When we consider the miracles of Jesus in the Gospel of Mark and note the details that are either included or excluded compared to their accounts in the other Gospels, we gain valuable insights into the origin and the purpose of the Gospel of Mark. This is especially true when we consider the miracles where Peter was present.

An early church writer named Papias, a pupil of the Apostle John, wrote "Mark having become the interpreter of Peter, wrote down accurately all that he remembered — not, however, in order — of the words or deeds of Christ. For neither did he hear the Lord, nor was he a follower of His, but later on, as I said, he attached himself to Peter." Reference: "Explanation of the Lord’s Discourses" (70-155 AD).

This information is of interest for a number of reasons. First Papias identifies the Gospel of Mark as Mark’s record of Peter’s words and he emphasizes Mark’s diligence for accuracy. Next Papias notes that the Gospel of Mark was not chronologically ordered and was in fact the Gospel of the Apostle Peter; the words he taught and preached to the early Gentile Christian churches! Several other second and third century writers confirm Papias’s report.

Armed with this information, if we look more closely at the Gospel of Mark, we discover that it clearly bears the stamp of Peter’s presence and his first-hand experiences as an eyewitness to what Jesus both said and did. For instance, Jesus’ activities and teaching in Capernaum are reported to have taken place in close association with Peter’s house. Consider the detail included in the following instances:

(1) Jesus left the synagogue and went to Peter’s house where he healed Peter’s mother-in-law of a fever (Mark 1:29-31).

(2) It was at Peter’s house that the people brought their sick and demoniacs to Jesus. The whole city of Capernaum gathered at Peter’s door (Mark 1:32-34).

(3) It was also most likely Peter’s house that is called Jesus’ home in Mark 2:1, Mark 7:17, 9:28. There, so many people gathered to hear Jesus and packed the house so tightly that no one else could even enter through the front door. Thus the paralytic had to be lowered down to Jesus on a stretcher through Peter’s dismantled roof for Jesus to heal the man (Mark 2:1-12).

(4) The house called Jesus’ house in Mark 2:15 was most likely also Peter’s house, where the tax collectors and "sinners" gathered to eat with Jesus amid the complaints of the Pharisees and teachers of the law.

(5) It was at Peter’s house that some of Jesus’ family came to whisk him away; perhaps for his protection since some were saying he was out of his mind. Note that this incident is only recorded in the Gospel of Mark and it appears to be an observation of the Apostle Peter (Mark 3:20, 21).

Another contextual clue in the Gospel of Mark is its "Peter centric" cadence. The narrative and pacing seem to be from Peter’s point of view. Jesus’ call to Peter to be a disciple appears early in the first chapter (Mark 1:16-18). Then, in the eighth chapter, the Gospel of Mark reaches a high point as Peter, who as spokesman for the group of disciples, confesses that Jesus is the Christ. Then shortly thereafter it is Peter again who rebukes Jesus for announcing his upcoming suffering, death and resurrection (Mark 8:27-33). All of these personal perspectives seem to be the first-hand experiences of the Apostle Peter that continue throughout the book.

Contextual evidence confirms the Gospel of Mark to be the record of the Apostle Peter’s eyewitness accounts of the ministry of Jesus. Since Mark was an interpreter who "attached himself to Peter," Mark likely captured this information from Peter’s sermons, which he delivered to the early Gentile churches.

If this is true, the power of the Gospel of Mark transcends the view that it is simply another history of Jesus. It is instead a personal reflection of Peter’s experiences used to light the spark of faith in our early brethren. We may go further and link the Gospel of Mark to the Apostle Peter’s life and experience which is detailed in the book of Acts, then beyond that to his fatherly advice written in the first and second epistles of Peter.

These connected links give an up-close and personal view of the Apostle Peter, his approach, personality and work. An understanding of the Gospel of Mark also adds a powerful and personal dimension to the workings of the early church.

• Why did the Gospel of Mark leave out the important detail of Peter walking on water? Perhaps the Apostle Peter did not want to call attention to himself as some sort of deity or one of Christ’s favorites. Peter’s focus was on Jesus Christ.

• Why so much detail about the miracle of the man sick with palsy let down through the roof? Perhaps this extra detail is given because it took place at Peter’s own house where it would have directly affected him and his family.

• Why were fifteen of Jesus’ miracles omitted from the Gospel of Mark? Since Mark recorded Peter’s words with accuracy, the Apostle Peter was the originator of the content of the Gospel of Mark. However, as the compiler of the content, Mark was in final control of the actual items that were included. Perhaps Mark left out these miracles, the Sermon on the Mount and several of Jesus’ parables because they were already a part of the Apostle Matthew’s Gospel. Mark, not being an apostle, may have shown deference to the ministry of the Apostle Matthew.

It greatly encourages us to see how Jesus provided the great truths that began the Gospel Age church for both Jew and Gentile. It should also greatly encourage us to see how Jesus developed the faith and devotion of the Apostle Peter, even after his sin of denial. Jesus invested in Peter and we can more clearly see the investments Jesus makes in us, even after our weakness. Jesus entrusted Peter with the great keys of knowledge for both the Jewish and the Gentile audiences; His proclamation, that Jesus was the Christ, the Son of the living God, was the foundation truth on which his church would be built (Matthew 16:19). While Peter’s ministry to the Jews is clearly recorded throughout the New Testament, his ministry to the Gentiles, previously more obscure, is now strengthened through the recollections of John Mark, Peter’s interpreter.

Out of Peter’s weakness, Jesus planted strength. Out of Peter’s denial, Jesus planted a renewed conviction, and out of Peter’s doubt, Jesus developed his confidence in the blood of Jesus Christ. Through the Apostle Peter’s words and Mark’s pen, we see Jesus’ wonderful provision of the Gospel opening to the Gentiles; Jesus’ tender feeding that considers the spiritual needs of the Gentiles. The early Gentile converts would have surely come to the same conclusion as the Psalmist who writes in a moment of overwhelming reverence and thoughtful reflection; "He (Jesus) is thy Lord, worship thou him" (Psalm 45:11).

This article closes with the words of Dean Frederic Farrar, in his masterwork The Life of Christ. Farrar provides us with an eloquence and insight to the miracle of the man sick with palsy that is worth noting.

"Jesus went first into the town of Capernaum, which was now regarded as ‘his own city.’ He went at once to the house — probably the house of St. Peter — which he ordinarily used when staying at Capernaum. There the crowd gathered in even denser numbers, filling the house, and even the courtyard, which surrounded it, so that there was no access even to the door. But there was one poor sufferer — a man bedridden from stroke of paralysis — who, with his friends, had absolutely determined that access should be made for him; he would be one of those violent men who would take the kingdom of heaven by force. And the four who were carrying him, finding that they could not reach Jesus through the crowd, made their way to the roof, perhaps by the usual outer staircase, and making an aperture in the roof by the removal of a few tiles, let down the paralytic, on his humble couch, exactly in front of the place where Christ was sitting.

"The man was silent, perhaps awestruck at his manner of intrusion into the Lord’s presence; but Jesus was pleased at the strength and unhesitating boldness of faith which the act displayed, and bestowing first upon the man a richer blessing than he primarily sought, he gently said to him, as he had said to the woman who was a sinner, ‘Be of good courage, son; thy sins are forgiven thee.’ Our Lord had before observed the unfavorable impression produced on the bystanders by those startling words. He again observed it now in the interchanged glances of the Scribes who were present, and the look of angry disapproval on their countenances. But on this occasion he did not, as before, silently substitute another phrase.

"On the contrary, he distinctly challenged attention to his words, and miraculously justified them. Reading their thoughts, he reproved them for their fierce unuttered calumnies of which their hearts were full, and put to them a direct question. ‘Which, he asked, is easier? to say to the paralytic, Thy sins are forgiven thee; or to say, Arise and walk?’ May not anybody say the former without its being possible to tell whether the sins are forgiven or not? But who can say the latter, and give effect to his own words, without a power from above? If I can by a word heal this paralytic, is it not clear that I must be the one who has also power on earth to forgive sins?