The forgotten Gospel

A statistical approach, combining the distribution of key-words in the Gospel of Mark, led the author to reconsider the Mark Gospel structure.

The Gospel is organised around two sources:

-The more ancient one is from a Semitic (Aramean ?) origin (265 verses). The same verses are present in the Matthiew and Luke Gospels.

-The more recent is a secondary comment added by the primitive Greek church, for the Gentile teaching during Apostolic times (410 verses).

This procedure : a Semitic proposal followed by a Greek comment, is somewhat systematic – 81 examples known so far – leading one to conclude that Mark is merging two written sources, each Greek sequence being limited by two duplicated (so-called parallel) verses (i.e. same verb and key-words),

an introductive A verse and a conclusive A’ verse. (See pages "Doublet" 1 and 2).

-Examples of key-words from both Semitic (in Red) and Greek (in Blue) sources are shown (page Mots Sem-Grec).

-Examples of parallel verses are shown (page : Vers A et A') dealing here with Jesus crucified sequence.

Mark’s synthesis is an early work (around 40/45), so, it doesn't encompass the Second (Q) Source sections, even if they are today in parallel in both the Matthew and Luke more recent versions.

This leads one to infer that the Gospel texts are the product of successive accretions, some anonymous authors of the second generation completing – and never deleting – the Holy Sources received from the Apostolic generation.

The fact that the Our Father is missing in Mark, leads one to infer an early synthesis, close to the period when the first Christians were still celebrating in the synagogues and praying the Kaddish.

To comply with the fact that all patristic documents suggest a first Gospel document written by Matthiew, the Markan semitic text was compared to the equivalent verses of Matthiew, by selecting the most simple and/or the most Jewish version, for each verse, always found in the Matthiew Gospel.

As a consequence, the request made by the Gentiles to access to the Holy Texts through a translation/adaptation – as inferred from the Acts – occurred far sooner than generally admitted, obviously prior to the date of the Mark synthesis.


The ‘’duality’’ in Mark appears finally more structural rather than a mnemonic maturation from an oral tradition. It is time now, to explore troughfully the Early Christianity teaching, through the translation / adaptation from the original Semitic canvas to the Greek one, kept visible within the Mark’s text, under the control of the Matthew’s parallel verses, generally simpler and clear, by definition, from any secondary latinism.

The Gospel of Mark would be therefore an occasional work, composed in urgency from existing documents, for immediate use in Rome. Neither specific Markan tradition, nor theological approach is to be found, only the obvious talent of a compiler.

This leads us to conclude that most of the Gospels redaction was completed before the Temple destruction and opens the question about Paul's knowledge referring to Gospels when he was acting as writter (50-65)...

If an agreement is met, it will be time for all of us to name our Common Father, ‘’God’’ within the Greek sections and ‘’YHWH’’ in the Semitic ones....