In our previous commentary, we observed how the Pharisees had the audacity to criticize those who did not follow in the unrighteous traditions of their elders; and today their successors attempt to condemn men who do not abide in their unrighteous church tradition. Such men will fast according to supposed “holy days” such as Lent, which are found nowhere in the Bible, and think themselves righteous for doing so, while they promote the abominations which God hates.

In His engagements with the hypocritical scribes of the Pharisees, who were ostensibly of the portion Solomon would have described as pure in their own lofty eyes yet not washed from their filthiness (Proverbs 30:12-14), we saw Christ describe Himself as a physician healing the sick. These concepts appear often in the prophets as a picture of sin and repentance, and Christ elucidated on the familiar parable when He said, “I have not come to call the righteous, but wrongdoers!” (Mark 2:17)

The cleansing of the leper and healing of the paralytic are paired together in both Mark and Luke (Mark 1:40-2:12, Luke 5:12-26), and there is no doubt that the pairing is intentionally thematic. Both conditions would have reduced men to hopelessly impoverished states, and then both these men are fully restored upon seeking out Christ, because Yahweh is indeed a rewarder to those who seek Him (Hebrews 11:6). It is us who must take the initiative, and even at the end of what is now the first chapter of Mark, we saw how the people came to Christ from everywhere (Mark 1:45).

The gospel of Mark is essentially Peter's gospel, and in our previous presentation we read what could be considered Peter's personal account of the healing of his mother-in-law, whom we identified as a type for the woman of Israel in this particular instance, as the woman is often depicted as the symbolic mother of the nation in the prophets.

In our previous presentation concerning the possessed man in the Capernaum assembly hall, we discussed how the origin of unclean spirits both embodied and disembodied is tied to the fallen angels throughout Scripture, whose fornication is described in Genesis and 1 Enoch.

In our previous presentation we read Mark’s succinct account of the forty days in the wilderness, using it as an opportunity to identify the Adversary who tried Christ, and following an examination of the evidence, we came to the conclusion that they were an incredulous and scornful descendant of Cain, perhaps an individual or group from those racial vipers among the Pharisees and Sadducees who came to enquire of John the Baptist.

In our previous presentation on the gospel of Mark, we explored how the primary purpose of John the Baptist was to prepare the people for the coming of the Christ, and this was accomplished in manifold ways.

In our introduction to Mark, we discussed how the early Christian writers attested that this gospel is the faithful preservation of Peter’s oral testimonies. The internal evidence supports this, such as the vivid descriptive style and its focus on the actions of Christ’s ministry rather than lengthy teachings or parables. This emphasis on works gives the Gospel of Mark a fast-paced and dynamic narrative compared to the other accounts.

Here we are going to endeavor to present a commentary on the Gospel of Mark, which we pray is the fruitful beginning of many such projects. The reason we have chosen to present Mark before Matthew is not because we believe it was penned first, but because it shares most of its accounts with Matthew and Luke. By presenting Mark’s comparatively concise gospel first, we hope to establish a foundation for future commentaries while also avoiding any unnecessary repetition.