The Source of Mark's Naked Youth Narrative?

[Secret Alias]

But this is a problem for me also. The forgers of orthodox material we far removed from the germinal seed from which Christianity developed.

[Sinouhe]

One might wonder if a gospel writer or two might have reflected upon Amos 2 when contemplating the destruction of the Temple (or after the annihilation of Jerusalem by Hadrian; especially re Amos 2.10c: ie., no longer having "possession of the land of the Amorite")

Exactly. When you look at the scriptures used in Mark, like 90% of them have this theme. They are either to Elijah/Elisha, which is a story about the prelude to the destruction of the Israelite kingdoms and the temple, or they are to scriptures like this, which are about God's punishment of the Israelites because they have displeased him, so he's sending foreign armies to destroy them.

What about the multiple references to Isaiah’s servant or the son of man ? I think 90% is an exageration. But i follow you on this pesher. It’s obviously a pesher from Amos.

[rgprice]

Even many of the ones that refer to Isaiah are also about God punishing the Israelites. There is the Parable of the Wicked Tenants and Isaiah 5 of course. But also the Walking on Water and Isaiah 43, which is one of my favorite examples of all time.

Isaiah 43:
2 When you pass through the waters, I will be with you; and through the rivers, they shall not overwhelm you; when you walk through fire you shall not be burned, and the flame shall not consume you.
3 For I am the Lord your God, the Holy One of Israel, your Savior.
4 Because you are precious in my sight, and honored, and I love you, I give people in return for you, nations in exchange for your life.
5 Do not fear, for I am with you; I will bring your offspring from the east, and from the west I will gather you;
6 I will say to the north, “Give them up,” and to the south, “Do not withhold; bring my sons from far away and my daughters from the end of the earth—
7 everyone who is called by my name, whom I created for my glory, whom I formed and made.”
8 Bring forth the people who are blind, yet have eyes, who are deaf, yet have ears!
9 Let all the nations gather together, and let the peoples assemble. Who among them declared this, and foretold to us the former things? Let them bring their witnesses to justify them, and let them hear and say, “It is true.”
10 You are my witnesses, says the Lord, and my servant whom I have chosen, so that you may know and believe me and understand that I am he. Before me no god was formed, nor shall there be any after me.
11 I, I am the Lord, and besides me there is no savior.
12 I declared and saved and proclaimed, when there was no strange god among you; and you are my witnesses, says the Lord.
13 I am God, and also henceforth I am He; there is no one who can deliver from my hand; I work and who can hinder it?
14 Thus says the Lord, your Redeemer, the Holy One of Israel: For your sake I will send to Babylon and break down all the bars, and the shouting of the Chaldeans will be turned to lamentation.
15 I am the Lord, your Holy One, the Creator of Israel, your King.
16 Thus says the Lord, who makes a way in the sea, a path in the mighty waters,
17 who brings out chariot and horse, army and warrior; they lie down, they cannot rise, they are extinguished, quenched like a wick:
18 Do not remember the former things, or consider the things of old.
19 I am about to do a new thing; now it springs forth, do you not perceive it? I will make a way in the wilderness and rivers in the desert.
20 The wild animals will honor me, the jackals and the ostriches; for I give water in the wilderness, rivers in the desert, to give drink to my chosen people,
21 the people whom I formed for myself so that they might declare my praise.
22 Yet you did not call upon me, O Jacob; but you have been weary of me, O Israel!
23 You have not brought me your sheep for burnt offerings, or honored me with your sacrifices. I have not burdened you with offerings, or wearied you with frankincense.
24 You have not bought me sweet cane with money, or satisfied me with the fat of your sacrifices. But you have burdened me with your sins; you have wearied me with your iniquities.
25 I, I am He who blots out your transgressions for my own sake, and I will not remember your sins.
26 Accuse me, let us go to trial; set forth your case, so that you may be proved right.
27 Your first ancestor sinned, and your interpreters transgressed against me.
28 Therefore I profaned the princes of the sanctuary, I delivered Jacob to utter destruction, and Israel to reviling.

Is there any better summary of the Gospel of Mark?

[Joseph D. L.]

I don't accept the idea that these minor prophets and lesser texts could have been the basis for a gospel narrative. Doesn't mean I am right. I am just skeptical. Joseph was iconic.

Are you thinking that the writer had in mind a more philosophical exegesis?

I was reading a book that mentioned something about Greek statues depicting heroes and athletes in their nakedness to reveal a certain perfected type of man. The emphasis on the figure's youthfulness, νεανίσκος, might lean in the direction that the meaning is that this individual was being initiated into a mystery so as to become perfected. The way the narrative in Mark 14 51-52 flows wants the reader's attention on the nakedness of the fleeing youth. If you think about the culture and the language Mark was composed in I think that interpretation sticks well with what Clement says about Secret Mark. That Carpocratians supposedly possessed a portrait of Jesus made by Pilate himself. Are they saying Pilate was the youth? (speculation)

[Charles Wilson]

If the Title of this Thread may receive a comment, I believe we have an alternative in Thackeray's Translation of Josephus' Antiquities...:

“And now the feast of unleavened bread, which the Jews call Passover, came round; it is an occasion for the contribution of the multitude of sacrifices, and a vast crowd streamed in from the country for the ceremony. The promoters of the mourning for the doctors stood in a body of the Temple, procuring recruits for their faction. This alarmed Archelaus, who, wishing to prevent the contagion from spreading to the whole crowd, sent in a tribune in command of a cohort, with orders to restrain by force the ringleaders of the sedition...”

This is at the Temple Atrocity where 3000+ were murdered. It explains why the recruit ran away and why he was naked.

YMMV.

CW

[MrMacSon]

I should add that in the LXX the last line of Amos 2 reads:

16 And the strong shall find no confidence in power: the naked shall flee away in that day, says the Lord.

So, it leaves out warriors.

The Hebrew interlinear is similar:

And strong men of might naked shall flee in that day, says Yahweh

---

And strong men of might shall flee naked in that day, says Yahweh

---

https://biblehub.com/interlinear/amos/2-16.htm

(for full Amos 2 Hebrew interlinear see https://biblehub.com/interlinear/amos/2.htm)

The Greek LXX has

καὶ ὁ κραταιὸς οὐ μὴ εὑρήσει τὴν καρδίαν αὐτοῦ ἐν δυναστείαις, ὁ γυμνὸς διώξεται* ἐν ἐκείνῃ τῇ ἡμέρᾳ, λέγει Κύριος

---

and the strong in no way shall find his heart in might; the naked shall be pursued in that day, says the Lord

---

https://studybible.info/interlinear/Amos%202

* from δϊώκω • (diṓkō)

διώξεται is future 3rd middle indicative inflection/tense

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/διώκω

'shall flee' may work, too (rather than 'shall be pursued')

[Sinouhe]

Is there any better summary of the Gospel of Mark?

You're preaching to the converted. For sure, one of the main objectives of Mark was to explain the destruction of the temple due to the iniquities of Israel.
But that's not the sole objective of Mark.

[rgprice]

You're preaching to the converted. For sure, one of the main objectives of Mark was to explain the destruction of the temple due to the iniquities of Israel.
But that's not the sole objective of Mark.

Yes, but my point is that for any given periscope of the Gospels so many people come up with extravagant and elaborate hypothetical explanations. Whether its "Jesus the liberator" or "Oral accounts of a Jesus that was quoting scripture" or "reenacting scripture" (a famous example here is the Triumphal Entry into Jerusalem, which so many "Biblical scholars" claim is a true account of what Jesus did, which correlates with scripture because Jesus himself knew the prophecy and wanted to enact it,) or Jesus the astute fortune teller, who was able to gauge the political winds so well that he actually predicted the fall of the Temple, or Jesus the magician, who was using the techniques like those of Galen and other healers, etc. And on and on it goes.

But the explanation for these stories is very simple and has always been staring everyone right in the face, its just that so few want to acknowledge it. The first Gospel was written after the First (or Second) Jewish-Roman War, in which the writer re-purposed scriptures about what led to the fall of the "First Temple" into a story about what led to the fall of the "Second Temple".

That's it. That's where 75% of the narrative material comes from. The remaining 25% comes from the Pauline letters and possibly Josephus. The whole thing is a simple case of literary development. Then everyone started copying and revising this first story to suit different theological agendas and that's where the rest of the Gospels come from.

All other proposed explanations are just needless over complication of the situation. If you want to understand what the source of a given scene is, start with Mark and identify the likely scriptural basis for the scene. It doesn't need to be any harder than that.

[Sinouhe]

You're preaching to the converted. For sure, one of the main objectives of Mark was to explain the destruction of the temple due to the iniquities of Israel.
But that's not the sole objective of Mark.

Yes, but my point is that for any given periscope of the Gospels so many people come up with extravagant and elaborate hypothetical explanations. Whether its "Jesus the liberator" or "Oral accounts of a Jesus that was quoting scripture" or "reenacting scripture" (a famous example here is the Triumphal Entry into Jerusalem, which so many "Biblical scholars" claim is a true account of what Jesus did, which correlates with scripture because Jesus himself knew the prophecy and wanted to enact it,) or Jesus the astute fortune teller, who was able to gauge the political winds so well that he actually predicted the fall of the Temple, or Jesus the magician, who was using the techniques like those of Galen and other healers, etc. And on and on it goes.

For sure, most of the pericopes in Mark are pesharim or mimesis of the OT.

But the explanation for these stories is very simple and has always been staring everyone right in the face, its just that so few want to acknowledge it. The first Gospel was written after the First (or Second) Jewish-Roman War, in which the writer re-purposed scriptures about what led to the fall of the "First Temple" into a story about what led to the fall of the "Second Temple".
That's it.

Yes i think that's one of the main objective of Mark.

That's where 75% of the narrative material comes from. The remaining 25% comes from the Pauline letters and possibly Josephus.

I agree that Paul is a VERY important source of Mark. But Mark has others objective. That's not only about the temple. That's an oversimplification.

The whole thing is a simple case of literary development. Then everyone started copying and revising this first story to suit different theological agendas and that's where the rest of the Gospels come from.
All other proposed explanations are just needless over complication of the situation. If you want to understand what the source of a given scene is, start with Mark and identify the likely scriptural basis for the scene. It doesn't need to be any harder than that.

I agree.