Kata Markon

["L. J. Swain" <larry.swain AT wmich.edu>]

JFAlward AT aol.com wrote:

> In a message dated 3/14/01 10:21:56 PM Pacific Standard Time,
> larry.swain AT wmich.edu writes:
>
>
>
>> how do we connect the one scene of the young man running away nude
>> with a
>> scene in which he is at the
>> tomb BEFORE everyone else and giving instructions of such a nature
>> that
>> everyone, women and apostles, do as he says?  Perhaps I'm just
>> obtuse.........
>>
>> Larry Swain
>
>
> I don't think so. The young man at the tomb is angelic, while the one
> at the
> arrest scene is a shamed coward; the two couldn't be connected.
>
> I still say Mark symbolized Jerusalem's cowardice and shame with the
> flight
> of the naked man, and that this man has nothing to do with the one at
> the
> tomb.  As for the man at the tomb, Mark may have wished for us to
> believe he
> was an angel, or perhaps Jesus' ghost, but that's pure speculation and
> is
> without Old Testament antecedent as far as I know.
>
>

Joe,
Some have done so, which is my problem of how to get these two disparate
scenes to contain the same young man with white garment.  Contrasting
young men, possibly, but I don't see how we can see the two as the same
one, but perhaps I'm missing something essential in Karel's articles.

I will say on the other hand, that I, as eternal sceptic, don't quite
buy your argument either.  Not everything in the gospels must be found
to have Hebrew scripture antecedents, and in the context, a soldier
grabbing a young man's white tunic so that the young man runs away
naked---I just don't see the internal clues of the scene pointing to the
Jerusalem establishment, there isn't anything narratively to hang my hat
on for this one either.

Larry Swain