was furnamed Mark. So Acts xii. 12. And when he had confidered the thing, he came to the houfe of Marie, the mother of John, whofe furname was Mark. And ver. 25... and took with them Jahn, whofe furname was Mark. And he is feveral times mentioned by the furname, Mark, only. Acts xv. 39. 2 Tim. iv. 11. Col. iv. 10. Philem. ver. 24. Secondly, fuch of the ancients, as fuppofed Mark, the Evangelift, to have been the fame with him mentioned in the Acts, muft alfo have fuppofed, that he was called John, as well as Mark, though they have generally mentioned him by his furname.

3. It is faid, that (m) John Mark was much with Paul, Mark, the Evangelift, with Peter. So fay the ancients in general.

I answer: It is not at all impoffible, but that Mark might be fometimes with Paul, at other times with Peter. As may appear by and by.

As these reasons therefore do not appear to me conclufive, I rather think, that there is but one Mark in the New Teftament, John Mark, the Evangelift, and fellow-laborer of Paul and Barnabas, and Peter. II. I now proceed to write the hiftorie of John Mark from the New Teftament, mentioning, as they offer, fome obfervations, fhewing his acquaintance with Peter, as well as with Paul. After which I shall take notice of fome other things faid of him by the ancients.

His hiftorie from the N. T.

He was the fon of Marie, a pious woman at Jerufalem, and an early believer, at whofe house the difciples ufed to meet, and that in troublesome and difficult times, as well as at other feafons. Peter having been delivered out of prison by an angel, came to the house of Marie, mother of John, whofe furname was Mark, where many were gathered together prayActs xii. 12. ing. So that the very first mention of John Mark aflures us of Peter's intimacie in that familie.

That deliverance of St. Peter happened in the year 44. about the fame time that Paul and Barnabas came to Jerufalem from Antioch with contributions for the relief of the brethren in Judea in the time of a famine, or fcarcity. And it is faid at the end of that chapter. And Barnabas and Saul returned from Jerufalem, when they had fulfilled their minifrie, and took with them John, whofe furname was Mark. This, with fome other things to be hereafter mentioned, may difpofe us to think, that this John Mark is the fame, who in Col. iv. 10. is called fifter's fon to Barnabas.

Mark therefore went now from Jerufalem to Antioch, with Paul and Barnabas. And, when fome short time afterwards, they went abroad to other countreys, Mark accompanied them, as their minifter. Acts xiii. 5. They went to Cyprus, and preached the word in that countrey. But when they returned to the continent, and came on fhore at Perga in Pamphylia, he departed from them, and returned to Jerufalem. ver. 13. He therefore did not attend them in their farther progreffe to Antioch in Pifidia, Iconium, and other places, but went to Jerufalem.

And

(m) Et ita Petro addunt [Veteres] comitem, ac difcipulum, ut non tantum de Barnaba, fed et de Paulo, quem Joannes Marcus poft illud frigufculum fectatus eft. . . nihil meminerint. Grot. ibid.

Il étoit difciple de S. Pierre, et attaché à lui, dans le tems que l'autre étoit avec S. Paul, et S. Barnabe. Du Pin. Ibid.

ས

And now, very probably, he converfed again with Peter, and the other Apoftles, and was prefent with them at their difcourfes, and their devotions. For, as I apprehend, all the Apoftles were still in Judea, except James the fon of Zebedee, who had been beheaded by Herod Agrippa, in the beginning of the year 44.

Paul and Barnabas having finished their progreffe, returned to Antioch, and there abode. Whilft they were there, debates arose about circumcifing Gentil converts. Which determined Paul and Barnabas to go to Jerufalem. That controverfie being decided, they returned to Antioch.

Some time afterwards Paul faid unto Barnabas: Let us go again, and vifit our brethren, in every city, where we have preached the word, and fee how they do. And Barnabas determined to take with them John, whofe furname was Mark. But Paul thought it not good to take him with them, who had departed from them from Pamphylia, and went not with them to the work. Barnabas, however, perfifted in his refolution, and went with Mark to Cyprus. And Paul chofe Silas to accompany him. Acts xv. 36 41.

Hereby we perceive the good temper of Mark. He was now at Antioch, and was willing to attend Paul and Barnabas in their journeys, and actually went with Barnabas to Cyprus. And though Paul would not now accept of his attendance, he was afterwards fully reconciled to him. Mark is mentioned in feveral of his epiftles fent from Rome, dur ing his confinement there. I fuppofe, I shall hereafter fhew, that St. Paul's fecond epiftle to Timothie was writ in the fummer of the year 61. not long after Paul's arrival at Rome. In that epiftle he writes to Tiothie, to come to him. And he defires him to bring Mark with him. 2 Tim. iv. 11. Take Mark, and bring him with thee: for he is profitable to me for the miniftrie. Where Mark then was, does not clearly appear. It is probable, that he was either at Ephefus, or at fome other place, where Timothie would find him in his journey from Ephefus to Rome. And, unqueftionably, Mark did come with Timothie. He is mentioned in two of the epiftles writ by the Apoftle at Rome. Philem. ver. 24. and Col. iv. 10. Ariftarchus falutes you, and Mark, fifter's fon to Barnabas, touching whom ye received commandments. If he come unto you, receive him. Mark is not mentioned in the epiftle to the Philippians. Perhaps he was not acquainted there, or upon fome occafion was abfent from the Apostle, when that epiftle was writ. Or rather, he is comprehended in thofe general expreffions. ch. iv. 21. The brethren that are with me, greet you. For in the epiftle to the Philippians St. Paul does not mention his fellow-laborers by name, as he does in the epiftles to the Coloffians, and to Philemon. Nor is he mentioned in the epiftle to the Ephefians. To those who admit the true date of that epistle the reason will be obvious. It was writ, and sent away, before Mark came to be with St. Paul at Rome.

This is all we can fay concerning St. Mark from the New Testament. But from that we can collect his excellent character, and may conclude, that after this time he no longer attended on Paul. It is not improbable, that going now into Afia, he there met with St. Peter, and accompanied him, till that Apoftle came to Rome, where he fuffered mar

tyrdom.

tyrdom. Where likewife Mark wrote, and published the Gospel that goes by his name.

From other III. We will now inquire, whether there is any thing in gwriters. other writers to illuftrate the hiftorie of this Evangelift. Cave fays, without hesitation, that (n) Mark was a Levite. But he does not fay, upon what authority. I do not remember, that it is in any of the writers, of which I have given a particular account, excepting (0) Bede. It is alfo in a commentarie upon St. Mark's Gospel, ufually joyned with Jerome's works, though (p) allowed not to be his. That writer fays, that (4) Mark was a Levite, and a Prieft. It is not unlikely, that this was inferred from Mark's relation to Barnabas, who was a Levite of Cyprus. Comp. Acts. iv. 36. and Col. iv. Ic. But then Caye fhould not have denied, as he does in the fame place, that Mark the Evangelift is the fame as John Mark, mentioned in the Acts. For that, as I apprehend, is to remove out of the way the fole ground of this opinion.

By Eufebe we are informed, it (r) was faid, that Mark going into Egypt, firft preached there the Gofpel, which he had writ, and planted there many churches. And afterwards, in another chapter, he fays, that (s) in the eighth year of Nero, Anianus, the first Bishop of Alexandria after Mark, the Apostle and Evangelift, took upon him the care of that church. Of which Anianus he gives a great character, as beloved of God, and a wonderful man.

Epiphanius fays, that foon after Matthew, Mark, companion of Peters compofed his Gofpel at Rome. And having (t) writ it, he was fent by Peter into the countrey of the Egyptians.

Jerome, in his article of St. Mark, as (u) before quoted, after other things, fays: "Taking (x) the Gofpel, which himfelf had compofed, he

went

(2) S. Marcus, Evangelifta, quem cum Johanne Marco, de quo Act. xii. 12. male nonnulli confundunt, erat Levites. H. L. T. i. p. 24.

(0) Tradunt autem hunc, natione Ifraelitica, et facerdotali ortum profapia, ac poft paffionem ac refurrectionem Domini Salvatoris, ad prædicationem Apoftolorum Evangelica fide a facramentis imbutum, atque ex eorum fuiffe numero, de quibus fcribit Lucas, quia multa etiam turba facerdotum obediebat fidei. Bed. Prol. in Marc.

p. 88.

(p) Vid. Benedictin Monitum, et Petav. Animadv. ad Epiph. H. 21. num. vi. (9) Marcus Evangelifta Dei, Petri difcipulus, Leviticus genere, et facerdos, in Italia hoc fcripfit Evangelium. Præf. in Marc. ap. Hierom. T. v. p. 886. (r) Τῦτον δὲ μάρκον πρῶτον φασιν ἐπὶ τῆς αιγύπτε τειλάμενον. τὸ ἐυαγγέλιον δ δὴ καὶ συνεγράψατο κηρύξαι, ἐκκλησίας τε πρῶτον ἐπ ̓ αυτής αλεξανδρείας συσήσασε Jas. x. λ. H. E. 1. 2. cap. 16.

...

(s) πρῶτος μετὰ μάρκον τὸν ἀπόςολον καὶ ἐυαγγέλισὴν, τῆς ἐν ἀλεξανδρείᾳ Παροικίας αννιανὸς τὴν λειτεργίαν διαδέχεται ανὸς θεόφιλος και πάντα θαυμάσιος. Ib. cap. 24.

fav.

(ε) . . . καὶ γράψας αποςέλλεται ὑπὸ τὸ ἀγία πέτρα εἰς τὴν τῶν αιγυπτίων χώρ H. 51. num. vi.

(u) Vol. x. p. 92. 93.

(a) Affumto itaque Evangelio, quod ipfe confecerat, perrexit ad Ægyptum, et primus Alexandriæ Chriftum annuntians conftituit ecclefiam... Denique Philo.. videns Alexandriæ primam ecclefiam adhuc judaizantem, quafi in

laudem

went to Egypt, and at Alexandria founded a church of great note . . . "He died in the eighth year of Nero, and was buried at Alexandria, "where he was fucceeded, as Bishop, by Anianus."

From all these accounts, I think, it must appear to be probable, that if indeed Mark preached at all in Egypt, and founded a church at Alexandria; it must have been after he had writ his Gofpel, and after the death of Peter and Paul at Rome. Nevertheless, when presently afterwards Eufebe, and Jerome likewife, fpeak of Mark's converts, and Philo's Therapeuts, as all one, they feem to have imagined, that Mark had very early preached in Egypt. But what they fay upon that head is exceeding strange and unaccountable. For they both suppose, that Mark had writ his gofpel at Rome, before he went into Egypt: and that his Gofpel was not writ before the reign of Nero. If therefore Mark went at all to Alexandria, it was later, in the fame reign: and Philo's Therapeuts could not be Chriftians, nor Mark's converts: but were a fort of peopie, who had a being, and had formed their inftitution, before the gospel could be published in Egypt, and before the rife of the Christian Religion.

By Baronius (y) and many others, it is faid, that St. Mark died a Martyr. This is admitted by (z) Cave, and the (a) late Mr. Wetstein. But it is difputed by (b) S. Bafnage: and as feems to me, with good reafon. For St. Mark is not fpoken of as a Martyr by Eufebe, or other more ancient writers. And Jerome, as before quoted, fays, St. Mark died in the eighth year of Nero, and was buried at Alexandria. He does not fay, that he was crowned with martyrdom: as he would have done, if he had known of it. And his expreffions feem to imply a natural death. Fabricius (c) in his account of St. Mark, fays nothing of his having been a Martyr.

IV. Having thus writ the hiftorie of St. Mark, I fhall now recollect the teftimonies to his Gofpel, which we have Teftimonies to bis Gefpel. feen in ancient writers, particularly, with a view of afcertaining the time of it: obferving likewife whatever may farther lead us into the knowledge of his station and character, and whether he was one of Christ's seventy difciples, or not.

The first writer to be here taken notice of is Papias, about A. D. 116. He fays, "That (d) the Elder, from whom he had divers infor"mations, faid: Mark, being the interpreter of Peter, wrote what he re"membred: but not in the order, in which things were spoken and done

"by

laudem gentis fuæ, librum fuper eorum converfatione confcripfit. De V. L. cap. 8.

(y) An. 64. §. i. ii.

(2) Alexandriæ primus Epifcopus factus Martyrium ibi fubiit: quo vero anno, mihi hactenus incompertum. H. L. p. 24.

(a) Tandem vero in Ægyptum concefliffe, atque Alexandriæ fanguine fuo doctrinam Chrifti confirmaffe, hiftoria ecclefiaftica teftatur. J. J. Wetstein. N. T. Tom. i. p. 551.

(b) Ann. 65. num. xix. xx.

• . 132.

(c) Vid. Fabr. Bib. Gr. I. 4. cap. v. n. iii. Tam. 3. p. 139. •'• •

(d) Vol. i. p. 241.

CH. VII. "by Chrift. For he was not a hearer of the Lord, but afterwards fol "lowed Peter."

Irenaeus, as before (e) cited, about 178. fays: "After the death of "Peter and Paul, Mark, the difciple and interpreter of Peter, delivered "to us in writing the things that had been preached-by Peter." In another place (f) he calls Mark "the interpreter and follower of "Peter."

Clement, of Alexandria, about the year of Chrift 194. fays: "That (g) "Peter's hearers at Rome, not content with a fingle hearing, nor with "an unwritten instruction in the divine doctrine, entreated Mark, the "follower of Peter, that he would leave with them in writing a memo"rial of the doctrine, which had been delivered to them by word of "mouth. Nor did they defift, untill they had prevailed with him. Thus "they were the means of writing the Gofpel, which is called according "to Mark. It is faid, that when the Apoftle knew what had been "done, he was pleased with the zeal of the men, and authorised that "fcripture to be read in the churches." That paffage is cited from "Eufebe's Ecclefiaftical Hiftorie.

Again, Eufebe fays: "Clement (b) informs us, that the occafion of "writing the Gofpel according to Mark was this. Peter, having pub"licly preached the word at Rome, and having spoken the Gofpel by the "Spirit, many who were there, entreated Mark to write the things that "had been spoken, he having long accompanied Peter, and retaining "what he had faid: and that when he had compofed the Gofpel, he de"livered it to them, who had afked it of him. Which when Peter knew, "he neither forbid it, nor encouraged it."

Many remarks were (i) formerly made upon these accounts of Clement, which cannot now be repeated. But it may be needful to fay fomething here for reconciling Irenaeus and him. Irenaeus faid, that Mark publifhed his Gofpel after the death of Peter and Paul: whereas Clement fuppofes Peter to have been ftill living, and that this Gospel was fhewn to Peter, who did not difapprove of it. But the difference is not great. Clement fays, that Mark's Gofpel was writ at Rome at the requeft of the Chriftians there, who were hearers of Peter. If fo, it could not be compofed long before Peter's death. For I take it to be certain, that Peter did not come to Rome, untill the reign of Nero was far advanced, nor very long before his own death. So that it may be reckoned not improbable, that Mark's Gofpel was not published, or did not become generally known, till after the death of Peter and Paul, as Irenaeus fays.

Tertullian, about the year 200. fpeaks of Mark as (k) an apoftolical man, or companion of Apostles: and fays, "That (1) the Gospel, pub"lifhed by Mark, may be reckoned Peter's, whose interpreter he « was."

Says Origen, about 230. "The (m) fecond Gospel is that according "to Mark, who wrote it as Peter dictated it to him. Who therefore "calls him his fon in his catholic epiftle." See 1 Peter v. 13.

(e) Vol. i. p. 354.

(b) P. 475.

(f) P. 357.
(i) Vol. i. p. 245... 249.

(k) See Vol. ii. p. 576... 588. (m) Vol. viii. p. 235.

(g) Vol. ii. 472.

Eufebes

Vol. ii. p. 476... 493.

(1) P. 581.