John Mark
St. Mark byFrans Hals,c. 1625
Apostle of the Seventy, Bishop ofByblos[1]
Died	First century AD
Venerated in	Eastern Orthodox Church Roman Catholic Church Eastern Catholic Churches
Feast	September 27[1]

John Mark (Greek:Ἰωάννης Μᾶρκος,romanized: Iōannēs Markos) is named in theActs of the Apostles as an assistant accompanyingPaul andBarnabas on their missionary journeys. Traditionally he is regarded as identical withMark the Evangelist, the traditional writer of theGospel of Mark.

Several times the Acts of the Apostles mentions a certain "John, who was also called Mark" or simply "John":

And when [Peter] had consideredthe thing, he came to the house of Mary the mother of John, whose surname was Mark; where many were gathered together praying.^{Acts 12:12}

And Barnabas and Saul returned from Jerusalem, when they had fulfilledtheir ministry, and took with them John, whose surname was Mark.^{Acts 12:25}

And when they were at Salamis, they preached the word of God in the synagogues of the Jews: and they had John totheir minister.^[2]

Now when Paul and his company loosed from Paphos, they came to Perga in Pamphylia: and John departing from them returned to Jerusalem.^[3]

And Barnabas determined to take with them John, whose surname was Mark.

But Paul thought not good to take him with them, who departed from them from Pamphylia, and went not with them to the work.

And the contention was so sharp between them, that they departed asunder one from the other: and so Barnabas took Mark, and sailed unto Cyprus;

And Paul chose Silas, and departed, being recommended by the brethren unto the Grace of God.^[4]

From these passages it may be gathered that John's motherMary had a large house inJerusalem to which Peter fled after escaping prison; that John assisted Paul and Barnabas on theirfirst missionary journey toCyprus and as far asPerga inPamphylia, but then returned to Jerusalem; and that later controversy over receiving John Mark back led to Paul and Barnabas parting ways, with Barnabas taking Mark back to Cyprus and both thereafter disappearing from the narrative of Acts. The reasons for John Mark's departure to Jerusalem and the subsequent disagreement between Paul and Barnabas have been subject to much speculation.Matthew Henry, for example, suggested that John Mark had departed "without [Barnabas and Paul's] knowledge, or without their consent".^[5] However, there is simply too little data to regard any explanation with confidence.^[6]

Some scholars have argued that John Mark's negative portrayal in Acts is a polemic against the presumptive author of the Gospel of Mark, Luke's primary source for his own Gospel.Adela Collins suggests, "Since the author of Acts also wrote the Gospel according to Luke, it could be that this critical portrait was intended to undercut the authority of the second Gospel."^[7] Michael Kok notes that "Mark's Gospel was a bit of an embarrassment to the refined literary and theological tastes of an educated Christian like Luke."^[8]

It was common for Jews of the period to bear both a Semitic name such asJohn (Hebrew:Yochanan) and a Greco-Roman name such asMark (Latin:Marcus).^[9] But sinceJohn was one of the most common names among Judean Jews,^[10] andMark was the most common in the Roman world,^[11] caution is warranted in identifying John Mark with any other John or Mark.

Ancient sources, in fact, consistently distinguish John Mark from the other Marks of the New Testament and style him Bishop ofByblos.^{[1][12][13][14]} Neither was John Mark identified in antiquity with any other John, apart from rare and explicit speculation.^[13][15][16]

Medieval sources, on the other hand, increasingly regarded all New Testament references toMark asMark the Evangelist, and many modern scholars have agreed in seeing a single Mark.^[17] The very fact that various writings could refer simply toMark without further qualification has been seen as pointing to a single Mark.^[18]

First, there isMark the cousin of Barnabas, mentioned by Paul as a "fellow worker" in the closings of three Pauline epistles.^[19] In antiquity he was regarded as a distinct Mark, Bishop of Apollonia.^[14] If, on the other hand, these two Marks are to be identified, the fact that these epistles were written after the departure of John Mark with Barnabas in Acts must suppose some later reconciliation. But a majority of scholars, noting the close association of both Marks with Paul and Barnabas, indeed regard them as likely the same person. Biblical scholarsSamuel Rolles Driver andCharles Augustus Briggs identified Mark, the cousin of Barnabas, with John Mark,^[20] as do John R. Donahue andDaniel J. Harrington.^[21]

Mark the Evangelist, however, is known only from the patristic tradition, which associates him only withPeter and makes no mention of Paul.^[22]Jerome alone suggests that the Mark of whom Paul speaks may be the Evangelist.^[23][24] But modern scholars have noted that as Peter fled to the house of John Mark's mother, the two men may have had a longstanding association.^[25]

A minority of modern scholars have argued, on the other hand, for identifyingJohn the Evangelist orJohn the Elder with John Mark.^[26]

TheActs of Barnabas, apparently an apocryphal work of the 5th century,^[27] purports to be written by John Mark and to detail the missionary journey and martyrdom of Barnabas in Cyprus, thus picking up where the account of Acts leaves off.^[28]

TheEncomium of the Apostle St. Barnabas, written byAlexander the Monk in the 6th century, also gives an extensive account of the activity of Barnabas and John Mark in Cyprus. After the death of Barnabas, John Mark leaves for Ephesus, and the account then continues by identifying him withMark the Evangelist.^[13]

• People in Acts of the Apostles
• Gospel of Mark
• Mark the Evangelist

• Source attribution
• Articles with short description
• Short description matches Wikidata
• Articles containing Greek-language text