Roland

Any good theories out there about who that naked young man is in Mark 14:51-52? Is he related to the other young man in a robe in 16:5? Why doesn't Mark call him "an angel" as the others do? What writer would refer to him as a "young man" if he knew he was really an angel?

I've heard the theory that the "man" might well be Mark himself, a means of explaining why he is the first one to tell the story of Jesus of Nazareth (he portrays the women as not telling anyone about Jesus' resurrection).

Is there any plausibility to this theory?

Intelligitimate

http://www.after-hourz.net/ri/wasjesusgay.html

spin

It's the "fulfillment" of Amos 2:16 (mixed with Mic 2:8).


spin

Chili

That was his bosum buddy John whom he later introduced as Mary's son.

Vorkosigan

Many. I just got Gundry's commentary from Amazon, I'll let you know later.

inquisitive01

Verse 50 says "And they all forsook him and fled." Therefore, I don't believe it could have been Mark.

The man you're referring to was not naked at first (he was covered with a linen cloth), but he lost the cloth when he fled (later, after the others had already fled). See Section IX under Mar 14:43-52 on the following page: Blue Letter Bible Mark 14:43 ff

Roland

I find it interesting that the first man loses the cloth and that the second man is described as wearing a robe. It just seems to me as if the author is trying to make the reader see a connection between these two enigmatic "young men." The fleeing seems irrevlevant to me, since the "second" young man is clearly "in the know" with Jesus by the time we see him in the tomb.

If "Mark" had indeed created this fiction of Jesus of Nazareth, he needed an explanation as to why HE would know the story but no one else had ever heard of it. This seems to be the perfect solution. He knew all along and told the women to spread the word. They obviously didn't so that now, after all this time, he's relating the tale in his gospel. Thus, he made himself a character in his own story to help explain why it is emerging now and not at the time it happened.

This theory may be wild, but it helps explain a number of troubling aspects of Mark's text (the seemingly incomplete ending, the two mysterious men, the fact that he doesn't call the second man "an angel" etc.).

spin

I do wish people would flick through a bible every now and then.

Amos 2:16,
and he that is courageous among the mighty shall flee away naked in that day, says Yahweh

This is just another "fulfilled" prophecy.


spin

Roland

How is he "courageous" when he's running away? That is one bizarre quote.

spin

Ummm, before this running away he was considered courageous. It's, uh, not too difficult, along the lines of "even the bravest would poo their nappies in that situation".


spin