Sources for Studying and Preaching the Gospel of Mark
Daily Dose of Greek by Robert Plummer
Mark 9–16 (Baylor Handbook on the Greek New Testament) Rodney J. Decker Baylor University Press. Kindle Edition.
Thomas Constable’s Commentaries at netbible.org (Commentary on all 66 books of the Bible)
Preceptaustin (32 commentaries and 17 sermon series)
Wisdom for the Heart (23 sermons by Stephen Davie)
Steven Cole sermons (Unfortunately, he did not do a series on Mark)
Commentary and Reference Survey: A Comprehensive Guide to Biblical and Theological Resources Paperback – February 15, 2007, by John Glynn
A Biblical Theology of the New Testament by Roy B. Zuck, David Lowery, et al. | Oct 9, 1994. Kindle is $14:57.
Annotated bibliography
Books
R. T. France, (2002). The Gospel of Mark: A Commentary on the Greek Text. Grand Rapids, MI; Carlisle: W.B. Eerdmans; Paternoster Press.
R. T. France has an excellent introduction to Mark. He divides Mark into three Acts and follows the geographical divisions of Mark. France also sees the twofold theme of Mark including Christ and his disciples: “Discipleship is the proper outcome of a healthy Christology” (The Gospel of Mark: A Commentary on the Greek Text. NIGTC. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2002).
J. R. Edwards, (2002). The Gospel According to Mark. Grand Rapids, MI; Leicester, England: Eerdmans; Apollos.
Edwards’ introduction though not as thorough as R. T. France is useful. Unlike France, Edwards divides Mark into two sections: The Gospel of Mark falls naturally into two halves, the first concerning Jesus’ ministry in Galilee (1:1–8:26), and the second his journey to Jerusalem and his passion there (8:27–16:8). Edwards gives good explanations of the journey theme, the messianic secret, etc.
R. A. Cole, (1989). Mark: An Introduction and Commentary (Vol. 2). Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press.
R. A. Cole is not very helpful with discourse analysis. For example, he doesn’t see the inclusion with the blind men in Mark 8 and 10. His commentary is very helpful with explanation.
Craig Evans, Word Biblical Commentary Mark 8:27-16:20 (Nashville: Thomas Nelson) 2001.
In his introduction, Evans has an excellent Theology of Mark. Evans covers many areas of theology. He states that Mark’s theology is revealed in the messianic secret. He refutes The Messianic Secret according to its originator, William Wrede. A proper understanding of Mark’s theology clearly shows that Jesus was publicly proclaimed to be the Messiah and that he understood he was the Messiah (Craig A. Evans. Word Biblical Commentary, Volume 34B, Mark 8:27-16:20, Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 2001, lxx-lxxii).Mark L
Mark L. Strauss, Mark: Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament, ed. Clinton E. Arnold, Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2014.
Strauss describes Mark as “a gospel narrative on steroids!” (17). Strauss advocates two themes in Mark: “With the majority of scholars we believe that Mark’s narrative purpose is not only Christological but also parenetic, to call believers to follow the suffering of the Son of Man” (Mark: Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament, ed. Clinton E. Arnold, Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2014, 41). Strauss sees Mark divided into two sections and not three. Strauss aids with discourse analysis. With every periscope, Strauss gives a literary context, the main idea, the structure, which is an overview, an exegetical outline, and an explanation
Abraham Kuruvilla, Mark: A Theological Commentary for Preacher. Eugene: Cascade Books, 2012.
Kuruvilla’s introduction is not as in-depth as the other exegetical commentary. He is unique in his Pericopal Theology. He divided the Gospel of Mark into twenty-five pericopes. From each text or periscope, a theological focus is stated, which in turn is used to apply to the audience. He calls this process from text to praxis. “The first move, from text to theology, draws meaning from the biblical text with authority; the second, from theology to praxis, directs meaning to the situations of listeners with relevance” (Mark: A Theological Commentary for Preacher, xiii). The combination of these theological foci help determines the theme and the development of the theme of the book. Kuruvilla diagrams the text to praxis process. He follows R. T. France’s three Acts. With every pericope, Kuruvilla gives a Preview Summary, a theological focus, an overview, a thorough exegetical outline, an explanation, and two preaching outlines.
David Rhoads and Donald Michie. Mark as Story (Philadelphia: Fortress Press) 1982.
These two authors take a literary approach to the Gospel of Mark that is really refreshing and missed by most commentaries. They discuss the narrator, point of view, plot, and characterization. In the blog post The Factual Data Sheet on Mark, I use some of their literary insights. Unfortunately, they have a low view of the main character of the Gospel of Mark. They write, “In Mark’s story, Jesus is neither God nor a divine being, but a man who is given authority by God” (105).
Article
Daniel Wallace, The Synoptic problem at Bible.org
Wallace states that his two-source hypothesis affects the authorship, date, and purpose of the first three gospels. In particular, these areas are impacted once a fairly firm date for Acts can be established.
1. If Acts was written toward the end of Paul’s first Roman imprisonment (c. 61-2 CE)
2. Then Luke must have preceded (C.61-62)
3. Mark must have preceded Luke (mid to late 50s seems most probable).
4. Further, if both Matthew and Luke used Mark independently of one another, it is conceived of Matthew as having been written much later than 62, even if he were cut off as it were from the literary fruits of the nascent Church. The mid-60s would seem to be the latest date for Matthew. See the review at drtimwhite.net.