Additional information
by Daniel B. Moore (Author)
Assume that Mark was published for the benefit of Cornelius and other non-Jewish believers in the Roman enclave of Caesarea Maritima, shortly after Matthew was published. Under this premise, what insights might be gained by considering Mark's affinity with Matthew, when combined with an awareness of Mark's literary tendencies? For example, supposed difficulties and obscure expansions in Mark, such as the odd quote from Malachi in Mark 1:2 and the reference to wild animals in Mark 1:13, can be recognized as subtly connecting the Gospels while also deepening narrative contexts for those within Mark's audience who were already familiar with Matthew. Motivations behind Mark's resequencing of the Galilean narratives can be explained. Mark's alleged contradictions with Matthew, such as the split fig tree story in Mark 11, can be recognized as having been arranged for the benefit of Mark's Greco-Roman audience, without suggesting a conflict with Matthew's chronological account. Skeptical challenges to the doctrine of inerrancy based on such passages can therefore be dismissed. For students of the Synoptic Gospels, this study offers exegetical insights into Mark, while continuing to demonstrate the explanatory power and apologetic benefit of Matthean priority.
