 |  |
the acts rather than the discourses of the Saviour, a feature which his frequent use of the
words "immediately" and "straightway", intensifies. Mark differs from Matthew not
only in the omission of the genealogy and quotations from the Old Testament, but in his
treatment of a common theme and his selection of material. For example, where
Matthew records fourteen parables Mark records but four; where Matthew occupies a
whole chapter of forty-two verses (10:) to record the call and commission of the twelve
apostles, Mark compresses this subject into seven verses (6: 7-13); where Matthew's
purpose demanded thirty-nine verses (23:) in setting forth the denunciation of the
Scribes and Pharisees, Mark's purpose is served by the use of but three (12: 38-40);
where Matthew's records in detail the temptation in the wilderness, Mark simply records
the fact that the Lord was there in the wilderness forty days, tempted of the devil.
Perhaps, with his Roman readers in mind Mark makes one addition to the record, namely,
that the Lord was "with the wild beasts" (1: 12, 13). Mark does not record the "Lord's
Prayer", a strong echo in chapter 11: 24-26 satisfying the requirements of his gospel. In
the face of the second coming found in Mark 13:, shows the extreme importance that
must be attached to this epoch-making event for Israel and the nations of the earth.
While these articles were in preparation, a very precious letter was received from a
valued fellow-worker, which so beautifully brings to light what we were feeling after,
that we can do no more than quote it here, trusting that the reader will be as helped by its
reprint as we were at its first reading.
"I think there are four portions of Scripture which refer to the Lord as `Servant',
namely Isaiah, Zechariah, Mark and Philippians, with perhaps the addition of such
passages as Luke 22: 27 and John 13: 16.
It is correct to say that in His `servantship' lies the redemption that is in Christ Jesus
(the stripping of Himself John xiii, Phil. 2:) the Servant being the sufferer, and is the
servantship a priestly one? If it is, a completed work, as in Hebrews, seems indicated in
Mark 16: 19, `Sat down at the right hand of God'. This seems to have been the line
taken by Campbell Morgan, but he links Mark with the Pentateuch--`the answer to the
unfulfilled aspiration and sigh of humanity for a priest.*
[* - This aspiration is fulfilled for Gentile believers, by Christ as the one Mediator and
Head, Paul never refers to Christ as a Priest outside of the epistle to the Hebrews.]
Amongst the omissions (no miraculous birth; no reference to childhood at Nazareth;
no claim to authority, e.g., in the parable of the tares where the command to the reapers is
omitted; no woes upon the Pharisees; no reference in Gethsemane, to the legions of
angels; no statements as to His having all power in heaven and in earth)--amongst such
is the omission of nomos `law' which occurs in Matthew eight times, in Luke nine times,
in John fifteen times. Service SUCH AS HIS was the free offering of His heart of love
and knew no urge save that of His own nature or that He came to do the will of His
Father.
There is something that is very comforting in the thought that of all of whom God
might have used to write along the lines of this gospel for our learning, it is the failing
servant, who draws back from the path of service he had entered, but who later, through
grace, was made `serviceable' to whom it is given to set before us, so graphically and so
entrancingly, the unfailing, the perfect Servant, Christ Jesus our Lord.