Mark is the second Gospel in the New Testament of the Bible.马克是第二个福音，在新约圣经的圣经。 It is the earliest and the shortest of the four Gospels.它是最早和最短的4个福音。 Papias, an early church father, ascribed this Gospel to Mark, an interpreter of Peter who is often identified with Mark, the cousin of Saint Barnabas and companion of Barnabas and Saint Paul on their first missionary journey.帕皮亚，早期教会的父亲，这归因于福音马克，口译员彼得谁是确定的，往往与马克，表姐圣巴拿巴和同伴巴拿巴和圣保罗在他们的第一代传教之旅。 Irenaeus said that Mark wrote this Gospel after Peter and Paul had died.爱任纽说，马克写了这福音后，彼得和保罗已经死亡。 Most scholars today, therefore, date the book AD 65 - 70.大多数学者今天，因此，到目前为止，预订广告65 -7 0。
The Gospel was probably written in Rome for a primarily Gentile audience, to convince them that Jesus of Nazareth, in spite of his sufferings and death, was the Son of God. It has been called a Gospel of action because it records 18 miracles (similar in count to Matthew and Luke) but only 4 parables (Matthew includes 18 parables and Luke 19). Jesus' victory over evil through his deeds and death receives emphasis. Much material in Mark is repeated in Matthew and in Luke, leading most scholars to conclude that Mark was written first and used independently by the other writers.福音，可能是书面在罗马为主要詹蒂莱听众，说服他们认为，纳匝肋的耶稣，尽管他的苦难和死亡，是上帝的儿子， 它已被称为福音行动 ，因为它记录的18个奇迹（类似在计数马修和卢克） ，但只有4个比喻（马太包括18比喻和卢克19 ） 。 耶稣的胜利，战胜邪恶，通过他的事迹和死亡收到的重视。得多材料在马克是反复在马修和在路加，导致大多数学者结论是，马克是书面的第一和独立使用由其他作家。
| BELIEVE 相信 Religious 宗教 Information 信息 Source 来源 web-site 网址： |
| Our List of 1,000 Religious Subjects 我们所列出的1000名宗教科目 |
| E-mail 电子邮箱 |
Bibliography
参考书目
RH Lightfoot, The
Gospel Message of St. Mark (1950); CFD Moule, The Gospel According to Mark
(1965); V Taylor, The Gospel According to Saint Mark (1966); E Trocme, The
Formation of the Gospel According to Mark (1975).铑lightfoot ，福音的讯息，圣马克（
1950年） ; CFD的moule ，福音根据马克（ 1965年） ; v泰勒，福音根据圣马克（ 1966年） ，电子商务特罗克梅，形成的福音，根据马克（
1975年） 。
Mark, the evangelist; "John whose surname was Mark" (Acts 12:12, 25).马克，传播者; “约翰的姓是马克” （行为12时12分， 25 ） 。 Mark (Marcus, Col. 4:10, etc.) was his Roman name, which gradually came to supersede his Jewish name John.马克（马库斯，上校4时10分，等等）是他的罗马名称，逐渐取代他的犹太人的名字约翰。 He is called John in Acts 13:5, 13, and Mark in 15:39, 2 Tim.他是所谓的约翰的行为， 13时05分， 13 ，和马克在15时39分， 2添。 4:11, etc. He was the son of Mary, a woman apparently of some means and influence, and was probably born in Jerusalem, where his mother resided (Acts 12:12). 4时11分，等他的儿子，玛丽，一名女子显然是一些手段和影响，可能是出生在耶路撒冷，他的母亲居住（行为12时12分） 。 Of his father we know nothing.他的父亲，我们一无所知。 He was cousin of Barnabas (Col. 4:10).他的堂弟，巴拿巴（上校4时10分） 。 It was in his mother's house that Peter found "many gathered together praying" when he was released from prison; and it is probable that it was here that he was converted by Peter, who calls him his "son" (1 Pet. 5: 13).这是在他母亲的房子，彼得发现“许多聚集在一起祈祷， ”当他被从监狱释放;很可能就是在这里，他被转换彼得，谁要求他“儿子” （ 1宠物。 5 ： 13 ） 。 It is probable that the "young man" spoken of in Mark 14:51, 52 was Mark himself.这是有可能的“青年男子”谈到在马克14时51分， 52马克自己。 He is first mentioned in Acts 12: 25.他是第一次提到在行为12 ： 25 。 He went with Paul and Barnabas on their first journey (about AD 47) as their "minister," but from some cause turned back when they reached Perga in Pamphylia (Acts 12:25; 13:13).他与保罗和巴拿巴在他们的第一旅（约广告， 47岁）作为其“交通部长” ，但是从一些事业回头时，他们达成的perga在潘菲利亚（行为12时25分; 13时13分） 。
Three years afterwards a "sharp contention" arose between Paul and Barnabas (15:36-40), because Paul would not take Mark with him.三年之后，一个“尖锐的争论”之间出现保罗和巴拿巴（ 15:36-40 ） ，因为保罗不会采取马克与他。 He, however, was evidently at length reconciled to the apostle, for he was with him in his first imprisonment at Rome (Col. 4:10; Philemon 24).不过，他显然是在长度调和，以使徒，因为他与他在他的首监禁在罗马（上校4时10分;利蒙24 ） 。 At a later period he was with Peter in Babylon (1 Pet. 5:13), then, and for some centuries afterwards, one of the chief seats of Jewish learning; and he was with Timothy in Ephesus when Paul wrote him during his second imprisonment (2 Tim. 4:11).在稍后的期间，他是与Peter在巴比伦（ 1宠物。 5时13分） ，然后，和一些百年之后，其中一个行政议席的犹太学习;他与提摩太在以弗所时，保罗写道，他在他第二次监禁（ 2添。 4时11分） 。 He then disappears from view.然后，他从人们的视野中消失。
(Easton Illustrated Dictionary) （伊斯顿说明字典）
It is the current and apparently well-founded tradition that Mark derived his information mainly from the discourses of Peter.这是当前和显然是有充分依据的传统，马克，他所得的资料主要来自话语的彼得。 In his mother's house he would have abundant opportunities of obtaining information from the other apostles and their coadjutors, yet he was "the disciple and interpreter of Peter" specially.在他母亲的家，他将有丰富的机会获取信息，从其他使徒和他们的coadjutors ，但他是“弟子和口译彼得”特别。 As to the time when it was written, the Gospel furnishes us with no definite information.以的时候，这是书面，福音，提供我们没有明确的信息。 Mark makes no mention of the destruction of Jerusalem, hence it must have been written before that event, and probably about AD 63.马克并没有提及摧毁耶路撒冷，因此它必须被写入之前的事件，可能是关于广告63 。 The place where it was written was probably Rome.的地方，这是书面可能是罗马。 Some have supposed Antioch (comp. Mark 15:21 with Acts 11:20).有些人假定安提（ comp.马克15时21分行为11时20分） 。 It was intended primarily for Romans.它的用意，主要是为罗马。
This appears probable when it is considered that it makes no reference to the Jewish law, and that the writer takes care to interpret words which a Gentile would be likely to misunderstand, such as, "Boanerges" (3:17); "Talitha cumi" (5:41); "Corban" (7:11); "Bartimaeus" (10:46); "Abba" (14:36); "Eloi," etc. (15:34).这似乎是可能的时候，这是认为它没有提到犹太人的法律，以及作家，照顾来解释的话，其中一詹蒂莱可能会误解，如“ boanerges ” （ 3时17分） ; “ talitha cumi “ （ 5时41分） ; ” corban “ （ 7时11分） ; ” bartimaeus “ （ 10时46分） ; ”阿爸“ （ 11:24 ） ; ” eloi “等（ 15时34分） 。 Jewish usages are also explained (7:3; 14:3; 14:12; 15:42).犹太人的惯例，亦解释（ 7时03分; 14时03分; 14时12分; 15时42分） 。 Mark also uses certain Latin words not found in any of the other Gospels, as "speculator" (6:27, rendered, AV, "executioner;" RV, "soldier of his guard"), "xestes" (a corruption of sextarius, rendered "pots," 7:4, 8), "quadrans" (12:42, rendered "a farthing"), "centurion" (15:39, 44, 45).马克还使用某些拉丁美洲的话中未发现任何其他福音，因为“投机者” （ 6时27分，所提供的，视听， “刽子手” ;风疹病毒， “士兵他的卫兵” ） ， “ xestes ” （ 1腐败sextarius ，所提供的“盆” ， 7时04分， 8 ） ， “ quadrans ” （ 12时42分，使“一farthing ” ） ， “百人” （ 15时39分， 44 ， 45 ） 。 He only twice quotes from the Old Testament (1:2; 15:28).他只有两次行情从旧约（ 1:2 ; 15时28分） 。
The characteristics of this Gospel are, (1) the absence of the genealogy of our Lord, (2) whom he represents as clothed with power, the "lion of the tribe of Judah."的特点，这是福音， （ 1 ）没有该族谱我们的主， （ 2 ）人，他所代表的温饱作为与权力， “狮子该部落的犹大” 。 (3.) Mark also records with wonderful minuteness the very words (3:17; 5:41; 7:11, 34; 14:36) as well as the position (9:35) and gestures (3:5, 34; 5:32; 9:36; 10:16) of our Lord. （ 3 ） 。马克也记录与美好的非常微小的话（ 3时17分; 5时41分; 7时11分， 34 ; 14时36分） ，以及立场（ 9时35分）和手势（ 3时05分， 34 ; 5时32分; 9时36分; 10时16分）我们的主。 (4.) He is also careful to record particulars of person (1:29, 36; 3:6, 22, etc.), number (5:13; 6:7, etc.), place (2:13; 4:1; 7:31, etc.), and time (1:35; 2:1; 4:35, etc.), which the other evangelists omit. （ 4 ） 。他也谨慎地记录详情的人（ 1点29分， 36 ; 3点06 ， 22 ，等） ，数目（ 5时13分; 6时07分，等） ，到位（ 2点13分; 4时01分; 7时31分，等等） ，时间（ 1点35分; 2:1 ; 4:35等） ，而其他福音省略。 (5.) The phrase "and straightway" occurs nearly forty times in this Gospel; while in Luke's Gospel, which is much longer, it is used only seven times, and in John only four times. （ 5 ） “和straightway ”发生了近40倍，在这福音;而在路加的福音，这是长得多，这是只用了7倍，并在约翰只有4倍。 "The Gospel of Mark," says Westcott, "is essentially a transcript from life. “福音马克说： ” westcott ， “基本上是一种由誊本的生活。
The course and issue of facts are imaged in it with the clearest outline." "In Mark we have no attempt to draw up a continuous narrative.过程和问题的事实是，影像在它与清晰的轮廓。 “ ， ”在马克，我们并没有试图制订出一个连续的叙事。 His Gospel is a rapid succession of vivid pictures loosely strung together without much attempt to bind them into a whole or give the events in their natural sequence.他的福音是一种快速，继承生动的图片松散strung在一起，没有什么约束，企图使他们成为整个或给予的事件在他们的自然序列。 This pictorial power is that which specially characterizes this evangelist, so that 'if any one desires to know an evangelical fact, not only in its main features and grand results, but also in its most minute and so to speak more graphic delineation, he must betake himself to Mark.'" The leading principle running through this Gospel may be expressed in the motto: "Jesus came......preaching the gospel of the kingdom" (Mark 1:14). "Out of a total of 662 verses, Mark has 406 in common with Matthew and Luke, 145 with Matthew, 60 with Luke, and at most 51 peculiar to itself." (See Matthew).这图案的权力是专的特点，这传播者，使' ，如果任何一个想要知道一个福音事工促进会，事实上，不仅在其主要特点和宏伟的结果，而且在其最分钟，所以说更多的图形划分，他必须betake自己的马克“ 。领导的原则贯穿福音，这可能表示的座右铭： ”耶稣来到......宣扬福音的王国“ （马克1时14分） 。 ”一共有662韵文，马克已在406共同与马修和卢克， 145与马修， 60路加，并在51个最特有的本身“ 。 （见马太） 。
(Easton Illustrated Dictionary) （伊斯顿说明字典）
The subject will be treated under the following heads:这一主题将治疗根据以下元首：
I. Contents, Selection and Arrangement of Matter;一，内容，选择和安排的事;
II.二。 Authorship;作者;
III.三。 Original Language, Vocabulary, and Style;原来的语言，词汇，和作风;
IV.四。 State of Text and Integrity;国家的文字和完整性;
V. Place and Date of Composition;五，地点和日期组成;
VI.六。 Destination and Purpose;目的和宗旨;
VII.七。 Relation to Matthew and Luke.有关马修和卢克。
I. CONTENTS, SELECTION AND ARRANGEMENT OF MATTER一，内容，选择和安排的事
The Second Gospel, like the other two Synoptics, deals chiefly with the Galilean ministry of Christ, and the events of the last week at Jerusalem.第二个福音，跟其他两个synoptics ，交易主要是与伽利略部基督，和事件的最后一周在耶路撒冷。 In a brief introduction, the ministry of the Precursor and the immediate preparation of Christ for His official work by His Baptism and temptation are touched upon (i, 1-13); then follows the body of the Gospel, dealing with the public ministry, Passion, Death, and Resurrection of Jesus (i, 14-xvi, 8); and lastly the work in its present form gives a summary account of some appearances of the risen Lord, and ends with a reference to the Ascension and the universal preaching of the Gospel (xvi, 9-20).在简要介绍了，教育部的先导，并立即准备基督为他的正式工作，他的洗礼和诱惑，是触及（一， 1月13日） ;然后如下的身体福音，处理公共事务部，激情，死亡，与复活的耶稣（我14 -十六， 8 ） ;和最后的工作，以其目前的形式给出了简要的帐户一些外表的复活的主，并结束与一个参考到阿森松岛和世界的说教的福音（十六， 9月20日） 。 The body of the Gospel falls naturally into three divisions: the ministry in Galilee and adjoining districts: Phoenicia, Decapolis, and the country north towards Cæarea Philippi (i, 14-ix, 49); the ministry in Judea and (kai peran, with B, Aleph, C*, L, Psi, in x, 1) Peræ, and the journey to Jerusalem (x, 1-xi, 10); the events of the last week at Jerusalem (xi, 11-xvi, 8).正文福音属于自然分为三个部门：财政部在加利利和毗连区：腓尼基， decapolis ，和该国北部对cæarea腓立比（一， 14 -九， 49 ） ;财政部在朱迪亚和（启peran ， b ，列， c * ，升，防扩散安全倡议，在x ， 1 ） peræ ，和西游记耶路撒冷（十，一喜， 10 ） ;的事件，上周在耶路撒冷（十一， 11 -十六， 8 ） 。
Beginning with the public ministry (cf. Acts 1:22; 10:37), St. Mark passes in silence over the preliminary events recorded by the other Synoptists: the conception and birth of the Baptist, the genealogy, conception, and birth of Jesus, the coming of the Magi, etc. He is much more concerned with Christ's acts than with His discourses, only two of these being given at any considerable length (iv, 3-32; xiii, 5-37).开始与公共事务部（参见行为1时22分; 10时37分） ，圣马克及格，沉默的初步记录事件由其他synoptists ：概念和诞生，浸会，族谱，观念，及诞生耶稣，未来的贤士，等他更为关注与基督的行为比他的话语中，只有两个，这些正考虑在任何在相当长（四， 3-32 ;第十三5-37 ） 。 The miracles are narrated most graphically and thrown into great prominence, almost a fourth of the entire Gospel (in the Vulg., 164 verses out of 677) being devoted to them, and there seems to be a desire to impress the readers from the outset with Christ's almighty power and dominion over all nature.奇迹叙述最生动和扔进大突出，几乎四分之一的整个福音（在vulg ， 164诗走出677 ）正致力于他们，似乎有一种愿望，留下深刻印象的读者从一开始与基督的全能的权力和统治所有的性质。 The very first chapter records three miracles: the casting out of an unclean spirit, the cure of Peter's mother-in-law, and the healing of a leper, besides alluding summarily to many others (i, 32-34); and, of the eighteen miracles recorded altogether in the Gospel, all but three (ix, 16-28; x, 46-52; xi, 12-14) occur in the first eight chapters.非常第一章的纪录，三个奇迹：铸造出一个不洁的精神，治愈率彼得的母亲-在法律和愈合的一leper ，除了暗指简易程序，以其他许多（我， 32-34 ） ;和，该18的奇迹记录，共有在福音，但所有三（九， 16-28 ; X的46-52 ;席， 12月14日）发生在第一八个章节。 Only two of these miracles (vii, 31-37; viii, 22-26) are peculiar to Mark, but, in regard to nearly all, there are graphic touches and minute details not found in the other Synoptics.只有两个，这些奇迹（第七章， 31-37 ;第八， 22日至26日）是特有的马克，但在对于几乎所有的，有图形和涉及分钟的细节没有发现，在其他synoptics 。 Of the parables proper Mark has only four: the sower (iv, 3-9), the seed growing secretly (iv, 26-29), the mustard seed (iv, 30-32), and the wicked husbandman (xii, 1-9); the second of these is wanting in the other Gospels.该比喻适当的马克只有四： sower （四， 3月9日） ，种子日益增长的秘密（四， 26-29 ） ，芥籽（四， 30-32 ） ，和恶人husbandman （十二， 1 -9 ） ;第二，这些是要在其他的福音。 Special attention is paid throughout to the human feelings and emotions of Christ, and to the effect produced by His miracles upon the crowd.特别值得注意的是，在整个支付给人类的感受和情绪的基督，并影响所产生的奇迹后，他的人群。 The weaknesses of the Apostles are far more apparent than in the parallel narratives of Matt.弱点使徒远远更加明显比在平行叙述的马特。 and Luke, this being, probably due to the graphic and candid discourses of Peter, upon which tradition represents Mark as relying.和卢克，这，大概是由于图形和坦诚的话语，黄匡源，当其中的传统，代表马克作为依靠。
The repeated notes of time and place (eg, i, 14, 19, 20, 21, 29, 32, 35) seem to show that the Evangelist meant to arrange in chronological order at least a number of the events which he records.一再说明时间和地点（例如，我， 14 ， 19 ， 20 ， 21 ， 29 ， 32 ， 35 ）似乎表明，该传播者的意思安排时间顺序排列，至少一些事件，他的纪录。 Occasionally the note of time is wanting (eg i, 40; iii, 1; iv, 1; x, 1, 2, 13) or vague (eg ii, 1, 23; iv, 35), and in such cases he may of course depart from the order of events.偶尔注意到的时间是要（例如，我40 ;三，一;四， 1 ; X的1 ， 2 ， 13 ）或模糊（例如二，一， 23岁;四， 35岁） ，和在这种情况下，他可能当然，偏离秩序的活动。 But the very fact that in some instances he speaks thus vaguely and indefinitely makes it all the more necessary to take his definite notes of time and sequence in other cases as indicating chronological order.但非常的事实是，在一些实例，他说，因此，依稀和无限期，使所有，更要采取明确的注释，他的时间和顺序在其他情况下，作为显示顺序。 We are here confronted, however, with the testimony of Papias, who quotes an elder (presbyter), with whom he apparently agrees, as saying that Mark did not write in order: "And the elder said this also: Mark, having become interpreter of Peter, wrote down accurately everything that he remembered, without, however, recording in order what was either said or done by Christ. For neither did he hear the Lord, nor did he follow Him, but afterwards, as I said, (he attended) Peter, who adapted his instructions to the needs (of his hearers), but had no design of giving a connected account of the Lord's oracles [vl "words"]. So then Mark made no mistake [Schmiedel, "committed no fault"], while he thus wrote down some things (enia as he remembered them; for he made it his one care not to omit anything that he had heard, or set down any false statement therein" (Eusebius, "Hist. Eccl.", III, xxxix). Some indeed have understood this famous passage to mean merely that Mark did not write a literary work, but simply a string of notes connected in the simplest fashion (cf. Swete, "The Gospel acc. to Mark", pp. lx-lxi). The present writer, however, is convinced that what Papias and the elder deny to our Gospel is chronological order, since for no other order would it have been necessary that Mark should have heard or followed Christ. But the passage need not be understood to mean more than that Mark occasionally departs from chronological order, a thing we are quite prepared to admit. What Papias and the elder considered to be the true order we cannot say; they can hardly have fancied it to be represented in the First Gospel, which so evidently groups (eg viii-ix), nor, it would seem, in the Third, since Luke, like Mark, had not been a disciple of Christ. It may well be that, belonging as they did to Asia Minor, they had the Gospel of St. John and its chronology in mind. At any rate, their judgment upon the Second Gospel, even if be just, does not prevent us from holding that Mark, to some extent, arranges the events of Christ's like in chronological order.我们在这里面临的，但是，随着证词帕皮亚，谁的报价一老（ presbyter ） ，与他显然同意，说，马克并没有写在命令： “和老说，这也：马克，成为口译员彼得，写下准确的一切，他记得，如果没有，不过，录音，为了什么或者说或做的基督。他也没有听到主，他也没有按照他的意思，但后来，正如我刚才所说， （他出席） ，黄匡源，谁适应他的指示的需要， （他的hearers ） ，但没有设计提供了连接到主的签[的VL “改为” ] 。那么，马克没有错[ schmiedel ， “承诺并无过错“ ] ，而因此，他写下了一些东西（ enia作为他记得他们;为他作出他的一小心不要省略的事，他已听到，或订定任何虚假陈述的地方” （尤西比乌斯， “历史。传道书” 。 ，三， XXXIX ）号决议。确实有一些了解，这个著名的通过意味着只是马克没有写的文学作品，只是一连串的债券连最简单的方式（参见swete ， “福音行政协调会。标志” ，页。中心LX - lxi ） 。目前的作家，不过，相信什么帕皮亚和老否认，我们的福音是时间顺序排列，由于没有其他命令，将它已经有必要马克应该有听到或其次是基督，但通过不必理解为是指较马克偶尔偏离时间顺序排列，一件事情我们很愿意承认。什么帕皮亚和老被视为真正令我们不能说他们难以办好足球有它的代表在第一福音，因为这样可以使明显的群体（例如第八至第九） ，也没有，看来，在第三，由于卢克一样，马克，尚未弟子基督的，它可能会认为，属于像以小亚细亚，他们的福音圣约翰和其年代在铭记。无论如何，他们的判断后，第二个福音，即使是公正，并不妨碍我们认为马克，在一定程度上，安排事件基督的一样，在时间顺序排列。
II.二。 AUTHORSHIP作者
All early tradition connects the Second Gospel with two names, those of St. Mark and St. Peter, Mark being held to have written what Peter had preached.所有早期的传统，连接第二福音与两个名字，这些圣马克和圣彼得，马克被关押有书面什么彼得曾鼓吹。 We have just seen that this was the view of Papias and the elder to whom he refers.我们刚刚看到，这是鉴于帕皮亚和长辈的人，他是指。 Papias wrote not later than about AD 130, so that the testimony of the elder probably brings us back to the first century, and shows the Second Gospel known in Asia Minor and attributed to St. Mark at that early time.帕皮亚写道不得迟于有关广告130 ，使的证词，老，可能使我们回到第一世纪，并显示第二个福音已知在小亚细亚和归因于圣马克在年初的时间。 So Irenæus says: "Mark, the disciple and interpreter of Peter, himself also handed down to us in writing what was preached by Peter" ("Adv. Hær.", III, i; ibid., x, 6).因此， irenæus说： “马克，弟子和口译的彼得，自己也流传给我们的写作是什么鼓吹的彼得” （ “副hær ” ，三，我;同上，第十， 6 ） 。 St. Clement of Alexandria, relying on the authority of "the elder presbyters", tells us that, when Peter had publicly preached in Rome, many of those who heard him exhorted Mark, as one who had long followed Peter and remembered what he had said, to write it down, and that Mark "composed the Gospel and gave it to those who had asked for it" (Eusebius, "Hist. Eccl.", VI, xiv).圣克莱门特在亚历山大，依靠权威的“老presbyters ” ，告诉我们，当彼得曾公开鼓吹在罗马，许多人谁听到他告诫马克，作为一个谁已久之后彼得和怀念他说，它写下来，和马克“组成的福音给那些谁曾要求它” （尤西比乌斯， “历史。传道书” ，六，十四） 。 Origen says (ibid., VI, xxv) that Mark wrote as Peter directed him (os Petros huphegesato auto), and Eusebius himself reports the tradition that Peter approved or authorized Mark's work ("Hist. Eccl.", II, xv).奥利说， （同上，六，二十五）表示，马克写道，作为彼得指示他（ OS的佩特罗斯huphegesato自动） ，和尤西比乌斯自己报告的传统，黄匡源批准或授权马克的工作（ “历史。传道书” ，二， XV ）号决议。 To these early Eastern witnesses may be added, from the West, the author of the Muratorian Fragment, which in its first line almost certainly refers to Mark's presence at Peter's discourses and his composition of the Gospel accordingly (Quibus tamen interfuit et ita posuit); Tertullian, who states: "The Gospel which Mark published (edidit is affirmed to be Peter's, whose interpreter Mark was" ("Contra Marc.", IV, v); St. Jerome, who in one place says that Mark wrote a short Gospel at the request of the brethren at Rome, and that Peter authorized it to be read in the Churches ("De Vir. Ill.", viii), and in another that Mark's Gospel was composed, Peter narrating and Mark writing (Petro narrante et illo scribente--"Ad Hedib.", ep. cxx). In every one of these ancient authorities Mark is regarded as the writer of the Gospel, which is looked upon at the same time as having Apostolic authority, because substantially at least it had come from St. Peter. In the light of this traditional connexion of he Gospel with St. Peter, there can be no doubt that it is to it St. Justin Martyr, writing in the middle of the second century, refers ("Dial.", 106), when he sags that Christ gave the title of "Boanerges" to the sons of Zebedee (a fact mentioned in the New Testament only in Mark 3:17), and that this is written in the "memoirs" of Peter (en tois apopnemaneumasin autou--after he had just named Peter). Though St. Justin does not name Mark as the writer of the memoirs, the fact that his disciple Tatian used our present Mark, including even the last twelve verses, in the composition of the "Diatessaron", makes it practically certain that St. Justin knew our present Second Gospel, and like the other Fathers connected it with St. Peter.这些早期东部证人有可能成为补充说，从西方，作者的穆拉多利残卷片段，在其第一线，几乎可以肯定是指马克的存在，在彼得的论述，和他组成的福音，因此（ quibus但有interfuit等的ITA posuit ） ;良，谁指出： “福音，其中马克出版（ edidit是肯定要彼得的，其口译马克” （ “魂斗罗马克” ，四，五） ;圣杰罗姆，谁在一个地方说，马克写了一短在福音的要求，兄弟在罗马，和黄匡源表示，授权其在读教会（ “时点维尔。伊利诺伊州” ，第八章） ，以及在纷纷表示，马克的福音组成，彼得的叙述和马克写作（石化narrante等illo scribente -“广告h edib。 ”的E P。 c xx） 。在每一个这些古老当局马克被看作是作家的福音，这是看在同一时间内有使徒权威，因为大幅至少它来自圣彼得大教堂。在根据这一传统的Connexion公司的福音，他与圣彼得大教堂，有可毫无疑问，这是给它的圣贾斯汀烈士，在写作中的第二个世纪，是指（ “拨号“ ， 106 ）时，他凹陷基督给的标题” boanerges “的儿子zebedee （一个事实提到，在新约圣经只在3时17马克） ，并认为这是写在”回忆录“彼得（中文tois apopnemaneumasin autou -后，他刚刚命名为彼得） 。虽然圣贾斯汀并不名称马克作为作家的回忆录，事实上，他的弟子提安用我们目前的马克，甚至包括过去十二个月的诗，在组成“ diatessaron ” ，使得它几乎肯定的是，圣贾斯汀知道，我们目前的第二个福音，并跟其他的父亲连接，它与圣彼得大教堂。
If, then, a consistent and widespread early tradition is to count for anything, St. Mark wrote a work based upon St. Peter's preaching.如果，那么，一贯的和普遍的早期的传统，是计数的事情，圣马克写了工作，根据圣彼得的说教。 It is absurd to seek to destroy the force of this tradition by suggesting that all the subsequent authorities relied upon Papias, who may have been deceived.这是荒谬的企图摧毁的力量，这种传统暗示所有后续当局依靠帕皮亚，谁可能已被骗。 Apart from the utter improbability that Papias, who had spoken with many disciples of the Apostles, could have been deceived on such a question, the fact that Irenæus seems to place the composition of Mark's work after Peter's death, while Origen and other represent the Apostle as approving of it (see below, V), shows that all do not draw from the same source.除了从完全improbability认为，帕皮亚，谁曾发言的许多弟子的使徒，可能会被欺骗了这样一个问题，事实上， irenæus似乎是把马克组成的工作后，彼得的死亡，而奥利和其他代表使徒作为审批的，它（见下文，第V ） ，显示，所有不吸取来自同一来源。 Moreover, Clement of Alexandria mentions as his source, not any single authority, but "the elders from the beginning" (ton anekathen presbuteron--Euseb., "Hist. Eccl.", VI, xiv).此外，克莱门特在亚历山大提到他的来源，而不是任何单一的权力，但“长者从一开始” （吨anekathen presbuteron -e useb， “历史。传道书” ，六，十四） 。 The only question, then, that can be raised with any shadow of reason, is whether St. Mark's work was identical with our present Second Gospel, and on this there is no room for doubt.唯一的问题，那么，可以提出任何的阴影，因此，是否是圣马克的工作是一致的，与我们目前的第二个福音，并在此是没有疑问的余地。 Early Christian literature knows no trace of an Urmarkus different from our present Gospel, and it is impossible that a work giving the Prince of the Apostles' account of Christ's words and deeds could have disappeared utterly, without leaving any trace behind.早期基督教文学知悉任何痕迹一urmarkus不同，从我们目前的福音，这是不可能的工作给予王子使徒'帐户基督的言行可以完全消失，没有留下任何痕迹的背后。 Nor can it be said that the original Mark has been worked up into our present Second Gospel, for then, St. Mark not being the actual writer of the present work and its substance being due to St. Peter, there would have been no reason to attribute it to Mark, and it would undoubtedly have been known in the Church, not by the title it bears, but as the "Gospel according to Peter".也可以说原来的马克一直工作到了我们目前的第二个福音，那么，圣马克没有得到实际的作者目前的工作和其实质是由于圣彼得大教堂，将有已没有理由归因于它马克，它无疑已众所周知，在教会里，而不是由它承担的标题，但由于“福音根据彼得” 。
Internal evidence strongly confirms the view that our present Second Gospel is the work referred to by Papias.内部强烈的证据证实，认为我们目前的第二个福音是工作所提到帕皮亚。 That work, as has been seen, was based on Peter's discourses.这项工作，已经看到，是基于彼得的论述。 Now we learn from Acts (i, 21-22; x, 37-41) that Peter's preaching dealt chiefly with the public life, Death, Resurrection, and Ascension of Christ.现在我们学习的行为， （我， 21-22日; X的37-41段）表示，彼得的说教处理，主要是与市民的生活，死亡，复活，升天的基督。 So our present Mark, confining itself to the same limits, omitting all reference to Christ's birth and private life, such as is found in the opening chapters of Matthew and Luke, and commencing with the preaching of the Baptist, ends with Christ's Resurrection and Ascension.因此，我们目前的马克，局限于相同的限制，省略了所有参考，以基督的诞生和私人生活中，如被发现在该开放章节马修和卢克，并展开与宣扬，浸会，结束与基督的复活和阿森松。 Again (1) the graphic and vivid touches peculiar to our present Second Gospel, its minute notes in regard to (2) persons, (3) places, (4) times, and (5) numbers, point to an eyewitness like Peter as the source of the writer's information.再次（ 1 ）图形和生动的涉及特有的，我们目前的第二个福音，其分钟注意到，在关于（ 2 ）人， （ 3 ）地方， （ 4 ）次， （ 5 ）号码，指向一名目击者一样，彼得为来源，作者的信息。 Thus we are told (1) how Jesus took Peter's mother-in-law by the hand and raised her up (i, 31), how with anger He looked round about on His critics (iii, 5), how He took little children into His arms and blessed them and laid His hands upon them (ix, 35; x, 16), how those who carried the paralytic uncovered the roof (ii, 3, 4), how Christ commanded that the multitude should sit down upon the green grass, and how they sat down in companies, in hundred and in fifties (vi, 39-40); (2) how James and John left their father in the boat with the hired servants (i, 20), how they came into the house of Simon and Andrew, with James and John (i, 29), how the blind man at Jericho was the son of Timeus (x, 46), how Simon of Cyrene was the father of Alexander and Rufus (xv, 21); (3) how there was no room even about the door of the house where Jesus was (ii, 2), how Jesus sat in the sea and all the multitude was by the sea on the land (iv, 1), how Jesus was in the stern of the boat asleep on the pillow (iv, 38); (4) how on the evening of the Sabbath, when the sun had set, the sick were brought to be cured (i, 32), how in the morning, long before day, Christ rose up (i, 35), how He was crucified at the third hour (xv, 25), how the women came to the tomb very early, when the sun had risen (xvi, 2); (5) how the paralytic was carried by four (ii, 3), how the swine were about two thousand in number (v. 13), how Christ began to send forth the Apostles, two and two (vi, 7).因此，告诉我们， （ 1 ）如何耶稣拿起彼得的母亲-在法律所提出的手和她（我， 31岁） ，如何与愤怒，他期待一轮关于对他的批评者（三，五） ，如何，他的孩子们他的武器和祝福他们，奠定了他的手后，他们（第九， 35条; X的16 ） ，如何实现这些谁进行麻痹发现屋顶（ 2 ， 3 ， 4 ） ，如何基督指挥说，千头万绪，应该坐下来后，绿草，以及它们如何坐下来，在公司，在100和在五十年代（六， 39-40 ） ; （ 2 ）如何詹姆斯和约翰离开了他们的父亲在船与雇用的公务员（我20 ） ，他们如何来进入众议院的西蒙与郑家富，与詹姆斯和约翰（我29 ） ，如何盲人男子在杰里科的是儿子timeus （十， 46岁） ，如何西蒙的昔兰尼是父亲亚历山大和rufus （十五，二十一） ; （ 3 ）如何有没有空间，甚至有关门的房子里，耶稣被（二， 2 ） ，如何耶稣星期六在海中和所有千头万绪，是由海关于土地（四， 1 ） ，如何耶稣是在严峻的船民就睡着枕头（四， 38 ） ; （ 4 ）如何在傍晚的安息日，当太阳已定，患病者被带到治愈（我， 32岁） ，如何在今天上午，早一天，基督奋起（我， 35岁） ，他是如何被钉在十字架上，在第三小时（ 15 ， 25 ） ，妇女如何来到墓极早，当太阳已上升（十六， 2 ） ; （ 5 ）如何麻痹进行，由四（二，三） ，如何猪大约有2000多， （五13 ） ，如何基督开始发送，提出了使徒，二和二（六，七） 。 This mass of information which is wanting in the other Synoptics, and of which the above instances are only a sample, proved beyond doubt that the writer of the Second Gospel must have drawn from some independent source, and that this source must have been an eyewitness.这大量的信息是希望在其他synoptics ，其中上述事例只是一个范例，证明了，毫无疑问，作者的第二个福音，必须得出一些独立的来源，这来源必须是被一名目击者。 And when we reflect that incidents connected with Peter, such as the cure of his mother-in-law and his three denials, are told with special details in this Gospel; that the accounts of the raising to life of the daughter of Jaïrus, of the Transfiguration, and of the Agony in the Garden, three occasions on which only Peter and James and John were present, show special signs of first-hand knowledge (cf. Swete, op. cit., p. xliv) such as might be expected in the work of a disciple of Peter (Matthew and Luke may also have relied upon the Petrine tradition for their accounts of these events, but naturally Peter's disciple would be more intimately acquainted with the tradition); finally, when we remember that, though the Second Gospel records with special fullness Peter's three denials, it alone among the Gospels omit all reference to the promise or bestowal upon him of the primacy (cf. Matthew 16:18-19; Luke 22:32; John 21:15-17), we are led to conclude that the eyewitness to whom St. Mark was indebted for his special information was St. Peter himself, and that our present Second Gospel, like Mark's work referred to by Papias, is based upon Peter's discourse.当我们反映的事件，涉嫌与黄匡源，如治疗他的母亲-在法律和他的三名否认，说有特殊的细节在这福音;帐目，提高生命的女儿jaïrus ，该变形和痛苦，在花园里，先后三次对其中只有彼得和詹姆斯和约翰人出席，显示特别的迹象，第一手的知识（参见swete ，前引书，页XLIV ）号决议，如可能预计在工作弟子彼得（马太和路加，也可能是靠后， petrine传统，为他们的帐目，这些事件，但自然彼得的门徒会更深切熟悉的传统） ;最后，当我们记得，虽然第二福音的纪录，特别丰满彼得的三否认，但光靠它之间的福音省略所有参考的承诺，或赋予他的首要地位（参见马修16:18-19 ;卢克22时32分;约翰21:15-17 ） ，我们现正率领得出结论认为，目击者向谁圣马克负债为他的特别资料，圣彼得自己，而我们目前的第二个福音，像马克的工作所提到帕皮亚，是基于彼得的话语。 This internal evidence, if it does not actually prove the traditional view regarding the Petrine origin of the Second Gospel, is altogether consistent with it and tends strongly to confirm it.这个内部的证据，如果它实际上并不证明传统的观点就petrine的起源第二福音，是完全一致的与它往往是强烈的证实。
III.三。 ORIGINAL LANGUAGE, VOCABULARY, AND STYLE原来的语言，词汇和作风，
It has always been the common opinion that the Second Gospel was written in Greek, and there is no solid reason to doubt the correctness of this view.一直以来，共同认为，第二个福音写在希腊，并没有坚实的理由怀疑的正确性，这种看法。 We learn from Juvenal (Sat., III, 60 sq.; VI, 187 sqq.) and Martial (Epig., XIV, 58) that Greek was very widely spoken at Rome in the first century.我们学习尤维纳利斯（周六，三， 60平方米;第六， 187 sqq 。 ）和武术（ epig. ，十四， 58岁） ，希腊是非常广泛的发言，在罗马，在第一世纪。 Various influences were at work to spread the language in the capital of the Empire.不同的影响，分别在工作中传播的语言，在资本帝国。 "Indeed, there was a double tendency which embraced at once classes at both ends of the social scale. On the one hand among slaves and the trading classes there were swarms of Greek and Greek-speaking Orientals. On the other hand in the higher ranks it was the fashion to speak Greek; children were taught it by Greek nurses; and in after life the use of it was carried to the pitch of affectation" (Sanday and Headlam, "Romans", p. lii). “事实上，有一个双重的趋势拥抱一次班，两边的社会规模。一方面之间的奴隶和营运班有大批希腊和希腊为母语的东方人。另一方面，在较高职级这是时装发言希腊;孩子们教它的希腊护士;和在后的生活使用它进行到音高affectation “ （ sanday和headlam ， ”罗马“ ，第LII ）号。 We know, too, that it was in Greek St. Paul wrote to the Romans, and from Rome St. Clement wrote to the Church of Corinth in the same language.我们也知道， ，这是在希腊圣保禄写信给罗马，从罗马圣克莱门特写信给教会的科林斯在相同的语言。 It is true that some cursive Greek manuscripts of the tenth century or later speak of the Second Gospel as written in Latin (egrathe Romaisti en Rome, but scant and late evidence like this, which is probably only a deduction from the fact that the Gospel was written at Rome, can be allowed on weight. Equally improbable seems the view of Blass (Philol. of the Gosp., 196 sqq.) that the Gospel was originally written in Aramaic. The arguments advanced by Blass (cf. also Allen in "Expositor", 6th series, I, 436 sqq.) merely show at most that Mark may have thought in Aramaic; and naturally his simple, colloquial Greek discloses much of the native Aramaic tinge. Blass indeed urges that the various readings in the manuscripts of Mark, and the variations in Patristic quotations from the Gospel, are relics of different translations of an Aramaic original, but the instances he adduces in support of this are quite inconclusive. An Aramaic original is absolutely incompatible with the testimony of Papias, who evidently contrasts the work of Peter's interpreter with the Aramaic work of Matthew. It is incompatible, too, with the testimony of all the other Fathers, who represent the Gospel as written by Peter's interpreter for the Christians of Rome.这是事实，有些草书希腊手稿十世纪或稍后发言的第二个福音，作为书面在拉丁美洲（ egrathe romaisti英文罗马，但很少和晚期的证据，这样的，这可能是唯一的扣除事实，即是福音写在罗马，可以允许的重量。琢磨，似乎同样的看法，布拉斯（ philol.的gosp ， 196 sqq 。 ）表示，福音原本写的阿拉姆语。论点先进的，由布拉斯（参见也李鹏飞在“ expositor “ ，第六系列，我， 436 sqq ） ，只是表明在最马克说，可能有思想的阿拉姆语和自然他的简单，通俗希腊披露了许多本土的阿拉姆语色彩。布拉斯事实上，敦促各读，在手稿马克，以及变化的教父的报价从福音，是文物，不同的翻译一阿拉姆语原，但实例，他adduces在支持这是相当有定论。阿拉姆语一原，是绝对不符合的证词帕皮亚，谁很明显的对比工作的彼得的口译与阿拉姆语的工作，马修，这是不相容的，也与证词的其他所有的父亲，谁代表福音，作为书面彼得的传译员，为基督信徒的罗马。
The vocabulary of the Second Gospel embraces 1330 distinct words, of which 60 are proper names.词汇的第二个福音，包含1330鲜明的话，其中有60个适当的名称。 Eighty words, exclusive of proper names, are not found elsewhere in the New Testament; this, however, is a small number in comparison with more than 250 peculiar words found in the Gospel of St. Luke. 80换句话说，独家专有名称，都没有发现其他地方的新约圣经;不过，这是一个很小的数目相比，与250多个奇特的话，发现在福音中的圣卢克。 Of St. Mark's words, 150 are shared only by the other two Synoptists; 15 are shared only by St. John (Gospel); and 12 others by one or other of the Synoptists and St. John.圣马克的话， 150是共同只能由其他两个synoptists ; 15顷共享只有圣约翰（福音） ;和12个其他由一或其他的synoptists和圣约翰。 Though the words found but once in the New Testament (apax legomena) are not relatively numerous in the Second Gospel, they are often remarkable; we meet with words rare in later Greek such as (eiten, paidiothen, with colloquialisms like (kenturion, xestes, spekoulator), and with transliterations such as korban, taleitha koum, ephphatha, rabbounei (cf. Swete, op. cit., p. xlvii). Of the words peculiar to St. Mark about one-fourth are non-classical, while among those peculiar to St. Matthew or to St. Luke the proportion of non-classical words is only about one-seventh (cf. Hawkins, "Hor. Synopt.", 171). On the whole, the vocabulary of the Second Gospel points to the writer as a foreigner who was well acquainted with colloquial Greek, but a comparative stranger to the literary use of the language.虽然找到的字词，但一旦在新约圣经（ apax legomena ）是不是相对众多，在第二福音，他们往往是显着;我们见面的话罕见的在以后的希腊，如（ eiten ， paidiothen ，与口语一样， （ kenturion ， xestes ， spekoulator ） ，并与transliterations如korban ， taleitha koum ， ephphatha ， rabbounei （参见swete ，前引书，第XLVII ）号。的字词特有的圣马克约四分之一都是非经典，而在这些特有的圣马太，或圣卢克的比例，非经典的话是只有约1 -第七（参见霍金斯， “贺。 synopt ” ， 171 ） 。就整体而言，词汇的第二福音点，以作家，作为外国人，谁是熟悉口语希腊，而是一个比较陌生的文学使用的语言。
St. Mark's style is clear, direct, terse, and picturesque, if at times a little harsh.圣马克的作风建设是明确的，直接，简洁，和如诗如画的，如果有时有点苛刻。 He makes very frequent use of participles, is fond of the historical present, of direct narration, of double negatives, of the copious use of adverbs to define and emphasize his expressions.他十分频繁使用participles ，是喜欢历史，目前，直接叙事，双重的否定，对大量使用副词的界定，并强调他的表现。 He varies his tenses very freely, sometimes to bring out different shades of meaning (vii, 35; xv, 44), sometimes apparently to give life to a dialogue (ix, 34; xi, 27).他不同，他非常态的自由，有时带出不同色调的意义（第七章， 35条;十五， 44岁） ，有时显然是为了让生命的对话（第九， 34条;席， 27 ） 。 The style is often most compressed, a great deal being conveyed in very few words (i, 13, 27; xii, 38-40), yet at other times adverbs and synonyms and even repetitions are used to heighten the impression and lend colour to the picture.的作风，往往是最压缩，大量被转达了在极少数的话（我， 13 ，第27条;十二， 38-40 ） ，但在其他时间副词和同义词，甚至重复使用，以提高的印象，并借给色彩图片。 Clauses are generally strung together in the simplest way by kai; de is not used half as frequently as in Matthew or Luke; while oun occurs only five times in the entire Gospel.条文是普遍strung一起在最简单的方法，由启;德是没有用的一半，经常在马太或卢克;而oun只发生的5倍，在整个福音。 Latinisms are met with more frequently than in the other Gospels, but this does not prove that Mark wrote in Latin or even understood the language. latinisms是会见更加频繁，比在其他福音，但这并不证明马克写在拉丁美洲或什至理解的语言。 It proves merely that he was familiar with the common Greek of the Roman Empire, which freely adopted Latin words and, to some extent, Latin phraseology (cf. Blass, "Philol. of the Gosp.", 211 sq.), Indeed such familiarity with what we may call Roman Greek strongly confirms the traditional view that Mark was an "interpreter" who spent some time at Rome.它证明只不过是他熟悉的共同希腊的罗马帝国，其中自由通过拉的话，在一定程度上，拉美用语（参见布拉斯， “ philol 。的gosp ” ， 211平方米） ，事实上，这种熟悉什么，我们可致电罗马希腊强烈印证了传统认为，马克是一个“翻译”谁花了一些时间在罗马。
IV.四。 STATE OF TEXT AND INTEGRITY国家的文字和完整性
The text of the Second Gospel, as indeed of all the Gospels, is excellently attested.案文第二福音，事实上，所有的福音，是很好核签。 It is contained in all the primary unical manuscripts, C, however, not having the text complete, in all the more important later unicals, in the great mass of cursives; in all the ancient versions: Latin (both Vet. It., in its best manuscripts, and Vulg.), Syriac (Pesh., Curet., Sin., Harcl., Palest.), Coptic (Memph. and Theb.), Armenian, Gothic, and Ethiopic; and it is largely attested by Patristic quotations.这是载于所有小学unical手稿，丙，但是，不具有完整的文本，在所有，更重要的unicals后来，在伟大的质量cursives ;在所有古代版本：拉丁美洲（审核。 。 ，在其最好的手稿，和vulg 。 ） ，叙利亚（ pesh. ， curet ，单仲偕， harcl ， palest ） ，科普特（ memph.和theb ） ，亚美尼亚语，哥特式，衣索比亚，并在很大程度上是核签教父报价。 Some textual problems, however, still remain, eg whether Gerasenon or Gergesenon is to be read in v, 1, eporei or epoiei in vi, 20, and whether the difficult autou, attested by B, Aleph, A, L, or autes is to be read in vi, 20.一些文字上的问题，但是，仍然存在，例如是否gerasenon或gergesenon是在读五，一， eporei或epoiei在六， 20 ，以及有否困难autou ，核签由B ，列，一，升，或autes是可以阅读在六， 20 。 But the great textual problem of the Gospel concerns the genuineness of the last twelve verses.但伟大的词句的问题，福音关注的真实性，过去十二个月的诗。 Three conclusions of the Gospel are known: the long conclusion, as in our Bibles, containing verses 9-20, the short one ending with verse 8 (ephoboumto gar), and an intermediate form which (with some slight variations) runs as follows: "And they immediately made known all that had been commanded to those about Peter. And after this, Jesus Himself appeared to them, and through them sent forth from East to West the holy and incorruptible proclamation of the eternal salvation." 3结论福音是众所周知的：长期的结论，因为在我们的圣经，其中载有诗9月20日，简短的一首诗结束与第8条第（ ephoboumto明嘉） ，及一个中间的形式（与一些稍有不同）运行如下： “和他们就立即作出了已知的所有已指挥那些关于彼得。和在此之后，耶稣自己似乎他们，并通过他们发出了从东到西圣地和廉洁宣布永恒的救赎” 。 Now this third form may be dismissed at once.现在，这个第三的形式可能会被解雇，在一次。 Four unical manuscripts, dating from the seventh to the ninth century, give it, indeed, after xvi, 9, but each of them also makes reference to the longer ending as an alternative (for particulars cf. Swete, op. cit., pp. cv-cvii). 4 unical手稿，约会从第七到第九世纪，给它，事实上，在十六，九，但他们每个人还提到较长的结束作为一种替代（详情参考。 swete ，前引书，页。简历- cvii ） 。 It stands also in the margin of the cursive Manuscript 274, in the margin of the Harclean Syriac and of two manuscripts of the Memphitic version; and in a few manuscripts of the Ethiopic it stands between verse 8 and the ordinary conclusion.它站在此外，在保证金的草书手稿274 ，在保证金的harclean叙利亚和两个手稿的memphitic版本;及在未来数手稿的衣索比亚，它的立场之间的韵文8和普通的结论。 Only one authority, the Old Latin k, gives it alone (in a very corrupt rendering), without any reference to the longer form.只有一个权威，旧拉丁美洲钾，赋予它单独（在一个非常腐败渲染） ，没有任何参考的时间越长的形式。 Such evidence, especially when compared with that for the other two endings, can have no weight, and in fact, no scholar regards this intermediate conclusion as having any titles to acceptance.这类证据，尤其是当相比，对于另外两个结局，可以有没有份量，事实上，没有学者在这方面的中间，得出这样的结论有任何职衔，以接受。
We may pass on, then, to consider how the case stands between the long conclusion and the short, ie between accepting xvi, 9-20, as a genuine portion of the original Gospel, or making the original end with xvi, 8.我们可以通过对话，那么，考虑如何此案的立场之间的长期结论和短期，即之间的接受十六， 9月20日，作为一个真正的部分，原来的福音，或使原有的年底与十六， 8 。 In favour of the short ending Eusebius ("Quaest. ad Marin.") is appealed to as saying that an apologist might get rid of any difficulty arising from a comparison of Matt.在赞成短期内结束尤西比乌斯（ “ quaest 。广告马林。 ” ）是呼吁说，一apologist可能摆脱任何困难所产生的比较马特。 xxviii, 1, with Mark, xvi, 9, in regard to the hour of Christ's Resurrection, by pointing out that the passage in Mark beginning with verse 9 is not contained in all the manuscripts of the Gospel.二十八， 1 ，与马克，十六， 9 ，在考虑到小时基督的复活，他指出，通过在马克开始与诗九是不包含在所有手稿福音。 The historian then goes on himself to say that in nearly all the manuscripts of Mark, at least, in the accurate ones (schedon en apasi tois antigraphois . . . ta goun akribe, the Gospel ends with xvi, 8. It is true, Eusebius gives a second reply which the apologist might make, and which supposes the genuineness of the disputed passage, and he says that this latter reply might be made by one "who did not dare to set aside anything whatever that was found in any way in the Gospel writing". But the whole passage shows clearly enough that Eusebius was inclined to reject everything after xvi, 8. It is commonly held, too, that he did not apply his canons to the disputed verses, thereby showing clearly that he did not regard them as a portion of the original text (see, however, Scriv., "Introd.", II, 1894, 339). St. Jerome also says in one place ("Ad. Hedib.") that the passage was wanting in nearly all Greek manuscripts (omnibus Græciæ libris poene hoc capitulum in fine non habentibus), but he quotes it elsewhere ("Comment. on Matt."; "Ad Hedib."), and, as we know, he incorporated it in the Vulgate. It is quite clear that the whole passage, where Jerome makes the statement about the disputed verses being absent from Greek manuscripts, is borrowed almost verbatim from Eusebius, and it may be doubted whether his statement really adds any independent weight to the statement of Eusebius. It seems most likely also that Victor of Antioch, the first commentator of the Second Gospel, regarded xvi, 8, as the conclusion. If we add to this that the Gospel ends with xvi, 8, in the two oldest Greek manuscripts, B and Aleph, in the Sin. Syriac and in a few Ethiopic manuscripts, and that the cursive Manuscript 22 and some Armenian manuscripts indicate doubt as to whether the true ending is at verse 8 or verse 20, we have mentioned all the evidence that can be adduced in favour of the short conclusion. The external evidence in favour of the long, or ordinary, conclusion is exceedingly strong. The passage stands in all the great unicals except B and Aleph--in A, C, (D), E, F, G, H, K, M, (N), S, U, V, X, Gamma, Delta, (Pi, Sigma), Omega, Beth--in all the cursives, in all the Latin manuscripts (OL and Vulg.) except k, in all the Syriac versions except the Sinaitic (in the Pesh., Curet., Harcl., Palest.), in the Coptic, Gothic, and most manuscripts of the Armenian. It is cited or alluded to, in the fourth century, by Aphraates, the Syriac Table of Canons, Macarius Magnes, Didymus, the Syriac Acts of the Apostles, Leontius, Pseudo-Ephraem, Cyril of Jerusalem, Epiphanius, Ambrose, Augustine, and Chrysostom; in the third century, by Hippolytus, Vincentius, the "Acts of Pilate", the "Apostolic Constitutions", and probably by Celsus; in the second, by Irenæus most explicitly as the end of Mark's Gospel ("In fine autem evangelii ait Marcus et quidem dominus Jesus", etc.--Mark xvi, 19), by Tatian in the "Diatessaron", and most probably by Justin ("Apol. I", 45) and Hermas (Pastor, IX, xxv, 2). Moreover, in the fourth century certainly, and probably in the third, the passage was used in the Liturgy of the Greek Church, sufficient evidence that no doubt whatever was entertained as to its genuineness. Thus, if the authenticity of the passage were to be judged by external evidence alone, there could hardly be any doubt about it.历史学家接着对自己说，在几乎所有的手稿马克，至少，在准确的（ schedon英文apasi tois antigraphois 。 。 。电讯管理局局长goun akribe ，福音结束十六， 8 。这是事实，尤西比乌斯给出了第二次的答复，其中apologist可能作出，并假设的真实性有争议的通过，他说，这后者的答复可能由一国作出“谁也不敢留什么，无论是发现以任何方式，在福音写作“ ，但整个通过清楚地表明，足够的尤西比乌斯倾向于拒绝一切后，十六，八，这是常见的举行，也说，他并不适用于他的大炮，以有争议的诗，从而显示明确表示，他不认为他们作为一个部分的原文（见，不过， scriv ， “ introd 。 ”第一，二， 1894年， 339 ） 。圣杰罗姆也说，在一个地方（ “广告。 hedib 。 ” ） ，通过是要在几乎所有的希腊手稿（综合græciæ libris poene特设capitulum在精细非habentibus ） ，但他报价，它在其他地方（ “发表评论。对马特。 ” ; “广告hedib 。 ” ） ，正如我们所知，他注册成立，它在武加大这是很清楚，整个通道，使那里杰罗姆声明关于有争议的诗被缺席从希腊手稿，是借来的，几乎逐字从尤西比乌斯，它可能会怀疑是否他的发言真的加入任何一个独立的重量，以声明的尤西比乌斯这似乎最有可能也认为，胜利者安提阿，第一评论员的第二个福音，把十六， 8 ，作为结论，如果我们加入这个福音结束十六， 8 ，在这两个最古老的希腊手稿，乙和列，在该单。叙利亚，并在未来数衣索比亚手稿，并认为草书手稿22日和亚美尼亚的一些手稿显示，怀疑是否真正结束是在诗八首诗或20 ，我们已提到的所有证据，可以引用在赞成短期的结论。外部证据，在赞成，长期，或普通，得出的结论是极其强烈。立场，通过在所有伟大的unicals除B和列-在一，丙， （四） ，电子商务，男，克， H型，钾，男， （ n ）的，硫，美国，第五，第十，伽玛，德尔塔， （有价证券投资，西格玛） ，欧米茄，什么-在所有c ursives，在所有拉丁美洲的手稿（其他职等和vulg 。 ）除钾，在所有的叙利亚文版本，除西乃半岛（在pesh ， curet ， harcl ， palest 。 ） ，在科普特，哥特式，以及最手稿，亚美尼亚，这是引用或提到，在第四世纪，由aphraates ，叙利亚表的大炮，米加利阿斯magnes ， didymus ，叙利亚使徒行传， leontius ，伪ephraem ，钱卓乐爵士在耶路撒冷，埃皮法尼乌斯，刘汉铨，奥古斯丁，金口;在第三个世纪，由希波吕托斯， vincentius ，行为“彼拉多” ， “使徒宪法” ，并可能由驳克里索;在第二，由irenæus最明确，作为年底，马克的福音（ “在罚款autem evangelii美国在台协会马库斯等quidem dominus耶稣”等-马克十六， 1 9） ，由提安在“ d iatessaron” ，并极有可能由J ustin（ “ a pol我” ， 4 5岁）和h ermas（牧师，九，二十五， 2 ） 。此外，在第四世纪肯定，并可能在第三，通过使用在礼仪中的希腊教会，充分的证据证明，毫无疑问，无论是受理，以对其真实性，因此，如果的真实性，通过被判断的外部证据，仅，有可能难以有任何疑问。
Much has been made of the silence of some third and fourth century Father, their silence being interpreted to mean that they either did not know the passage or rejected it.许多已取得的沉默，一些第三和第四世纪的父亲，他们的沉默被解释为意味着他们要么不知道通过或否决的。 Thus Tertullian, SS.因此，良，悬浮物。 Cyprian, Athanasius, Basil the Great, Gregory of Nazianzus, and Cyril of Alexandria are appealed to.塞浦路斯，亚他那修，罗勒的伟大，格雷戈里的nazianzus ，西里尔的亚历山大是呼吁。 In the case of Tertullian and Cyprian there is room for some doubt, as they might naturally enough to be expected to have quoted or alluded to Mark, xvi, 16, if they received it; but the passage can hardly have been unknown to Athanasius (298-373), since it was received by Didymus (309-394), his contemporary in Alexandria (PG, XXXIX, 687), nor to Basil, seeing it was received by his younger brother Gregory of Nyssa (PG, XLVI, 652), nor to Gregory of Nazianzus, since it was known to his younger brother Cæsarius (PG, XXXVIII, 1178); and as to Cyril of Alexandria, he actually quotes it from Nestorius (PG, LXXVI, 85).在该案件良和塞浦路斯仍有一些疑问，因为它们可能自然不够，预期所引述的或暗示的马克，十六， 16 ，如果他们收到它，但通过难以已经陌生的阿他那修（ 298-373 ） ，因为它是收到的didymus （ 309-394 ） ，他在亚历山德里亚当代公司（ PG ，第39届， 687 ） ，也不是罗勒，看到它收到他的弟弟格雷戈里的nyssa公司（ PG ，四十六， 652 ） ，也不是格雷戈里的nazianzus ，因为它是已知他的弟弟cæsarius公司（ PG ，三十八， 1178 ） ;和以西里尔亚历山德里亚，他其实是行情从涅斯公司（ PG ， lxxvi ， 85 ） 。 The only serious difficulties are created by its omission in B and Aleph and by the statements of Eusebius and Jerome.唯一的严重困难所造成的遗漏，其在B和列和由报表尤西比乌斯和杰罗姆。 But Tischendorf proved to demonstration (Proleg., p. xx, 1 sqq.) that the two famous manuscripts are not here two independent witnesses, because the scribe of B copies the leaf in Aleph on which our passage stands.但提申多夫证明示范（ proleg. ，第XX条， 1 sqq 。 ）表示，两个著名的手稿在这里不是两个独立的证人，因为刀的B副本叶在列上，通过我们的立场。 Moreover, in both manuscripts, the scribe, though concluding with verse 8, betrays knowledge that something more followed either in his archetype or in other manuscripts, for in B, contrary to his custom, he leaves more than a column vacant after verse 8, and in Aleph verse 8 is followed by an elaborate arabesque, such as is met with nowhere else in the whole manuscript, showing that the scribe was aware of the existence of some conclusion which he meant deliberately to exclude (cf. Cornely, "Introd.", iii, 96-99; Salmon, "Introd.", 144-48).此外，在双方的手稿，刀，但结论与诗八，出卖知识，更其次是无论是在他的原型或在其他手稿，为在B ，相反，他的习俗，他离开多一栏空缺后，韵文8 ，并在列诗八其次是一个复杂的arabesque ，例如是会见了独一无二的，在整个手稿，表明该刀是意识到存在着的一些结论，他的意思，刻意排除（参见cornely ， “ introd 。 “ ，三， 96-99 ;鲑鱼， ” introd “ ， 144-48 ） 。 Thus both manuscripts bear witness to the existence of a conclusion following after verse 8, which they omit.因此，双方的手稿见证存在一个结论之后韵文8 ，他们省略。 Whether B and Aleph are two of the fifty manuscripts which Constantine commissioned Eusebius to have copies for his new capital we cannot be sure; but at all events they were written at a time when the authority of Eusebius was paramount in Biblical criticism, and probably their authority is but the authority of Eusebius.是否B和列是两所50手稿，其中君士坦丁委托尤西比乌斯有副本，他的新的资本我们不能肯定，但在所有的事件，他们在书面的时候，权力是至高无上的尤西比乌斯在圣经的批评，大概其管理局不过是权威的尤西比乌斯。 The real difficulty, therefore, against the passage, from external evidence, is reduced to what Eusebius and St. Jerome say about its omission in so many Greek manuscripts, and these, as Eusebius says, the accurate ones.真正的困难，因此，反对通过，从外部证据，是减少到什么尤西比乌斯和圣杰罗姆说，约其遗漏在这么多的希腊手稿，而这些，作为尤西比乌斯说，准确的。 But whatever be the explanation of this omission, it must be remembered that, as we have seen above, the disputed verses were widely known and received long before the time of Eusebius.但无论是解释这一遗漏，我们必须紧记，正如我们所看到上述情况，有争议的诗被广为人知，并收到了很久之前的时间尤西比乌斯。 Dean Burgon, while contending for the genuineness of the verses, suggested that the omission might have come about as follows.院长比尔贡，而争夺的真实性，该诗，有人认为可能有遗漏，来约如下。 One of the ancient church lessons ended with Mark, xvi, 8, and Burgon suggested that the telos, which would stand at the end of such lesson, may have misled some scribe who had before him a copy of the Four Gospels in which Mark stood last, and from which the last leaf, containing the disputed verses, was missing.其中一个最古老的教堂的教训，结束了与马克，十六， 8 ，和比尔贡有人认为telos ，这将的立场，在去年底的教训，例如，可能会误导一些刀谁曾在他面前的副本四福音中，马克站在最后，从其中最后叶，含有有争议的诗，被人失踪。 Given one such defective copy, and supposing it fell into the hands of ignorant scribes, the error might easily be spread.鉴于这样一个有缺陷的复制，并假设它落入手中，无知的文士，错误可能很容易被传播。 Others have suggested that the omission is probably to be traced to Alexandria.有的建议，遗漏，可能是要追查到亚历山大。 That Church ended the Lenten fast and commenced the celebration of Easter at midnight, contrary to the custom of most Churches, which waited for cock-crow (cf. Dionysius of Alexandria in PG, X, 1272 sq.).该教堂，结束了lenten快速展开，庆祝复活节在午夜十二时，相反的习俗，大多数教会，等待鸡-乌鸦（参见狄奥尼修斯的亚历山大在pg ，第十， 1272平方米） 。 Now Mark, xvi, 9: "But he rising early", etc., might easily be taken to favour the practice of the other Churches, and it is suggested that the Alexandrians may have omitted verse 9 and what follows from their lectionaries, and from these the omission might pass on into manuscripts of the Gospel.现在马克，十六， 9 ： “但他上升的早期”等，可能很容易被采取赞成的做法，其他教会，这是有人认为alexandrians可能有遗漏的诗句9日和什么情况如下从他们的lectionaries ，从这些遗漏可能通过对进入手稿福音。 Whether there be any force in these suggestions, they point at any rate to ways in which it was possible that the passage, though genuine, should have been absent from a number of manuscripts in the time of Eusebius; while, on the other and, if the verses were not written by St. Mar, it is extremely hard to understand how they could have been so widely received in the second century as to be accepted by Tatian and Irenæus, and probably by Justin and Hermas, and find a place in the Old Latin and Syriac Versions.是否有任何武力在这些建议，他们指出，在任何利率的方法，它可能通过，但真正的，应该已经缺席了一些手稿，在时间的尤西比乌斯;同时，对其他和，如果诗没有写的圣三月，这是非常努力去了解他们如何能已如此广泛，在收到的第二个世纪，以接受提安和irenæus ，并可能由Justin和hermas ，并寻找一个地方，在旧拉丁美洲和叙利亚的版本。
When we turn to the internal evidence, the number, and still more the character, of the peculiarities is certainly striking.当我们转向内部证据的情况下，号码，还有更多的性质，特点，无疑是惊人的。 The following words or phrases occur nowhere else in the Gospel: prote sabbaton (v. 9), not found again in the New Testament, instead of te[s] mia[s] [ton] sabbaton (v. 2), ekeinos used absolutely (10, 11, 20), poreuomai (10, 12, 15), theaomai (11, 14), apisteo (11, 16), meta tauta and eteros (12), parakoloutheo and en to onomati (17), ho kurios (19, 20), pantachou, sunergeo, bebaioo, epakoloutheo (20).以下的字词或词组出现无处可在福音：蛋白sabbaton （五9 ） ，未发现再次在新约圣经，而不是特[ S ]的米娅[ ] [吨] sabbaton （五2 ） ， ekeinos使用绝对（ 10 ， 11 ， 20 ） ， poreuomai （ 10 ， 12 ， 15 ） ， theaomai （ 11 ， 14 ） ， apisteo （ 11 ， 16 ） ，中继tauta和eteros （ 12 ） ， parakoloutheo和EN ，以onomati （ 17 ） ，何kurios （ 19日， 20日） ， pantachou ， sunergeo ， bebaioo ， epakoloutheo （ 20 ） 。 Instead of the usual connexion by kai and an occasional de, we have meta de tauta (12), husteron [de] (14), ho men oun (19), ekeinoi de (20).而不是通常的连线启，并不定期德，我们有中继德tauta （ 12 ） ， husteron [德] （ 14 ） ，何男子oun （ 19 ） ， ekeinoi德（ 20 ） 。 Then it is urged that the subject of verse 9 has not been mentioned immediately before; that Mary Magdalen seems now to be introduced for the first time, though in fact she has been mentioned three times in the preceding sixteen verses; that no reference is made to an appearance of the Lord in Galilee, though this was to be expected in view of the message of verse 7.那是敦促主题的诗九没有提到立即之前;玛丽麦大伦学院，现在看来要首次引进的时间，但在事实上，她一直提到的3倍，在此之前的16韵文;没有提及是一个外观主在加利利，虽然这是可以预期，鉴于该邮件的诗7 。 Comparatively little importance attached to the last three points, for the subject of verse 9 is sufficiently obvious from the context; the reference to Magdalen as the woman out of whom Christ had cast seven devils is explicable here, as showing the loving mercy of the Lord to one who before had been so wretched; and the mention of an appearance in Galilee was hardly necessary.相对较少的重视，过去3点，为主题的诗九是不够明显，从上下文;提及的麦大伦学院，作为该名女子出来，其中基督投7魔鬼是explicable在这里，显示爱好慈悲的上帝一个谁之前，已经这么倒霉的;提及一出现在加利利是很难必要的。 the important thing being to prove, as this passage does, that Christ was really risen from the dead, and that His Apostles, almost against their wills, were forced to believe the fact.重要的事被证明，这是否通过，即耶稣是真的从死里复活，和他的使徒，几乎对他们的遗嘱，被迫相信的事实。 But, even when this is said, the cumulative force of the evidence against the Marcan origin of the passage is considerable.不过，即使当这是说，累积的力量的证据，对马尔钱的来源通过相当可观。 Some explanation indeed can be offered of nearly every point (cf. Knabenbauer, "Comm. in Marc.", 445-47), but it is the fact that in the short space of twelve verse so many points require explanation that constitutes the strength of the evidence.一些解释，确实能提供的几乎每一个点（参见knabenbauer ， “通讯在马克” ， 445-47 ） ，但它是事实，即在短短的12首诗，使许多共同点，需要解释，即构成了实力的证据。 There is nothing strange about the use, in a passage like this, of many words rare with he author.有没有什么奇怪的使用，在一个通过这样，许多罕见的话与他的作者。 Only in the last character is apisteo used by St. Luke also (Luke 24:11, 41), eteros is used only once in St. John's Gospel (xix, 37), and parakoloutheo is used only once by St. Luke (i, 3).只有在最后一个字符是apisteo所用的圣卢克也（路加福音24:11 ， 41岁） ， eteros只用一次是在圣约翰的福音（ 19 ， 37 ） ，和parakoloutheo只用一次，由圣卢克（我， 3 ） 。 Besides, in other passages St. Mark uses many words that are not found in the Gospel outside the particular passage.此外，在其他通道，圣马克用途很多的话都没有发现在福音之外，特别是通过。 In the ten verses, Mark, iv, 20-29, the writer has found fourteen words (fifteen, if phanerousthai of xvi, 12, be not Marcan) which occur nowhere else in the Gospel.在10韵文，马克，四， 20日至29日，笔者发现14字（ 15 ，如果phanerousthai的十六，十二，不马尔钱）发生行不通的，否则在福音。 But, as was said, it is the combination of so many peculiar features, not only of vocabulary, but of matter and construction, that leaves room for doubt as to the Marcan authorship of the verses.但是，正如有人说，这是结合这么多独特的功能，不仅词汇，但此事和建设，即余地疑问，向马尔钱作者的诗。
In weighing the internal evidence, however, account must be take of the improbability of the Evangelist's concluding with verse 8.在权衡内部的证据，不过，帐户必须采取的improbability的传播者的结论与诗8 。 Apart from the unlikelihood of his ending with the participle gar, he could never deliberately close his account of the "good news" (i, 1) with the note of terror ascribed in xvi, 8, to some of Christ's followers.除了不大可能，他结束与participle明嘉，他可从来没有蓄意接近他的帐户中的“好消息” （一， 1 ）与注意的恐怖归因于在十六， 8 ，一些基督的信徒。 Nor could an Evangelist, especially a disciple of St. Peter, willingly conclude his Gospel without mentioning some appearance of the risen Lord (Acts 1:22; 10:37-41).也不能一传播者，特别是弟子的圣彼得大教堂，心甘情愿地结束他的福音而不提一些外观复活的主（ 1时22分行为; 10:37-41 ） 。 If, then, Mark concluded with verse 8, it must have been because he died or was interrupted before he could write more.如果，那么，马克得出的结论与诗八，它必须已，因为他去世或之前已中断，他可以写更多。 But tradition points to his living on after the Gospel was completed, since it represents him as bringing the work with him to Egypt or as handing it over to the Roman Christians who had asked for it.但传统的点，他的生活后，完成了福音，因为它代表了他带来的工作与他到埃及或作为它移交给罗马基督徒谁曾要求它。 Nor is it easy to understand how, if he lived on, he could have been so interrupted as to be effectually prevented from adding, sooner or later, even a short conclusion.也不是很容易理解如何，如果他的生活，他可能已经中断，所以，要有效地防止加入，迟早的事，即使是短期的结论。 Not many minutes would have been needed to write such a passage as xvi, 9-20, and even if it was his desire, as Zahn without reason suggests (Introd., II, 479), to add some considerable portions to the work, it is still inconceivable how he could have either circulated it himself or allowed his friends to circulate it without providing it with at least a temporary and provisional conclusion.没有多少分钟会被需要写这样的一个通道作为十六， 9月20日，即使这是他的愿望，作为赞恩没有理由建议（ introd. ，二， 479 ） ，添加一些相当大的部分，这项工作，它仍然是不可思议的如何，他可以要么发给自己或让他的朋友，分发，它没有向它提供至少一个临时及临时结论。 In every hypothesis, then, xvi, 8, seems an impossible ending, and we are forced to conclude either that the true ending is lost or that we have it in the disputed verses.在每一个假说，然后，十六，八，似乎是不可能的结局，和我们被迫结束，要么真正的结束是遗失或我们有它在有争议的诗。 Now, it is not easy to see how it could have been lost.现在，这是不容易看到它如何能已丢失。 Zahn affirms that it has never been established nor made probable that even a single complete sentence of the New Testament has disappeared altogether from the text transmitted by the Church (Introd., II, 477).赞恩申明，它从来没有成立，也不作出的可能，即使是一个单一完整的句子的新约圣经已完全消失，从文本传送由教会（ introd. ，二， 477 ） 。 In the present case, if the true ending were lost during Mark's lifetime, the question at once occurs: Why did he not replace it?在目前的情况下，如果真正结束失去了在马克的一生中，这个问题一旦发生：他为什么不能取代它呢？ And it is difficult to understand how it could have been lost after his death, for before then, unless he died within a few days from the completion of the Gospel, it must have been copied, and it is most unlikely that the same verses could have disappeared from several copies.这是很难理解它如何能已经丢失在他死后，为此之前，除非他死亡数天，从完成福音，它必须被复制，这是最不可能相同的诗可以消失几本。
It will be seen from this survey of the question that there is no justification for the confident statement of Zahn that "It may be regarded as one of the most certain of critical conclusions, that the words ephobounto gar, xvi, 8, are the last words in the book which were written by the author himself" (Introd., II, 467).它会从这个调查的问题是有没有理由为有信心的声明赞恩说： “这可被视为其中最关键的某些结论，即字ephobounto明嘉，十六， 8 ，是最后换言之，在这本书，其中写作者自己“ （ introd. ，二， 467 ） 。 Whatever be the fact, it is not at all certain that Mark did not write the disputed verses.无论是事实上，这并不是在所有肯定的是，马克没有写有争议的诗。 It may be that he did not; that they are from the pen of some other inspired writer, and were appended to the Gospel in the first century or the beginning of the second.可能是他没有;他们是从用笔的其他一些作家的灵感，并附加到福音在第一世纪的或开始第二。 An Armenian manuscript, written in AD 986, ascribes them to a presbyter named Ariston, who may be the same with the presbyter Aristion, mentioned by Papias as a contemporary of St. John in Asia.一亚美尼亚手稿，写的广告986 ，赋予他们一presbyter命名阿里斯顿，谁可能相同与presbyter亚里斯提安，所提到的帕皮亚作为一个当代的圣约翰在亚洲。 Catholics are not bound to hold that the verses were written by St. Mark.天主教徒并不必然认为，诗写的圣马克。 But they are canonical Scripture, for the Council of Trent (Sess. IV), in defining that all the parts of the Sacred Books are to be received as sacred and canonical, had especially in view the disputed parts of the Gospels, of which this conclusion of Mark is one (cf. Theiner, "Acta gen. Conc. Trid.", I, 71 sq.).但他们是典型的经文，为使安理会的特伦特（ sess.四） ，在确定所有的部分，神圣的书籍将收到的神圣和典型，尤其是在有争议的部分福音书，其中本结论马克是一（参见theiner ， “学报根。浓度。 trid ” ，我， 71平方米） 。 Hence, whoever wrote the verses, they are inspired, and must be received as such by every Catholic.因此，无论谁写的诗，他们的灵感，并且必须收到这样的每一个天主教。
V. PLACE AND DATE OF COMPOSITION五，地点和日期的组成
It is certain that the Gospel was written at Rome.可以肯定的是，福音写在罗马。 St. Chrysostom indeed speaks of Egypt as the place of composition ("Hom. I. on Matt.", 3), but he probably misunderstood Eusebius, who says that Mark was sent to Egypt and preached there the Gospel which he had written ("Hist. Eccl.", II, xvi).圣金口确实谈到了埃及作为地方组成（ “磡一对马特” ， 3 ） ，但他可能误解了尤西比乌斯，谁说，马克被送往埃及和鼓吹有福音了他的书面（ “历史。传道书” ，二，十六） 。 Some few modern scholars have adopted the suggestion of Richard Simon ("Hist. crit. du Texte du NT", 1689, 107) that the Evangelist may have published both a Roman and an Egyptian edition of the Gospel.少数几个现代学者通过的建议，理查德西蒙（ “历史。临界。杜文本杜新台币” ， 1689 ， 107 ）表示，传播者可能有出版，既是罗马和埃及版的福音。 But this view is sufficiently refuted by the silence of the Alexandrian Fathers.但是，这种观点是不够的反驳沉默的亚历山大的父亲。 Other opinions, such as that the Gospel was written in Asia Minor or at Syrian Antioch, are not deserving of any consideration.其他意见，例如像福音写在亚洲的未成年人或在叙利亚安提阿，都没有任何值得考虑。
The date of the Gospel is uncertain.日期福音是不确定的。 The external evidence is not decisive, and the internal does not assist very much.外部证据是不是决定性的，以及内部不帮助很大。 St. Clement of Alexandria, Origen, Eusebius, Tertullian, and St. Jerome signify that it was written before St. Peter's death.圣克莱门特在亚历山大，俄，尤西比乌斯，良，和圣杰罗姆标志，这是书面前，圣彼得大教堂的死因。 The subscription of many of the later unical and cursive manuscripts states that it was written in the tenth or twelfth year after the Ascension (AD 38-40).认购的许多后来unical和草书的手稿国，这是写在第十届或第十二一年后，阿森松岛（广告38-40段） 。 The "Paschal Chronicle" assigns it to AD 40, and the "Chronicle" of Eusebius to the third year of Claudius (AD 43). “逾越节纪事”指派它的广告40 ，和“纪事”的尤西比乌斯到第三年克劳（广告43 ） 。 Possibly these early dates may be only a deduction from the tradition that Peter came to Rome in the second year of Claudius, AD 42 (cf. Euseb., "Hist. Eccl.", II, xiv; Jer., "De Vir. Ill.", i).可能是这些早期的日期可能只扣除从传统彼得来到罗马，在第二年的克劳狄斯，广告42条（参见euseb ， “历史。传道书” ，二，第十四;哲， “德维尔。总部位于伊利诺州“ ，我） 。 St. Irenæus, on the other hand, seems to place the composition of the Gospel after the death of Peter and Paul (meta de ten touton exodon--"Adv. Hær.", III, i).圣irenæus ，另一方面，似乎是把组成的福音去世后，彼得和保罗（梅塔省德10图东exodon -“副h ær” ，三，我） 。 Papias, too, asserting that Mark wrote according to his recollection of Peter's discourses, has been taken to imply that Peter was dead.帕皮亚，太，声称马克写道，据他回忆彼得的论述，已采取暗示，彼得已死亡。 This, however, does not necessarily follow from the words of Papias, for Peter might have been absent from Rome.不过，这并不一定遵循从的话，帕皮亚，彼得可能已不在罗马。 Besides, Clement of Alexandria (Eusebius, "Hist. Eccl.", VI, xiv) seems to say that Peter was alive and in Rome at the time Mark wrote, though he gave the Evangelist no help in his work.此外，克莱门特在亚历山大（尤西比乌斯， “历史。传道书” ，六，十四）似乎是说彼得还活着，并在罗马的时间，马克写道，虽然他给传播者没有任何帮助，在他的工作。 There is left, therefore, the testimony of St. Irenæus against that of all the other early witnesses; and it is an interesting fact that most present-day Rationalist and Protestant scholars prefer to follow Irenæus and accept the later date for Mark's Gospel, though they reject almost unanimously the saint's testimony, given in the same context and supported by all antiquity, in favour of the priority of Matthew's Gospel to Mark's.有离开，因此，证词圣irenæus反对所有其他早期证人;这是一个有趣的事实，目前最天的理性主义和新教的学者倾向于按照irenæus并接受稍后日期为马克的福音，虽然他们拒绝几乎是一致圣的证词，鉴于在同样的背景和支持，所有文物，在赞成的优先次序马太福音马克的。 Various attempts have been made to explain the passage in Irenæus so as to bring him into agreement with the other early authorities (see, eg Cornely, "Introd.", iii, 76-78; Patrizi, "De Evang.", I, 38), but to the present writer they appear unsuccessful if the existing text must be regarded as correct.各种尝试，已作出解释，通过在irenæus ，使他成为协议，与其他早期当局（见，例如cornely ， “ introd ” ，三， 76-78 ;柏德， “德埃旺” ，我38 ） ，但以目前的作家，他们似乎不成功的，如果将现有案文必须被视为是正确的。 It seems much more reasonable, however, to believe that Irenæus was mistaken than that all the other authorities are in error, and hence the external evidence would show that Mark wrote before Peter's death (AD 64 or 67).似乎更为合理，不过，相信irenæus是错误的，比所有其他当局错误的，因此，外部证据表明，马克写信之前，彼得的死亡（公元64或67 ） 。
From internal evidence we can conclude that the Gospel was written before AD 70, for there is no allusion to the destruction of the Temple of Jerusalem, such as might naturally be expected in view of the prediction in xiii, 2, if that event had already taken place.来自内部的证据，我们可以得出结论，福音写之前，广告70 ，是没有提到的破坏庙耶路撒冷，如可能，自然会预计在观预测，在第十三， 2 ，如果这一事件已所采取的地方。 On the other hand, if xvi, 20: "But they going forth preached everywhere", be from St. Mark's pen, the Gospel cannot well have been written before the close of the first Apostolic journey of St. Paul (AD 49 or 50), for it is seen from Acts, xiv, 26; xv, 3, that only then had the conversion of the Gentiles begun on any large scale.在另一方面，如果十六， 20 ： “但他们会提出，到处鼓吹” ，由圣马克的笔名，福音不能以及已书面结束前第一使徒的征途上圣保禄（公元49或50 ） ，因为它被认为是从行为，第十四届， 26人;十五， 3 ，只有当时的转换外邦人开始对任何大型。 Of course it is possible that previous to this the Apostles had preached far and wide among the dispersed Jews, but, on the whole, it seems more probable that the last verse of the Gospel, occurring in a work intended for European readers, cannot have been written before St. Paul's arrival in Europe (AD 50-51).当然是有可能的，以往的这个使徒曾鼓吹到目前为止，和广泛的各分散的犹太人，但就整体而言，似乎更可能最后新诗的福音，发生在一个工作，打算为欧洲读者，不能有被写入之前，圣保禄的到来在欧洲（公元50-51 ） 。 Taking the external and internal evidence together, we may conclude that the date of the Gospel probably lies somewhere between AD 50 and 67.以外部和内部的证据一起，我们可以得出结论认为，日期福音大概是之间的某个广告50和67 。
VI.六。 DESTINATION AND PURPOSE目的和宗旨
Tradition represents the Gospel as written primarily for Roman Christians (see above, II), and internal evidence, if it does not quite prove the truth of this view, is altogether in accord with it.传统，代表了福音，作为书面主要是为罗马基督徒（见上文二） ，以及内部的证据，如果没有相当证明的真相，这一观点，是完全在符合它。 The language and customs of the Jews are supposed to be unknown to at least some of the readers.语言和习俗，犹太人是为了知道至少有一些以飨读者。 Hence terms like Boanerges (iii, 17), korban (vii, 11), ephphatha (vii, 34) are interpreted; Jewish customs are explained to illustrate the narrative (vii, 3-4; xiv, 12); the situation of the Mount of Olives in relation to the Temple is pointed out (xiii, 3); the genealogy of Christ is omitted; and the Old Testament is quoted only once (i, 2-3; xv, 28, is omitted by B, Aleph, A, C, D, X).因此，条款一样， boanerges （三， 17 ） ， korban （第七章， 11人） ， ephphatha （第七章， 34条）的解释;犹太海关解释，说明的叙事（七， 3月4日;十四， 12 ） ;情况的橄榄山，在关系到庙是指出， （十三， 3 ） ;族谱基督的是遗漏了;旧约是引述只有一次（一， 2月3日;十五， 28 ，是遗漏了由B ，列， 1 ，丙，丁， x ）的。 Moreover, the evidence, as far as it goes, points to Roman readers.此外，证据显示，据这是不言而喻，点，以罗马以飨读者。 Pilate and his office are supposed to be known (15:1--cf. Matthew 27:2; Luke 3:1); other coins are reduced to their value in Roman money (xii, 42); Simon of Cyrene is said to be the father of Alexander and Rufus (xv, 21), a fact of no importance in itself, but mentioned probably because Rufus was known to the Roman Christians (Romans 16:13); finally, Latinisms, or uses of vulgar Greek, such as must have been particularly common in a cosmopolitan city like Rome, occur more frequently than in the other Gospels (v, 9, 15; vi, 37; xv, 39, 44; etc.).彼拉多和他的办公室是假定被称为（ 15点01分-比照马修2 7:2;路加福音3 :1） ;其他硬币减少到其价值，在罗马的钱（十二， 4 2） ;西蒙的昔兰尼说被父亲亚历山大和rufus （十五， 21岁） ，事实并没有在本身的重要性，但提到的，可能是因为rufus是众所周知的罗马基督徒（罗马16时13分） ;最后， latinisms ，或使用庸俗希腊，例如作为必须已尤其是共同在一个国际大都会一样，罗马，较常发生，比在其他福音（五，九，十五;六， 37 ;十五， 39 ， 44等） 。
The Second Gospel has no such statement of its purpose as is found in the Third and Fourth (Luke 1:1-3; John 20:31).第二个福音没有这样的声明，其目的是发现，在第三次和第四次（路加福音1:1-3 ;约翰20时31分） 。 The Tübingen critics long regarded it as a "Tendency" writing, composed for the purpose of mediating between and reconciling the Petrine and Pauline parties in the early Church.该蒂宾根大学的批评，只要把它作为一个“趋势”写作，组成为目的的调解之间的调和petrine和宝莲，各方在早期教会的使命。 Other Rationalists have seen in it an attempt to allay the