yet the other gospels "cover" for it's shortcomings. Once something is elevated to the level of inspired writings, it escapes criticism. Mark was always an enigma, there really is no beginning or end to it, it's very raw and dry. The other gospels had to add the seasonings... 😂. Thank you for this!

[Lightman]

A common response would be “they all had different perspectives”. This is way more than that!

[RaysDad]

Jesus as described in Mark seems neurotic. He loses his temper a lot and belittles his followers. He even cursed a fig tree! He tried to avoid the masses of people who were ill and wanted him to heal them. I actually prefer the depiction of Jesus in Mark because he seems so human.

[geraldmeehan]

I think Mark is Gospel that sticks closest to real story of Jesus. Matthew, Luke & John all have an agenda

[zyxmyk]

i took the class. i thought the weirdest thing in Mark was Jesus said he didn't want people to understand his parables, "Lest they turn and be forgiven." a bit odd. my question though is about the ending. the women found the tomb, went away afraid, "and told no one." i wondered if the 'told no one' story could be a cover because none of this was claimed till much later. "well, why didn't anybody mention it back then? I was around and I heard nothing at all about it." it's human nature to find far-out things more believable the further in the past they are. for example, roswell wasn't really publicized till decades after the purported events. the far-out theories about kennedy's assassination became more believable the further from the events it got. is it possible all these stories about jesus' rising from the dead didn't come out till decades later and the 'told no one' line was an explanation for why no one at the time ever heard of any of this?

[rainbowkrampus]

Matthew's group want to euhemerize Jesus.
Luke's group want to solidify the authority of their organizational hierarchy.

If you're the earlier Mark camp, you don't care about any of that.
Mark's Jesus is the Jesus of Paul. You don't care if Jesus appears to fit into an earthly narrative or not. He shows up to do one thing and he does it. The end. The narrative isn't about Jesus as a person at all. It's about conveying the ideas an evangelist would need to be able to convey all packaged in a narrative format.
You also don't care about organizational hierarchy. You're still a relatively tiny group with a couple satellite groups around the sea. None much bigger than a book club. You have minimal organizational needs and the only point of rigid hierarchy is whoever Paul's successors were.

Matthew is clearly dealing in apologetics.
The christians have been waiting around for their apocalypse long enough by then that they're beginning to be forced to grapple with all of the criticism and mockery they receive. Can't just fall back on "They'll get theirs when the kingdom of god shows up." when you've been falling back on that for a couple of generations now. It's not particularly comforting.
So they give to Jesus what other Greek heroes have, a full life's story. Cradle to grave.
This group is also dealing with a change in demographics. They're trying to appeal to wealthier and more educated people. Mark is great if you're appealing to poor workers down on the docks or in the labor camps. It's practically vindictive towards elites. But now you've grown large enough that you're trying to get money from those elites. Better massage the story a bit to get them onboard.

I don't think Luke's group hate Mark. They seem to have a lineage that leads back to the Mark group. They retain some phrasing and terminology which Matthew changes etc.
What they do have is a need to solidify power within the group. The disparate satellite groups are getting some wacky ideas and the main group is getting so big that the whole thing is in danger of getting out of hand. We see this all the time with informal groups which grow beyond the ability of a loose authority structure to corral.
But how do you cement the authority which has already been established? Do what Paul did. Claim discipleship. Then take the added step of claiming that being "of the disciples" conveys some additional authority. How to do that? Start by downplaying the apparent lack of authority the disciples have by taking out the parts where they are to stupid to live.

It's all organization and apologetics. Power and money.
The kinds of things Mark's Jesus had some real problems with (ignoring the context for a minute).
If christians had any sense, they'd toss out everything except Mark and Paul's authentic letters.
But ya know, a fool and his money are soon parted.

So, subscribe and support MythVision 😈

[Sahajayana-Nirvanasara]

Excellent. finally someone talks about this hate for "Mark".*** the Nazoreans would have hated or called out the BS on all of the Gospels

[mooshei]

Christians will still say, “well!!! They were eyewitnesses, they were there🤬😡”

Lmao!

[MrAustrokiwi]

Registered for the course, paid for it via paypal and was able to watch the first lesson. The next day I couldn't access it Thrive cart didn't recognize my email adress. there wasn't even an email link for some sort of Support. So I actioned a refund through Paypal. Although I know its not a scam it certainly felt like one. Please note: I did not receive any email( Checked inbox, spam and trash) asking for confirmation of my email address; one was supposed to be received within 15 minutes of payment. My guess is that purchase must be made during USA Business hours( I live in Europe) for the confirmation of email address to be sent out. I am not resubscribing to the course.

[knows_too_much]

Mark is not the "original" story. The original story would be the first version of the Gospel of the Ebionites, written in Hebrew, which we do not have, and that too would be a STORY rather than an accurate historical account.

[williambeckett]

What the average layman doesnt grasp, and the church is at pains to make sure they don't grasp, is that all of the gospels, canonical or otherwise were never meant to be placed together because they were all competing theologies, not complimentary ones. Each gospel was written to be the final, definitive gospel. Excluding and supplanting all others.

[Akolgo_islam]

As a Muslim id require 4 witnesses for some situations. So I thought it would be interesting to apply this to the 4 gospels.
Here is the summary….


1:Jesus Begins His Ministry in Galilee

2:Jesus gives all he has, and subsequently Five Thousand people were fed

3: Jesus’ Triumphal Entry into Jerusalem

4:Jesus Foretells of a Betrayer in the Midst

5: Peter Denies Jesus

6: Pilate Pronounces Sentence Upon Jesus

7: They (The Ruling authorities) Crucified Jesus as “The King of The Jews”

8:Jesus Dies

9: Jesus is Buried in a Tomb (Sepulchre)

10:Some of his disciples Went to the Tomb (Sepulchre)and his body was not there

[Sinouhe]

Marcan priority is old news. But it is still fascinating that Matthew and Luke, although they disagree with Mark, use it as their main source of inspiration. Obviously because the oral tradition about a hypothetical Jesus was already lost and inaccessible. Logical for those who think Jesus is a myth, but hardly justifiable for historicists.

[wolfpax]

I have to wonder, if they hated it why would they draw on it as a source rather than just start over and tell the story they wanted to tell? They must have seen it as authoritative somehow even if they disagreed with specific parts.

[christodantakri]

I as the follower of Christ never hated, ignored, overlooked, forgotten and covered. I believe the Mark the precious piece of gospel as the word of God so also the three gospels. I do not James D Tabor says the Christians do. It is baseless argument. Rather I consider the Gospel Mark as the purest and loveliest one in the Bible because of its preciseness and purity.
The introduction of each gospel are the same that is Prologue.
The introduction of Matthew's gospel. Matthew writes clearly who is Jesus and says 1:18 He is the child of Holy Ghost. Matthew 1:20 Mary conceived Jesus by the Holy Ghost. 1:23 Jesus is God with us.
The introduction of Mark. Mark 1:1; writes Jesus the Son of God.
The introduction of Luke 1:35 He is the Son of God.
The Introduction of John 1:1-14 (V 14) He is the Son of God
I can give the same way about Epilogue.

[geekynerd]

Didn’t you have a scholar who thought that the gospel of Mark was written by the Flavians to glorify Vespasian? Maybe the writers of Luke and Matthew did not like The Flavian gospel (mark)

[pauljosephbuggle]

I studied the Gospel of Mark in a Catholic semenary and we looked at it closely as the first Gospel written.
I don't know where this guy gets his ideas from but it's not my experience.
Luke and Matthew "hate" Mark? Even a mediocre mind can understand that a first sourse mightn't necessarily be the most theologically thought through. It has taken us a lot of time and continues to take time to understand fully the message of Jesus in each and every age.
Forgotten? Hated? Changed? The Gospel of Mark hasn't been changed, it's still in the NT unchanged (notwithstanding the last verses which we generally accept as additions).
Come on! This guy's got a new "contraversy" for every show. The real truth is there is no new contraversy, all this has been carefully looked into for centuries.
Of all the spoofers on your channel this guy takes first prize (just beating the scholars who pretend Paul wasn't really a Christian but some kind of Jewish missionary to the pagans).
Be honest your show is for Christian Bible literalists who feel decieved that the whole Bible isn't literally true, which it was never thought to be anyway.

[darrenlewis]

I'm an Aluminate' that teaches One Humanitarian Truth Under God..I wouldn't expect all of these stories to match exactly because they were stories being orally transmitted about Jesus. The point of Jesus was he was the Messiah, the role model of behavior for humanity.

[fepeerreview]

I really enjoy this channel and Dr. Tabor's work. However I do feel it is inappropriate to define "hate" as "really, really not wanting it to stand" 1:01. Between that absurd definition of hate and the use of hate in the video title, when in fact we really don't know the inner feelings of Matthew and Luke with regard to Mark, the title borders on clickbait. Please, let's try to keep the discussion on an academic level and away from this kind of subjectivity. Maintaining a high standard is one of the reasons this channel has become one of my top 3 favorites in the biblical history area.