I haven't been back for the whole first part of Mark study. However, I've been reading the materials.<\/p>\n
Though unnecessary, I prefer to finish reading all provided materials before I attend the fellowship. Thus, when broken into small group discussions (not my cup of tea), I anticipate the discussion, however personal it could be, be grounded on the scriptural study of the day. This, is not achieved in certain groups sometimes, and everyone talking about ups and downs of their lives like I should have gone to a pub. I've noticed at least a guy would leave if this happens. I tried to endure, but I may eventually do likewise. This is also why I am discouraged from time to time to attend, other than the fact that I did not keep my promise of finishing the reading materials beforehand.<\/p>\n
My notes are a combination of Dr. Keller's Mark Study book which we get in our email and my own research.<\/p>\n
Mark<\/p>\n
Current theory: Earliest of all 4 gospels, Marcan priority<\/a> (supposedly source of Matthew + Luke). Other theory for the synoptic gospels (Matthew+Mark+Luke) is the Q source, which I don't believe to have firm grounding.<\/p>\n Author: John Mark, friend of Peter, thus the belief that Peter is the main source. Hence, the phrase: \"The Gospel according to Peter\".<\/p>\n Note for details during presence of Peter in Mark.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" I haven't been back for the whole first part of Mark study. However, I've been reading the materials. Though unnecessary, I prefer to finish reading all provided materials before I attend the fellowship. Thus, when broken into small group discussions … Continue reading
\n140AD, Papias wrote:
\nMark, having become the interpreter of Peter, wrote down accurately all that he remembered of the things said and done by our Lord, but not, however, in order.<\/em><\/p>\n