Kata Markon

["K. Hanhart" <K.Hanhart AT net.HCC.nl>]

L.S.

In Synoptic-L I suggested that in Kata Markon cruces interpretum could
be debated in some depth while in Synoptic-L this debate could be
briefly summarized with respect to its relevance to the synoptic
problem.

I reiterate my thesis that the expression "a tomb hewn from the rock"
refers to LXX Isa 22,16 as Montefiore suggested in his commentary as
early as 1927. 

I have become convinced that the burial story should be interpreted in
terms of a midrash on LXX Isa 22, 16 and LXX Isa 33,16 as Montefiore
intimated. 1) The expression in LXX Isa 22,16 is a hapax in the Hebrew
Bible and in the Septuagint.  2) Scholars have ackowledged Mark's method
of referring with one, two or three characteristic words to a passage in
the Septuagint. Witness the bold face type used to identify direct
quotations from Mark in the Greek New Testament. Mark used this method
because he didnot have modern facilities of lengthy footnotes or notes
in the margin to indicate that a particular part of his story should be
read in the light of that unique passage of Scripture. Now if it is
agreed f.i. that the sour wine 'oxous...epotizen' in 15,36 is a
reference to Ps 69,21 and 'to bdelugma tes eremoseos' refers to Dan 9,27
etc. an exegete would be hard put to deny that mnemeioi... lelatomemenon
ek petras' is a reference to LXX Isa 22, 16. 4) This is all the more
true, since the passage in Isaiah is written in the context of Jerusalem
beleaguered by a foreign army and hence was under threat and since Mark
was written just before or during or after the war with Rome when
Jerusalem was under threat or had fallen. 

This seems to me a good start for testing the theory that Matthew
reponded to Mark's open tomb story in Mt 16,17 - 19, as he referred to
Isa 22  as well in vs 19 (kleidas).

I would be happy to receive some comment on this hypothesis. 

Karel Hanhart