Of the four gospels in the Biblical canon, the Gospel of Mark is the shortest by a significant margin. The writer of John had a different approach to compiling and describing the message he wished to convey, so a difference in length would be understandable. With Matthew and Luke, the other two synoptic gospels, it is much easier to determine how and why the Gospel of Mark is shorter. The date of Mark’s gospel has some impact on why it is shorter, but there is no consensus on dating it.
The Length of the Gospel of Mark
The Gospel of Mark has 16 chapters and 678 verses. Comparatively, Matthew has 28 chapters and 1,071 verses while Luke has 24 chapters and 1,151 verses. Though counting chapters and verses is not a very reliable measure, as the verse count comparison of Matthew and Luke shows, it does suggest the volume of each.
Mark is much shorter by chapter and verse count when compared to the other two synoptic gospels. It stands to reason that the writer of Mark did not include some events and details that the writers of Matthew and Luke did. Let’s have a look at what Mark does not include before attempting to provide a reason why.
Comparing Mark to Matthew and Luke
Mark starts by introducing John the Baptist and then details the baptism of Jesus. The Gospel of Matthew relates these events in the third chapter. Matthew provides a genealogy of the line Jesus was descended from, details Jesus’s birth, the visit by the wise men, Herod’s killing of the infants, and the flight to and return from Egypt which Mark did not.
Luke, in turn, also mentions John the Baptist in the third chapter. Like Matthew, Luke details the back story of Jesus’s later ministry. It relates the birth narratives of John and Jesus and provides a genealogy as well. Luke has the most detailed account of the context of the birth of Jesus and the childhood of Jesus among the synoptic gospels. The only account he does not provide is how Jesus’s family fled to Egypt and returned from there.
Mark is more focused on Jesus as the Messiah. The word “messiah” means “anointed,” and Jesus functions as the Messiah from his baptism onward, therefore Mark does not give an account of any events before then.
Of the events from the baptism of Jesus to his temptation, Mark omits some of the details Matthew and Luke include. Matthew and Luke relate how John the Baptist preached repentance and Luke included John’s replies to questions. Mark also does not include a genealogy of Jesus at all. Matthew opens with a genealogy and Luke includes another version of the genealogy after telling the story of Jesus’s baptism.
The three synoptic gospels contain considerable detail on the ministry of Jesus in Galilee. The accounts Mark records either the writer of Matthew or Luke penned as well.
Matthew and Luke also include much detail about the Sermon on the Mount, with Matthew detailing it from Matthew 4:24-7:29 as a large unit. The accounts in Luke that relate to the same content are scattered throughout his gospel account.
Mark shares little of the information Matthew contains. Parallels between Matthew’s Sermon on the Mount account and similar passages in Mark detail the occasion of the event (Matthew 4:24-5:2; Mark 3:7-13a), the reference to the salt of the earth (Matthew 5:13; Mark 9:49-50), the reference to the light of the world (Matthew 5:14-16; Mark 4:21), teaching on adultery and divorce (Matthew 5:27-32; Mark 9:43-48), the Lord’s prayer (Matthew 6:7-15; Mark 11:25), teaching on judging (Matthew 7:1-5; Mark 4:24-25), and the close and effect of the teaching given during the Sermon on the Mount (Matthew 7:28-29; Mark 1:21-22). The Mark accounts are scattered throughout that gospel and do not present as a comprehensive, unified account.
The majority of what Matthew details in its account of the Sermon on the Mount has been omitted in Mark. The parallels between Matthew and Mark are also recorded in Luke except for the comments on the effects of the ministry on the mount. Matthew and Luke share many similarities with only a few exceptions. These omissions in Mark contribute significantly to the difference in length.
Though not as many as in the Sermon on the Mount, Mark omits several accounts of the ministry of Jesus in Galilee. Mark omitted some teachings, interactions, and parables that Matthew and Luke include.
As far as teaching goes, they are the call to fearless confession (Matthew 10:26-33; Luke 12:2-9), loyalty and division in families (Matthew 10:34-36; Luke 12:51-53), and the return of evil spirits (Matthew 12:43-45; Luke 11:24-26), among others.
On interactions, Mark omits the questions of John the Baptist and Jesus’s answer (Matthew 11:2-6; Luke 7:18-23), and Jesus’s witness concerning John (Matthew 11:7-19; Luke 7:24-35 and 16:16). Matthew and Luke detail the parable of the leaven (Matthew 13:33; Luke 13:20-21), while Matthew relates the parables of the tares (Matthew 13:24-30) and its interpretation (Matthew 13:36-43), of the hidden treasure and the pearl (Matthew 13:44-46), and the net (Matthew 13:47-50). All of these were omitted by Mark.
Matthew and Luke sometimes omit information Mark included. Mark is the only gospel that recorded the parable of the seed that grows secretly (Mark 4:26-29) and the account of the healing of the blind man at Bethsaida (Mark 8:22-26). There are many stories that Matthew and Mark have in common, but Luke excluded. Conversely, Mark and Luke share many that Matthew omitted. It is, however, fair to state that Matthew and Luke, in general, share most of the information Mark contains.
The significant overlap between these three gospels is why they are called synoptic. Synoptic means to see the same. They have a similar view on the story of the life of Jesus.
So, we have established that Mark often omitted to record teachings, events, and background that Matthew and Luke include. Understanding the sequence in which authors of the gospels wrote may explain the differences.
Mark as the First Gospel
Many scholars theorize that the writer of Mark wrote his gospel first and that the writers of Matthew and Luke used it as a source for their gospels. This view is known as Markan priority. If this view is correct, Matthew and Luke expanded on Mark‘s framework. The omissions in Matthew and Luke that Mark recorded show that they did not just copy from him but developed their own narratives to suit the audiences they aimed to reach. Each of the synoptic gospels contains unique material that neither of the other synoptics relate. The accounts they do share, however, use the same language to such an extent that it is reasonable to suggest that copying was involved.
Mark, being the first, excluded details that later gospels considered important enough to add. Mark was not one of the original Twelve Disciples. According to tradition he was a companion of Peter and likely gathered the information he shared in his gospel from Peter. Since he was not an eyewitness, it is more than likely that he did not know about some of the accounts Matthew and Luke added. Luke, though he was also not one of the twelve, carefully researched his gospel to create an accurate account (Luke 1:1-4).
Though there are scholars who do not subscribe to the view that Mark authored his version of the gospel before the others, the logical redaction profile of Mark suggests that it was the first. Mark, writing to a Gentile audience, did not include the birth of Jesus or lineages that Matthew and Luke contain, because, to his audience, it was not as important as it would be to people of Jewish heritage.
According to tradition, Mark was with Peter in Rome shortly before the latter’s execution when he authored his gospel. He may have been pressed for time or only recorded what Peter related to him. Whatever the exact circumstances, his gospel ends abruptly. It is the only gospel that does not include an account of Jesus appearing after the Resurrection in its original version. Most scholars agree that Mark 16:9-20 was a later addition to the Gospel of Mark that does not appear in the oldest manuscripts. Scholars refer to this section as the longer ending of Mark.
The Church Fathers believed that the author of Matthew wrote his gospel first, a view that scholars know as Matthean priority. Augustine was a proponent of this view, as is evident from his work Harmony of the Gospels. If this view is correct, then Mark redacted large portions of the Gospel of Matthew and added a few unique accounts to his version.
Considering the options, it seems reasonable that Mark was the first gospel. It was limited in scope precisely because the author had to rely on what he was told without the benefit of extensive research like Luke did, or the eyewitness experiences that Matthew and John had, allowing them to draw on events they experienced. It is short because, as the first gospel, it served as a framework for the extended versions Matthew and Luke built on it.
