Kata Markon

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

Before continuing the debate re. the 'naked youth',  discussed below,
may I again ask the indulgence of the participants for my writing-errors
in typing or composition. Those of us who are rather new to computers
and internet and who do not master the English language, will understand
the problem. Moreover, dealing with fundamental texts like Gethsemane
and the open tomb, one treads on sacred ground for those who consider
themselves to be practicing christians;  and sacred ground just as well
for those not sharing the christian's faith simply because of respect
for the faith of fellow humans. Careful formulation is always in order.
Sometimes one wonders if a fast medium like the format we are using,
lends itself to thoughtful exchange of thought. However,
the very possibility of such exchange across great distances means a
great advance for exegesis. Hence this request for patience without
irritation. I wonder, in the meantime if my innovative solution that the
anonymous 'youth' might well be Saul/Paul, would find a response in the
negative or in the affirmative. In other words the actions of the
neaniskos would represent important aspects of Paul's life and teaching.
I'll try below to enter my thesis into the debate.





> Subject: Gospel Creation
> From: Steve Black <sblack AT axionet.com>
> Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2001 21:47:45 -0800
> X-Message-Number: 1
>
> I Think what I have gained from Joe's perspective is to see the
> Hebrew Scripture as an additional possible source, in a source
> critical manner of speaking.
> That is - to add to Mark's  received tradition, to add to any
> possible collections of sayings (or what have you) - to add to these
> things the Hebrew scriptures as a source DOESN'T really seem all that
> wacky to me.

I wonder, if we must put it the way you do. All depends, of course, on
Mark's identity.
If indeed, as I hold with tradition, that the author was John Mark, one
should not regard the Hebrew Scriptures as an ADDITION to "Mark's
received tradition". Like Jesus himself
the Hebrew Scriptures were  his point of reference, they provided the
language and presuppositions for his own witness. They formed his mental
and literary point of reference. This would not be the case, of course,
if Mark were a Roman citizen who simply 'received' the early christian
tradition and who would consider the Hebrew Scriptures as an additional
'source'. The identity of Mark is fundamental here, that is his
belonging or not belonging to the Judean people (1st Century Jews).
Karel Hanhart

> My complaint is when these other sources are ignored or downplayed.

> Steve Black
> Diocese of New Westminster
> Anglican Church of Canada
>
> 3049 West 14th Ave
> Vancouver, BC
> Canada
> V6K 2X7
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Subject: Re: gmark digest: March 15, 2001 /naked Youth
> From: Karel Hanhart <K.Hanhart AT net.HCC.nl>
> Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2001 11:49:52 +0100
> X-Message-Number: 3

> > Karel Hanhart wrote:   [allow me to correct an annoying typing error 
> > below ]
> > You are right, there certainly is no consensus. I agree with you that the 
> > neaniskos  in Getsemane
> > and in the open tomb are one and the same person.  Austin Farrer and 
> > Scroggs and > > Groff have written in this vein. If indeed Mark was 
> > deeply influenced by Pauline > > thought - I too take this to be the case 
> > - than a profound symbolism is expressed here" the young man symbolizes 
> > the CONVERT [not 'concert'] to faith in Jesus. He is "buried with Christ" 
> > in order to "rise with him to new life".
> > I have written extensively on the subject  on pp 341-348; + 349 - 392 (I 
> > mention > > it again simply because. I am looking forward to a critique 
> > showing me where I may have gone wrong}.
> >   But THE ANALOGY OF BAPTISM  does not exhaustively explain the text 
> > about the young man dressed in a white 'stola' and sitting inside the 
> > grave as someone buried 'with Christ". Prof. Neirynck of Louvain rightly 
> > offered a critique of the idea that the neaniskos is an "initiate" 
> > baptized, after the reading of the passion story. Neirynck failed to see 
> > what connection there could have been between baptism and the military 
> > scene of a soldier grabbing the youth in his flight. This set me to 
> > further research: 
Mark must have had a historical disciple or apostle (sun-ekolouthei!) in
mind. someone like Simon Peter - who for a mysterious reason could
appear in the vision of the women as a messenger from beyond the veil of
death. In other words this historical youth, must historically have gone
through an experience symbolized by the shameful flight from Gethsemane
and the content of the women's vision. This historical 'follower' must
have died in the period between Gethsemane and the event the women saw
in their vision. As I have argued before following Claude Montefiore
(1927!) I believe, the climatic ending of Mark is a midrash on LXX Is
22,16 - the monumental tomb is there a euphemism for the first temple
destroyed in 586 BCE. 

As to the thesis the 'neaniskos' may well have symbolized the historical
figure of Paul, retrojected into the Gospel story  ANONYMOUSLY
1. because he had not been a disciple in the lifetime of Jesus, but as
an apostle, untimely born - he became part of the gospel witness. Many
will agree that Mark was highly influenced by Paul's letters.
2. His shameful flight could refer to his having been - so to speak - on
the side of Iscariot. He had persecuted the ecclesia.
3. The biblical term 'naked' always refers to divine judgment (f.i. Gen.
Ezek). Moreover, in a key passage of II Cor 5,3 Paul is writing that
when he dies he must 'appear before the judgment seat of Christ" (vs
10). He hopes not to be found "naked"   
in shame at that time, because he has been "clothed" - at the time of
his baptism he had "put on Christ". The use of the word 'naked is
uniquely Pauline in this context and because the passage deals with his
hope in the face of death is quite appropriate also in Mark's story. 
4. The identity of Paul would explain why Matthew left this neaniskos
out of his composition. After all Paul in Galatians had called the Law a
'curse' - not Matthean language to be sure. On the other hand, Luke in
his Acts assigned a major role to Paul next to Peter. This would also be
the case if indeed in their vision of the future catastrophe the 'angel
of Paul', or the 'spirit of Paul' would appear and bid the women
"to tell... Peter (!)" about what they had seen and heard". Jesus would
go before them into exile, that is "Galilee of the Gentiles".
5. This would also explain why Mark is insistent that the women did NOT
tell the
Peter and the eleven. Simply because none of the apostles (including
Paul) had foreseen this outcome of the Jewish war. 
6. But Paul had foreseen a mystery (cf Mk 4,9f.) that a 'part of Israel'
would harden their hearts while the "Gentiles would come in" (Rom
11,25). So Mark may well have applied the 'muster ion' of Rom 11 to the
events of the War.  
7. The ending '-iskos' in 'neaniskos' is a diminutive a young man of
small stature, a boy. The Latin word 'Paulus' means 'small' 'of little
weight' Paul regarded himself the 'least of the apostles'. Paulus is of
course also a Roman surname, but this does not prevent the reader, in
search of Mark's meaning. to lay the link.   
        These are some of the arguments that may point the way to a solution.

>  Karel Hanhart

> Subject: Re: Gospel Creation
> From: "Jack Kilmon" <jkilmon AT historian.net>
> Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2001 08:27:50 -0800
> X-Message-Number: 5
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Rikki E. Watts" <rwatts AT interchange.ubc.ca>
> To: "Kata Markon" <gmark AT franklin.oit.unc.edu>
> Sent: Thursday, March 15, 2001 1:44 PM
> Subject: [gmark] Re: Gospel Creation
>
> >So let me ask you again, can you cite 
> > me one first century example where a movement invents wholesale fictions
> > which it then passes off as recent history in order to claim that these
> > inventions are the fulfillment of Jewish scripture?  I can't see anything
> > like this in the rabbis, nothing like it in Qumran (who were very
> > interested in the fulfillment of scripture), or anywhere else.
>
> Parallels to aggadic midrash can be found in the Qumran pesharim.  In this
> sense,
> the pesharim are closer in literary genre to the NT than the later rabbinic
> Midrashim.

Midrash may have a wide range of meaning. I am not referring here to the
classical rabbinical midrashim like Midrash Rabba. Mark composed his own
haggadic midrashim, stories he used as a short homily to illustrate
Jesus' actions and teachings or the actions and teaching of other
contemporaries.     
> A study of the Qumran pesharim as revolving around the TR rather than Jesus
> is > the closest contemporary, or near contemorary, parallel to the NT 
> aggadic
> style. 
I think the 'pesher' of Qumran is not quite like the midrashim of Mark.
In the Habakkuk Commentary of Qumran the author notes [pishro] that the
'Kittim' (- in Habakkuk itself probably the Greeks - stand for 'the
Romans'. The verse in Habakkuk is in the eyes of the author a
'prediction'. Mark does not do this in his midrash on LXX Is 22 and 33.I
found the definition of Lewis J. Eron to be helpful here: 'Midrash' can
be understood as a process of reading a text considered to be the
authoritative word of God through the lens of a specific event and/or
special concern that may or may not be explicitly referred to in the
text. In the relationship between the original text and the focussing
event and/or concern, the meaning of the original text is expanded and
the significance of the focussing event and/or concern is underscored."
The event/concern in our case I think is the traumatic and overwhelming
event of the fall of Jerusalem and the new exile. 

Karel Hanhart
     
I would also suggest that the migration of this style from Jewish
> oral
> tradition to Hellenistic literary tradition is unique to the NT making Mark
> an
> historical first in this area.
>
> JK




> Subject: Re: Gospel Creation
> From: "Mark Goodacre" <M.S.Goodacre AT bham.ac.uk>
> Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2001 17:33:52 -0000
> X-Message-Number: 9
>
> On 16 Mar 2001, at 7:44, Rikki E. Watts wrote:
>
> > However, I think we've been around this one before, if not on this
> > list, at least on Xlist.  I'm not sure what you mean by aggadic
> > midrash (I presume as opposed to halakah), but even Michael Goulder
> > has had to retract his claim that the gospels are midrash.  See e.g.
> > Alexander, P. S., "Midrash and the Gospels" in C. M. Tuckett, ed.,
> > Synoptic Studies(Sheffield: JOST, 1984) 1-18. According to the
> > specialists they are clearly not.
>
> A point worth making, though in the interests of clarify I'd like to
> add that what Goulder has retracted is the *terminology* of
> "midrash" to describe the creative work of the evangelists (_Luke:
> A New Paradigm_ (JSNT, Sup 20; Sheffield: Sheffiedl Academic
> Press, 1989) and not the substance of the claim that they were
> engaged in extensive, creative embroidery drawing on their
> sources, the Scriptures, inference etc.
>
> Mark

Nevertheless, I believe, Mark's method can be interpreted as midrash in
the sense of Lewis Eron's definition of the term. Midrash has a wide
range of meaning. But it always presupposes citation(s) from the Hebrew
Bible. It is a language dealing with language or language that refers to
language. Hence such terms as one text 'helping' another or 'supporting'
another  or the 'stringing together' of texts.

Karel     K.Hanhart AT net.HCC.nl