ph2ter

Real meaning of baptism is probably one of the least understood doctrines of the New Testament. Something came to my mind while reading an online article in The Journal of Higher Criticism. Although an amateur in this field I hope it will be interesting for the readers of this forum.

According to Miles Fowler's article "Identification of the Bethany Youth in the Secret Gospel of Mark with other Figures Found in Mark and John" the rich man, the youth with linen cloth who follows Jesus at Gethsemane and the youth at Jesus' tomb of Mark all are identical with Lazarus and the beloved disciple of John. Author proposes that John and Mark complement each other and are telling different parts of the same story.
A key to decoding these identities is the Secret Gospel of Mark, discovered in 1958 by Professor Morton Smith who found it quoted in a letter that had been written by a bishop Clement of Alexandria, Egypt, at the end of the second century.
Clement's version of the first chapter of Secret Mark (SGM 1:1-13):
1 They come into Bethany, and there was a woman whose brother had died 2 and [she] approaches and bows down before Jesus and says to him, "Son of David, have mercy on me." 3 But the disciples scolded her. 4 And Jesus got angry and went with her into the garden where the tomb was. 5 Right away there was a loud voice from the tomb. 6 Then Jesus went up and rolled the stone away from the opening of the tomb. 7 He went right in where the youth was, reached out a hand and raised him, taking hold of [his] hand. 8 The youth loved him at first sight and began to plead with him to stay. 9 And coming out of the tomb, they go to the young man's home for he was rich. 10 And six days later Jesus called him. 11 And when evening came, the young man went to him wearing a shroud over his nude body. 12 And he stayed all night as Jesus taught him the secret of the kingdom of God. 13 From there he gets up and goes back across the Jordan.

According to the article, linen cloth symbolizes a burial cloth or shroud.
Smith is persuaded that the story connecting the rich man with the Bethany youth was told precisely to redeem the distressing implication of Mark 10:23 which is that those with great wealth can hardly be saved:
"[E]ven the rich man who at first rejected Jesus, although dead and buried in the world, could still be saved by the miracle of the resurrection and could receive the true, gnostic baptism, for which one came in the proper baptismal garb, a white sheet over the naked body."

Mark 14:51 provides the answer that there could be no more impressive identification of Lazarus, nor any more vivid symbol of his resurrection, than his wearing a burial shroud.

Does not the whole reconstructed Lazarus story symbolize baptism in the same sense which we can also find in Paul?
Connection of death with baptism is also characteristic of Paul.

Paul wrote:
"Don't you know that all of us who were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? We were therefore buried with him through baptism into death in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, we too may live a new life. If we have been united with him like this in his death, we will certainly also be united with him in his resurrection" (Rom. 6:3-5).
Also in Colossians we can read the same:
"Having been put to death with him in baptism, by which you came to life again with him, through faith in the working of God, who made him come back from the dead." (Col. 2:12)

Connection of baptism with death and rebirth probably has its origin in pagan mythologies. In some pagan cultures vegetation deity at the end of the pagan year had to be figuratively burned. Burning the "old body" was necessary for the rebirth. But in some other, the vegetation god "body" had to be drowned in a stream of water, which leads us to baptism symbolism, because baptism is also some form of death and rebirth.

Toto

Hi ph2ter, welcome to the Internet Infidels BCH forum.

This is sort of embarrassing, but it turns out that the Secret Gospel of Mark is now generally recognized as an interesting forgery done by Morton Smith. This leaves a number of scholars with egg on their faces (I don't know if this translates into Croatian.)

But the connections between baptism, death and rebirth are probably still there. You just need to rework the argument to do without the Secret Gospel.

ph2ter

Are they absolutely sure that it is a forgery?
But I think that identification of John's Lazarus with the youth of Mark works even without Secret Mark.

gurugeorge

I'll say. It's pretty anaemic nowadays, but I'll bet you it was a much more rugged affair in the old days. Consider (from Romans 6, RSV):

[3] Do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death?
[4] We were buried therefore with him by baptism into death, so that as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, we too might walk in newness of life.
[5]
For if we have been united with him in a death like his, we shall certainly be united with him in a resurrection like his.

Now I've seen all sorts of obscure readings of this, but to me it seems really obvious that's what's meant is that baptism (as practiced by Paul's communities, I'm not saying this was always the meaning and is the meaning in other contexts where a water ritual was used) was in fact a kind of deliberate drowning of the aspirant, pretty close to the point of death.

If you've ever nearly drowed, you'll know that it's a pretty panicky, claustrophobic affair, in which "your life flashes before your eyes" - as you start to think there's no way out, you start to think that your number is up.

Now, I'm a rationalist, but I've had mystical experiences of "oneness". What happens in such experiences is that for one reason or another the ordinary sense of self drops away, and what's left "here" is a kind of bare perception, or bare experiencing, and there's a kind of wordless sense that this bare, self-less experiencing is the Universe's (or as others might say, God's), and a parallel sense that somehow this is the "point" of everything; all accompanied by an indescribable sense "homecoming". IOW, in being totally impersonal (person-less, self-less being and perceiving), it sort of becomes universal (it's impossible to describe, you have to have "been there" - although of course the paradox is that "you" aren't there at all!). (As a rationalist of course I think this is just a brain phenonenon, but that's not to debunk it in any way, any more than to say that the joy of listening to Bach is a brain phenomenon!)

Anyway, having had both the experience of nearly drowning, and the kind of "non-dual glimpse" as described above, I think it's a pretty safe bet that given sufficient preparation for the Big Event in an atmosphere of reflection, holiness, etc., baptism was a kind of deliberate near-drowning of the aspirant, meant as a direct means to induce the death of the sense of self (a giving-up of the effort of maintenance of ego structure), so the aspirant could be plunged directly into mystical experience of oneness. So there you have the direct, simple enactment of "death" and "resurrection".

Another clue that this is the sort of thing Paul was talking about is the phrase "Peace that passeth understanding". The unitive experience is marked by, as I said, an indescribable sense of "homecoming" that's kind of a pure, perfect peace, again, impossible to describe. It's like all the happiness and satisfaction one has ever had in ones life, all rolled into one, then multiplied a thousandfold - and that's still a pale reflection in words.

Note a cognate idea in Buddhism: Nirvana literally means "snuffed out", as of a flame, but in terms of the Vedic lore that would have formed Gotama Siddhartha's milieu, fire was something that was considered to pervade the Universe in a Divine form, but to be sort of "trapped" in physical fuel, and when the fuel burnt out the "spirit" of the fire is released to its original condition (i.e. one of being universal, of permeating the Whole). Nirvana is always described in terms that imply this kind of incredible sense of release and peace.

Consider also Vedanta itself. The word "Shanti", meaning "peace", is one of the key words used in the Upanishads (the "dialogues" that form the heart of the mystical aspect of the Vedas). "OM, Shanti, Shanti, Shanti" is a common prefix or suffix to dialogues or parts of them.

Coincidence? Or pointers to a common-sense reading of Paul whereby he's talking (in religious, mythical terms, the most apt terms he knew) about actual experiences people of any culture can have as a result of common physiology and brain function, under the right kinds of circumstances?

gurugeorge

Just to add to my previous post, here's an interesting study of NDEs, particulary NDEs in relation to drowning:-

Of note is that drowning NDEs appear to have higher percentages (65.2%) of deep experiences compared to a general NDE population or with cardiac arrests.


[...] the data suggests that there could be a type of death where the experience is more easily remembered and integrated into earthly life.