Is the Secret Mark's Young Naked Josephus himself?

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
Giuseppe
Posts: 13732
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Is the Secret Mark's Young Naked Josephus himself?

Post by Giuseppe »

  • A reason to think so is that Josephus also betrayed the Zealots to go on the side of the Romans.
  • Josephus could be also the young rich who was reluctant to abandon his property for Jesus.
  • Josephus could be the young naked who received a secrete initiation (if Secret Mark is genuine) since we also are said that Joseph of Arimathea (=Josephus) was a secret disciple of Jesus (hence, by definition, requiring a secret initiation by Jesus).
  • Finally, prof Karel Hanhardt, if I am correct, argued for the Young Naked in the tomb as the same Josephus.
Giuseppe
Posts: 13732
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: Is the Secret Mark's Young Naked Josephus himself?

Post by Giuseppe »

And obviously, we know that in the real history a Jesus was entered "into secret league" with a Josephus.
davidmartin
Posts: 1589
Joined: Fri Jul 12, 2019 2:51 pm

Re: Is the Secret Mark's Young Naked Josephus himself?

Post by davidmartin »

not likely. The naked man is probably Jesus, the soldiers grabbed his 'clothes' (physical body) while his 'naked' spirit escaped the crucifixion
That same escape theme why Simon carried the cross. That 'deviant' readings exist shows even when the crucifixion is in the gospels they don't have the meaning of a sacrifice. The 'naked' is the giveaway, it's saying look behind the superficial meaning and attract the attention of the reader that what's about to happen is Jesus not being killed.
Giuseppe
Posts: 13732
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: Is the Secret Mark's Young Naked Josephus himself?

Post by Giuseppe »

You should advance the identity of the young naked everywhere he appears (at the tomb; in Secret Mark; the young rich; at the Getsemani). Therefore he is not Jesus.
davidmartin
Posts: 1589
Joined: Fri Jul 12, 2019 2:51 pm

Re: Is the Secret Mark's Young Naked Josephus himself?

Post by davidmartin »

haha this makes it more likely he is Jesus not less, the other appearances gave them the idea to put him in again, as a symbol. Jesus, naked on the cross like the young man is. That's what people would think reading it, they wouldn't think 'oh that's the Jewish historian Josephus'. This is especially true if Mark didn't have a resurrection and it doesn't. so the resurrection is previewed pre-crucifixion when everyone expects it afterwards - the naked young man is the resurrection in Mark, Jesus escaping back to the Father, but it happens out of sync before the cross!
Giuseppe
Posts: 13732
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: Is the Secret Mark's Young Naked Josephus himself?

Post by Giuseppe »

Jesus is not naked on the cross. The guards had removed from him only the garment, not the rest.


A correction: Karel Hanhart identifies the young naked at the tomb with Paul, not with Josephus.

In such sense, I would add the irony of the Gerasene demonic (=Paul) being not more the one sent by Jesus in the Decapolis, but one who sends Peter and the 11 to the Risen Jesus in Galilee.
davidmartin
Posts: 1589
Joined: Fri Jul 12, 2019 2:51 pm

Re: Is the Secret Mark's Young Naked Josephus himself?

Post by davidmartin »

Well, the Gerasene demonic as Paul is plausible, to stick the boot in as it were, but Hanhart can't be serious about the young naked being him i don't see the point of that. I do not know about whether Jesus is naked on the cross i thought it was one of the possibilities to make it look like a new birth, complete the baptismal imagery for what was the loss of their leader and seeming end of the movement. They'd have all sorts of symbols, i think the sacrificial one was unoriginal, i mean, it's not in the gospels much, they didn't know how Christianity was supposed to work yet
Giuseppe
Posts: 13732
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: Is the Secret Mark's Young Naked Josephus himself?

Post by Giuseppe »

davidmartin wrote: Mon Mar 27, 2023 7:44 am but Hanhart can't be serious about the young naked being him i don't see the point of that.
Hanhart makes a persuasive case that Paul is him. Just as Paul is the Beloved Disciple in the Fourth Gospel.

I quote Hanhart:

Once the "youth" had been identified, it was possible to solve the puzzling question concerning the number of angels the women see. With this new key the lock easily opened.

(a) Matthew, wanting to avoid a direct reference to Paul and thus neutralize Paul's alleged antinomianism, created his own ironic midrash ... And instead of Mark's comforting angelus interpres, we now read of a fiery angel of YHWH rolling the stone from the entrance of the monument in the evening...

[...]
And so Luke, with his penchant for reconciling differences, had the women see "two men", that is, the angels of Paul and Peter...

(The Open Tomb, p. 568, cursive original, my bold)

Hanhart calls 'anachronism' the presence of Paul in the Jesus story allegorizing the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 CE, but if Paul was really active during the 70 CE, then eo ipso the anachronism disappears.
User avatar
Sinouhe
Posts: 495
Joined: Tue Dec 28, 2021 1:12 pm

Re: Is the Secret Mark's Young Naked Josephus himself?

Post by Sinouhe »

It seemed to me that it was now common knowledge that the Gospel of Mark is based on the prophetic texts of the Old Testament.

If something seems strange or illogical, we should go and see if it does not come from the OT.

And this is once again the best explanation for Mark 14:52
Giuseppe
Posts: 13732
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: Is the Secret Mark's Young Naked Josephus himself?

Post by Giuseppe »

Sinouhe wrote: Mon Mar 27, 2023 8:35 am It seemed to me that it was now common knowledge that the Gospel of Mark is based on the prophetic texts of the Old Testament.
Frankly I can't ignore the sectarian polemic and supporting only the midrash fom OT. Especially so when the obsession on the OT is found among anti-marcionites.

At any case, Hanhart satisfies you, too:

And so, just as Isaiah had spoken to the wicked Shebna of doom and hope was promised to the women anxious about the fate of Zion (LXX 32:9; 33:10, 15.22), so the "youth" would promise the "daughters of Zion" the continued guidance of the Risen One at a time when all seemed lost.

(ibid., p. 565)

The "time when all seemed lost" is the 70 CE, when Mark places the scene of the Empty Tomb.
Post Reply