# Mark's gospel...what is it? [Term not book.]



## Sydnorphyn (May 13, 2007)

In Mark 1:1 we read, "the beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ, [the Son of God];" how should one understand the term gospel here?


----------



## Tirian (May 13, 2007)

G2098
εὐαγγέλιον
euaggelion
yoo-ang-ghel'-ee-on
From the same as G2097; a good message, that is, the gospel: - gospel.


----------



## Herald (May 13, 2007)

Sydnorphyn said:


> In Mark 1:1 we read, "the beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ, [the Son of God];" how should one understand the term gospel here?



The verse is straightforward. It is the start of (the origin) of the good news of Jesus Christ. Therefore it is the good news that is about Jesus Christ. It is the good news about Him.


----------



## Sydnorphyn (May 13, 2007)

BaptistInCrisis said:


> The verse is straightforward. It is the start of (the origin) of the good news of Jesus Christ. Therefore it is the good news that is about Jesus Christ. It is the good news about Him.


What does the term mean, not who it refers to?


----------



## Herald (May 13, 2007)

Can one define the term out of its context?


----------



## Dagmire (May 13, 2007)

It means "good news" or "good message".


----------



## Sydnorphyn (May 13, 2007)

Etymologically, yes, it means good news; but words have NO meaning outside of their context. Does the author assume the implied reader would know a larger context? What does it mean in its Old Testament context? Does Isaiah have anything to do with it?


----------



## Dagmire (May 13, 2007)

I have no idea what you're getting at.


----------



## Semper Fidelis (May 13, 2007)

Sydnorphyn said:


> Etymologically, yes, it means good news; but words have NO meaning outside of their context. Does the author assume the implied reader would know a larger context? What does it mean in its Old Testament context? Does Isaiah have anything to do with it?



The context is the Church. The Gospel of Mark was not written in a vacuum. All of its early readers would have understood the Gospel to be the teaching of the Apostles, whose teaching they were very familiar with.

One of the follies of critical scholarship is this idea that the Gospels were recorded as books with no historical Church as a backdrop. You thus have the silliness that Matthew copied from Mark or that they all copied from some mysterious document we don't have.

There was a corpus of oral teaching and letters. The Apostles weren't mute on the things Jesus taught until the Gospel writers suddenly came on the scene and wrote books inscripturating it.

Thus, the reason the Gospels resemble one another in many places is that they're recording the well circulated teaching of the Apostles.

So, when Mark says: "Gospel..." it's not as if the Church sees it for the first time, scratches its head and asks: "What does Mark mean by Gospel?"


----------



## Herald (May 13, 2007)

Sydnorphyn said:


> Does the author assume the implied reader would know a larger context?



Not in verse one. Verse one simply tells us that this (the following narrative) is the beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ.



> What does it mean in its Old Testament context?



Are you referring to the gospel (good news)? Is Mark making a reference _in this verse_ to the gospel being in the Old Testament?



> Does Isaiah have anything to do with it?



Only if the reference from Isaiah in verse two is connected to the statement in verse one.


----------



## Sydnorphyn (May 13, 2007)

yea, I got it, Bill.


----------

