Claremont Colleges Scholarship @ Claremont CGU Theses & Dissertations CGU Student Scholarship 2018 Mark’s Young Man and Homer’s Elpenor: Mark 14:51-52, 16:1-8 and Odyssey 10-12 Sungchan Moon Recommended Citation Moon, Sungchan. (2018). Mark’s Young Man and Homer’s Elpenor: Mark 14:51-52, 16:1-8 and Odyssey 10-12. CGU Theses & Dissertations, 112. https://scholarship.claremont.edu/cgu_etd/112. doi: 10.5642/cguetd/112 This Open Access Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the CGU Student Scholarship at Scholarship @ Claremont. It has been accepted for inclusion in CGU Theses & Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Scholarship @ Claremont. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Mark’s Young Man and Homer’s Elpenor Mark 14:51-52, 16:1-8 and Odyssey 10-12 by Sungchan Moon Claremont Graduate University 2018 © Copyright Sungchan Moon, 2018 All rights reserved. APPROVAL OF THE DISSERTATION COMMITTEE This dissertation has been duly read, reviewed, and critiqued by the Committee listed below, which hereby approves the manuscript of Sungchan Moon as fulfilling the scope and quality requirements for meriting the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. Dr. Dennis R. MacDonald, Chair Claremont School of Theology Dr. Tammi J. Schneider, Member Claremont Graduate University Dr. Gary Gilbert, Member Claremont McKenna College Abstract Mark’s Young Man and Homer’s Elpenor Mark 14:51-52, 16:1-8 and Odyssey 10-12 by Sungchan Moon Claremont Graduate University: 2018 Mark obviously says that all of the disciples of Jesus desert him and flee (Mark 14:50). Mark, however, introduces a young man as a new character who was following Jesus like other disciples and fled naked before Jesus’s suffering. This young man is the most enigmatic character in Mark. In particular, the young man never appears in other Gospels. For this reason, the young man’s identity and his conduct has been a topic of longstanding dispute among scholars. Some regard him as historical figures, one of Jesus’ own disciples like John the son of Zebedee, James the Lord’s brother, or John Mark. They consider him as witness of Jesus. Others take the young man to be symbolic figures like an angel, Jesus himself, Christian initiate, and a representative of disciples’ reality. In this work, I suggest that the young man is Mark’ literary creation by imitating Homeric model of Elpenor. Mark relies on a specific genetic model, not on historical reports of witness or symbolic interpretation. Mark’s literary intention by using Homer’s Elpenor is to substitute his own value for Homer’s. The idea of the afterlife in Homeric epics is replaced to Christianized the concept of the afterlife that is resurrection. In addition, the identity of the young man is Mark’s creation as a stand-in to substitute for Jesus and exculpate him from responsibility for not warning his disciples before the Jewish Temple destruction. According to Mark’s Gospel, Jesus himself told his disciples in advance. Moreover, the young man in Jesus’s empty tomb provides the three women with the message of Jesus to escape from the tragic incident. Therefore, nobody would blame Jesus for the suffering of the Jerusalem Church in Jewish war. The women’s failure to transmit the message doomed Jesus’ followers to the carnage of the war. The identity of the young man in Mark’s Gospel can be detected by considering Mark’s literary model and his mimetic achievement. As a creative and skillful author, Mark imitates well-known model in Greco-Roman literary world. Mark, however, does not just copy of the model; Mark emulates and transforms it to replace the concept of the afterlife. In addition, Mark’s mimetic achievement in the episode of the young man is to convey the supremacy of Jesus by exculpating him from responsibility not saving his followers from the catastrophe. Mark’s Gospel is the response for the issue. In sum, Mark’s dependence on Homer explains the most enigmatic character and scene in Mark. For My Lovely Children Gaeun and Gahyun vi ACKNOWLEDGMENT It has been a long journey for me to arrive at this final moment to earn the Ph.D. degree. It was a lonely and fierce fight. However, with the support and help of many people, this journey has come to this stage. There is no doubt that this dissertation would not have been possible without the guidance and the help of those who sincerely contributed and extended their valuable assistance for me. First and foremost, I would like to express the deepest appreciation to my supervising guide and mentor, Dr. Dennis R. MacDonald, who has continually and convincingly conveyed a spirit of adventure in regard to research and scholarship. He is not only a genius and creative scholar, but also a kind and generous friend. In particular, I am deeply grateful to him for delivering me out of the end of my rope and setting me on the right track. I extend my sincere thanks to Dr. Tammi J. Schneider. She has to spend much time to rescue me from the mire. I also appreciate that she read my dissertation thoroughly and gave me a good insight. It is true that she contributed to the better quality of my dissertation. In addition, I would like to thank Dr. Gary Gilbert. As a precious committee member, he sincerely encouraged me to pursue this degree and supported me for many years. My deepest gratitude goes to my family for their unflagging love and support throughout my life. My parents, Rev. Donghee Moon and Younghee Park, took good care of me emotionally and financially. Without their unceasing prayer and support, I would not have finished this dissertation. I am also grateful to my parents-in-law, Jongkyu Byeon and Sunye Ko, for endless support and prayer with their warm love and continued patience. I would like to give special thanks to my friends, in particular, Yil Song and Hyun’s family. Dr. Song treated me as his own brother. He supported me and helped my family with vii brotherly affection. I will not forget the hospitality of Hyun’s family. They provided me with a good place while I was staying away from my family to write my dissertation. I would especially like to thank my wife, Eunhye Byeon. She has made countless sacrifices to help me get to this point. My lovely children, Gaeun and Gahyun, have been my joy, hope, and my all during the journey. I am very thankful to God for all the blessings that have come to me through this journey. Χάριτι δέ Θεοῦ Εἰμι ὃ Εἰμι Summer 2018 Sungchan Moon viii ABBREVIATIONS AB The Anchor Bible AC Acta Classica AN Ancient Narrative BBR Bulletin for Biblical Research Bib Biblica CBQ Catholic Biblical Quarterly CP Classic Biblical Quarterly CQ The Classical Quarterly EGLBS Eastern Great Lakes Biblical Society ExpTim Expository Times HTS Hervormde Theological Studies (Theological Studies) JBL Journal of Biblical Literature JECS Journal of Early Christian Studies JETS Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society JHC Journal of Higher Criticism JHS The Journal of Hellenic Studies JR Journal of Religion NT Novum Testamentum PRSt Perspective Religious Studies SBL Society of Biblical Literature SC Second Century SP Studies in Philology STI Swedish Theological Institute TJT Toronto Journal of Theology WS Wiener Studien ix Table of Contents INTRODUCTION ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 Discussion of the Problem ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 2 Discussion of the Thesis ------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3 Methodology -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 6 CHAPTER ONE: THE HISTORY OF INTERPRETATION OF MARK 14:51-52 ----------------------------- 9 Who do Scholars Say the Young Man Is? ----------------------------------------------------- 9 The Young Man as a Historical Figure ------------------------------------------------- 10 The Young Man as a Symbolic Figure --------------------------------------------------15 The Literary Connection Between Mark 14:51-52 and 16:1-8 ---------------------------- 22 Similarities in Content -------------------------------------------------------------------- 23 Mark’s Literary Technique -------------------------------------------------------------- 24 The Young Man as Mark’s Imitation of Elpenor in Homer’s Odyssey ------------------ 27 CHAPTER TWO: HOMER IN THE GRECO-ROMAN LITERARY WORLD -------------------------------- 31 Why Homer? ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 31 Homer in Greek Education --------------------------------------------------------------------- 32 Homeric Epics as Literary Models ------------------------------------------------------------ 35 Mark and Homer -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 38 CHAPTER THREE: MIMESIS CRITICISM ON MARK 14:51-52 AND 16:1-8 --------------------------------- 40 Criterion 1: Accessibility or Availability ---------------------------------------------------- 42 Some Controversies ----------------------------------------------------------------------- 43 Criterion 2: Analogy ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 48 Plato’s Myth of Er ------------------------------------------------------------------------- 48 x Plutarchus’s Thespesius ------------------------------------------------------------------ 53 Virgil’s Palinurus and Misenus --------------------------------------------------------- 56 Lucan’s Civil War ------------------------------------------------------------------------