Kata Markon

["Kym Smith" <khs AT picknowl.com.au>]

Dear Steve,

I suspect that part of this posst was sent accidentally but I will start
again, just in case.

I do not think that there is any need to connect the young man who fled
naked with the young man in the tomb. The latter is clearly to be
identified with Matthew's single angel whose garments were white as snow
and who sat upon the stone, and Luke and John's pair of angels who were in
the tomb.

The former is a bit of a mystery, though, and we may all speculate as to
who he is, for speculation is all we have. I do not think the Synoptic
writers were big into creating symbolic figures, nor do I think that we
have here one who ended up persecuting the Church (i.e. Saul/Paul). If I
must speculate - and, as you will probably find out, I don't mind a bit of
biblical speculation - I suspect that it was Mark himself.

If the house which contained the upper room in which the last supper was
celebrated was the same place to which Peter reported after the angel
released him from prison (Acts 12 - perhaps connecting those two houses is
as improbable as connecting the two young men) then, as per the latter
story, it was John Mark's house. If the last supper was held in his house,
then it may be that, as a young man, he went out with the group to
Gethsemane. He may have been set up to sleep in a corner of the room and
simply went out as he was, grabbing a sheet/blanket rather than be left
behind.

Perhaps we should not expect the author of the gospel to include an
account of himself which has no apparent significance. It would be a
pretty vain attempt to get himself into the story. However, if Mark
himself was not the primary author of the gospel, then the one who wrote
it - knowing that the readers would understand or be told who the naked
young man was - may have included the story to give some weight to Mark's
witness. "See how early he was involved with these things!"  As I suspect
that the Apostle Peter was more involved in the gospel than is generally
allowed, then he may have wanted to acknowledge Mark's youthful presence
on such an important occasion. If Mark was the distributor of Peter's
gosepl (which, in turn, led to that unnmamed work gaining Mark's name)
then Peter may have wanted to 'authorize' Mark in some way.

Sincerely,

Kym Smith
Adelaide
South Australia
khs AT picknowl.com.au