Did the evangelist Mark write two versions of his gospel? According to a letter ascribed to Clement of Alexandria, Mark created a second, more spiritual edition of his gospel for theologically advanced Christians in Alexandria. Clement’s letter contains two excerpts from this lost gospel, including a remarkably different account of the raising of Lazarus.
Forty-five years of cursory investigation have yielded five mutually exclusive paradigms, abundant confusion, and rumours of forgery. Strangely, one of the few things upon which most investigators agree is that the letter’s own explanation of the origin and purpose of this longer gospel need not be taken seriously.
Mark’s Other Gospel: Rethinking Morton Smith’s Controversial Discovery calls this pervasive bias into question. After thoroughly critiquing the five main paradigms, Scott G. Brown demonstrates that the gospel excerpts not only sound like Mark, but also employ Mark’s distinctive literary techniques, deepening this gospels theology and elucidating puzzling aspects of its narrative. This mystic gospel represents Mark’s own response to the Alexandrian predilection to discover the essential truths of a philosophy beneath the literal level of revered texts.

Scott G. Brown wrote the first doctoral disseration on the secret Gospel of Mark (University of Toronto, 1999) and has published relevant articles in the Journal of Biblical Literature, Catholic Biblical Quarterly, Revue Biblique, and Biblical Archaeology Review. He presently teaches courses on Christian Origins in the Department for the Study of Religion at the University of Toronto.

Scott G. Brown's profile page

Ever since Morton Smith's discovery at Mar Saba of a letter by Clement of Alexandria containing fragments of a longer version of Mark, 'Secret Mark' has been surrounded by a cloud of controversy and a spate of outlandish and scurrilous accusations by detractors of Smith and the gospel. Brown's monograph combines the first detailed treatment of the history of the discovery with an outstandingly careful and persuasive analysis of the Clementine letter and the gospel fragments it contains. He lifts the discussion of 'Longer Mark' from the mire of innuendo and pseudo-scholarly opinion and sets it on the footing of serious and balanced discussion, showing that there are good reasons both to suppose that the Clementine letter is genuine and to conclude that the gospel fragments are Markan. Mark's Other Gospel is not only important for being the first full-length scholarly treatment on 'Longer Mark'; it also provides a compelling analysis of how modern scholarship on Christian origins treats discoveries that have the potential to upset the commonly accepted views of gospel origins.

John S. Kloppenborg, University of Toronto

Brown offers a thorough, dispassionate, and meticulously researched defence of the likely authenticity of the Clement of Alexander letter. At a minimum, Brown makes a persuasive case that—scholarly bombast aside—forgery has not been proven.

Ian Hunter

Mark's Other Gospel by Scott Brown critically examines not only the controversy surrounding Smith's find, but the excerpts themselves and, as such, is a necessary addition to early Christian studies.... The work is thorough and well written in spite of the complexity of the subject matter. In the least, Mark's Other Gospel demands that scholars take the Letter to Theodore and its 15 additional Markan verses seriously. At best, Brown demonstrates that a slightly different version of the Gospel of Mark was used amongst those few Alexandrians who were mature in their faith.

Dilys Patterson, Concordia University, Studies in Religion, 36/2, 2007

An important contribution to understanding early Christian gospel literature.

International Review of Biblical Studies, 2006 June

Brown examines meticulously and even-handedly the scholarly controversy which followed Smith's announcement of this discovery, and his key conclusions are worth noting with care....This book will prove invaluable, particularly to readers who do not have access to the information on which to assess one of the more unseemly scholarly controversies of recent decades. Brown's reconstruction of the history behind the longer version of Mark will merit serious engagement in scholarship.

Journal for the Study of the New Testament, 28.5, 2006, 2006 August