Were Mark and Luke Jesus' disciples?

Were Mark and Luke Jesus' disciples?



PeteNco

Answered Last

When you say Jesus' disciple (not the original 12 apostles), do you mean did they walked with Jesus? Mark is a relative (nephew ?) of Barnabas. Remember him? The one who was not chosen to replace Judas by the drawing of the lot[tery]. Matthew was chosen instead. So Mark very much probably walked with Jesus. Luke was Paul's (of Tarsus) Physician, travelling companion, and biographer. And since Paul never met Jesus personally, then Luke probably did not walk with Jesus either.

Answer As a disciple is really a 'follower of the doctrines of a teacher or school of thought' then, in that sense, both Mark and Luke were disciples.

This may or may not have included walking with Jesus and then, by implication, personally witnessing his teaching and miracles and talking directly with him. Both show detailed knowledge which suggests close association. I would certainly be inclined to agree with the above conclusion that Mark 'very much probably walked with Jesus.' There is also evidence that there was a larger group of followers with Jesus than just the inner twelve disciples such as when he sent out the seventy to preach. see Luke 10 v 1. Both Mark and Luke could have been among these.

In the prologue to his Gospel Luke claims in verse 3 to '... having had perfect understanding of all things from the very first..' This is certainly much more than just what was told him by Paul. Luke in his Gospel account records a number of things which are nowhere else. One example is the extra details of Jesus early life. Another is the specific mention of the taxing when Cyrenius was Governor of Syria, (see Luke 2 v 2) which he uses (as was the custom of historians of his day) to anchor the events being recorded in the passage as being at a particular time as opposed to when Cyrenius was Governor ten years later.

Such detailed knowledge as displayed by Luke was probably not obtained only through careful historical inquiry but through first hand knowledge.

Mark's Gospel, while vastly different in literary style, displays (especially when read altogether) a sense of fast moving and busy action. Such a sense would be lost to anyone writing from a distance of either space or time.

Short Answer No. Neither were named among the lists of Jesus' disciples. Other aspects of their association are discussed above. On; "Such detailed knowledge as displayed by Luke was probably not obtained only through careful historical inquiry but through first hand knowledge." I quote; "The Gospel of Luke is addressed to Theophilus. Theophilus, Bishop of Antioch, who is believed to be the person addressed, flourished in the latter half of the second century. Dr. Schleiermacher, one of Germany's greatest theologians, after a critical analysis of Luke, concludes that it is merely a compilation, made up of thirty-three preexisting manuscripts. Bishop Thirlwall's Schleiermacher says: "He [Luke] is from beginning to end no more than the compiler and arranger of documents which he found in existence" (p. 313). The basis of this Gospel is generally believed to be the Gospel of Marcion, a Pauline compilation, made about the middle of the second century. Concerning this Gospel, the Rev. S. Baring-Gould in his Lost and Hostile Gospels, says: "The arrangement is so similar that we are forced to the conclusion that it was either used by St. Luke or that it was his original composition. If he used it then his right to the title of author of the Third Gospel falls to the ground, as what he added was of small amount." On: Mark's Gospel, "Mark, according to Renan, is the oldest of the Gospels; but Mark, according to Strauss, was written after the Gospels of Matthew and Luke were written. He says: "It is evidently a compilation, whether made from memory or otherwise, from the first and third Gospels" (Leben Jesu, p. 5I). Judge Waite, in his History of Christianity, says that all but twenty-four verses of this Gospel have their parallels in Matthew and Luke. Davidson declares it to be an anonymous work "The author," he says, "is unknown." Omitting the last twelve verses of Mark, which all Christian critics pronounce spurious, the book contains no mention of the two great miracles which mark the limits of Christ's earthly career, his miraculous birth and his ascension. Concerning the first three Gospels, the Encyclopedia Britannica says: "It is certain that the Synoptic Gospels took their present form only by degrees." Of these books Dr. Westcott says: "Their substance is evidently much older than their form." Professor Robertson Smith pronounces them "unapostolic digests of the second century." Researched by: Itchie.C2
Answer According to the lists of disciples given in the Gospels, neither Mark or Luke is listed.

Matthew 10:2-4 (King James Version) 2 Now the names of the twelve apostles are these; The first, Simon, who is called Peter, and Andrew his brother; James the son of Zebedee, and John his brother; 3 Philip, and Bartholomew; Thomas, and Matthew the publican; James the son of Alphaeus, and Lebbaeus, whose surname was Thaddaeus; 4 Simon the Canaanite, and Judas Iscariot, who also betrayed him.

Luke 6:13-16 (King James Version) 13 And when it was day, he called unto him his disciples: and of them he chose twelve, whom also he named apostles; 14 Simon, (whom he also named Peter,) and Andrew his brother, James and John, Philip and Bartholomew, 15 Matthew and Thomas, James the son of Alphaeus, and Simon called Zelotes, 16 And Judas the brother of James, and Judas Iscariot, which also was the traitor.

See also John 1 v 40 - 49

Thus, whatever position one takes on the inspiration of the Bible etc there is complete agreement that neither were disciples, even though the reasons are quite different.