Letter from Clement on Secret Book of Mark

[rameumptom]

Ancient Letter, Modern Mystery: The “Secret Mark” Translation - Biblical Archaeology Review

This is a letter, supposedly from Clement, discussing the various Secret Books of Mark that came up in his day. Clement was a disciple of Peter. He explains that Peter and Mark (also Peter's disciple) wrote copious notes on the gospel. Mark took these down to Alexandria, where he wrote a secret gospel. Gnostic groups, including the Carpocratians, obtained a copy and adulterated it to fit their own beliefs.

Still, Clement states certain things that are true about the Secret Book of Mark:

1. There were secrets taught by Jesus to the initiated, things which were "not to be uttered."

2. Only a few were allowed to know the secrets, while most Christians were to only know the basics given in Mark's regular gospel.

3. The secret truths led the initiate "into the innermost sanctuary of that truth hidden by seven veils."

He mentions one story from the Secret Book of Mark, quoting from it, concerning a young rich man who Jesus raised from the dead. Then Jesus taught him the secret things, "And after six days Jesus told him what to do and in the evening the youth comes to him, wearing a linen cloth over his naked body. And he remained with him that night, for Jesus taught him the mystery of the kingdom of God." LDS will note how this sounds like the temple initiatory work. The Carpocratians and others used this to claim Jesus was having late night romps, but Clement and Mark knew that the secret initiations required the teachings to be done like this.

Once again, Joseph Smith "guessed" right on several things:

1. Some important teachings of Jesus and his disciples are not to be found in the Bible.

2. These important teachings included secrets that were to be kept from the world, and even from the regular members of the Christian Church.

3. These ancient teachings (veils, linen cloth, secrets that are unutterable) make sense in a modern LDS temple context.

[WmLee]

Could these "secrets" taught by the Savior perhaps be "sacred" and not so secret and "not uttered" because one unworthy, or unprepared, would not understand and only make a mockery of it?

[Misshalfway]

This stuff always fascinates me.

Thanks Ram dude!

[Traveler]

Could these "secrets" taught by the Savior perhaps be "sacred" and not so secret and "not uttered" because one unworthy, or unprepared, would not understand and only make a mockery of it?

In all cultures and all societies, including the society of Israel, there is an effort to maintain certain details and other specifics of covenants by attitudes of guarding and maintaining in high regard. This is because of the concept of valued treasures involved. A parallel in modern society may be associated with “secrets” in how we keep our money. Keeping our money hidden away in a “safe” or a special pocket of a wallet in order to keep it safe and separate from other possessions is not uncommon. Not just so that it will not be stolen or damaged but to avoid the appearances of flaunting and bragging.

The Traveler

[Snow]

This is a letter, supposedly from Clement...

"Supposedly" is right. Jacob Neusner - a eminent scholar known you BYU Studies fans - called Morton Smiths claims "outright fraud." Needless to say, Neusner is far from alone in that camp. For those unfamiliar with the caper, Morton Smith, a scholar of some merit claims to have found the letter in a monastery in 1958. He took pictures of the letter. While others later saw the letter, it is missing and cannot be examined for authenticity.

[dazed-and-confused]

all through the NT, there are references to "those that can see, and those that can here"......so to think that some teachings given to the desciples that might not include the masses would be obvious...despites the masses resentment of it and tendancy to disavow the authenticity of them...

tough luck...you're not part of that group...get over it and go on from where you are.

[joofob]

From a LDS perspective one should be grateful for the availability and access to such sacred teachings and covenants, because those able to receive such in the ancient church were a very selective group of individuals. It gives a new meaning to the prophecy that the Lords spirit will be poured out upon all flesh.

[Hemidakota]

I concur Joofob...I am grateful to eat the 'crumbs from the table' when it falls to the floor.

[Vort]

"Supposedly" is right. Jacob Neusner - a eminent scholar known you BYU Studies fans - called Morton Smiths claims "outright fraud." Needless to say, Neusner is far from alone in that camp. For those unfamiliar with the caper, Morton Smith, a scholar of some merit claims to have found the letter in a monastery in 1958. He took pictures of the letter. While others later saw the letter, it is missing and cannot be examined for authenticity.

If I remember correctly, the letter was supposed to have been transcribed into the flyleaf pages of a book, so even if they still existed for examination, they would not be "original" material. But analysis on them may have shown whether they were a medieval transcription or a modern hoax. Even if they proved to be the former, of course, that does not guarantee they would be legit.

[Snow]

If I remember correctly, the letter was supposed to have been transcribed into the flyleaf pages of a book, so even if they still existed for examination, they would not be "original" material. But analysis on them may have shown whether they were a medieval transcription or a modern hoax. Even if they proved to be the former, of course, that does not guarantee they would be legit.

As I recall - that is correct. It is supposed to be a copy of an ancient letter. I suppose there is room to believe on both sides as some scholars think it may possibly be legit while others think it is a forgery. I might point out that the letter alludes to a homosexual relationship between Jesus and Mark.

[Vort]

I might point out that the letter alludes to a homosexual relationship between Jesus and Mark.

Yes, you might point that out. If you did, you would be correct only if Morton Smith did create the fraudulent hoax (since I believe that was exactly the interpretation he gave to it). But if the transcription were medieval in origin, whether authentic or not, it probably does not refer to homosexual activity:

"And straightway, going in where the youth was, he stretched forth his hand and raised him, seizing his hand. But the youth, looking upon him, loved him and began to beseech him that he might be with him. And going out of the tomb they came into the house of the youth, for he was rich. And after six days Jesus told him what to do and in the evening the youth comes to him, wearing a linen cloth over his naked body. And he remained with him that night, for Jesus taught him the mystery of the kingdom of God."

If you are a 21st-century Westerner (or perhaps an ancient Greek), you might assume that the proximity of the words "loved", "naked body", and "night" must necessarily indicate sodomy. If you are not a 21st-century Westerner (or an ancient Greek), it's more likely you think that "love" refers to an emotional state of caring and appreciation, that "naked body" refers to the unclothed state beneath the linen cloth, and that "night" refers to the dark period when it's not day. This could then make cryptic reference to some teachings the Lord gave to this revived youth, perhaps something that involved him wearing a linen cloth over his naked body. No sexual perversions necessary.

[deseretgov]

"And straightway, going in where the youth was, he stretched forth his hand and raised him, seizing his hand. But the youth, looking upon him, loved him and began to beseech him that he might be with him. And going out of the tomb they came into the house of the youth, for he was rich. And after six days Jesus told him what to do and in the evening the youth comes to him, wearing a linen cloth over his naked body. And he remained with him that night, for Jesus taught him the mystery of the kingdom of God."

This makes it sound even more like the temple.

"wearing a linen cloth over his naked body...Jesus taught him the mystery of the kingdom of God."

[Snow]

Yes, you might point that out. If you did, you would be correct only if Morton Smith did create the fraudulent hoax (since I believe that was exactly the interpretation he gave to it). But if the transcription were medieval in origin, whether authentic or not, it probably does not refer to homosexual activity:

"And straightway, going in where the youth was, he stretched forth his hand and raised him, seizing his hand. But the youth, looking upon him, loved him and began to beseech him that he might be with him. And going out of the tomb they came into the house of the youth, for he was rich. And after six days Jesus told him what to do and in the evening the youth comes to him, wearing a linen cloth over his naked body. And he remained with him that night, for Jesus taught him the mystery of the kingdom of God."

If you are a 21st-century Westerner (or perhaps an ancient Greek), you might assume that the proximity of the words "loved", "naked body", and "night" must necessarily indicate sodomy. If you are not a 21st-century Westerner (or an ancient Greek), it's more likely you think that "love" refers to an emotional state of caring and appreciation, that "naked body" refers to the unclothed state beneath the linen cloth, and that "night" refers to the dark period when it's not day. This could then make cryptic reference to some teachings the Lord gave to this revived youth, perhaps something that involved him wearing a linen cloth over his naked body. No sexual perversions necessary.

Assuming that nakedness, love, nighttime etc, don't connotative physical love unless you are a modern day Western and maybe an ancient Greek.

Do I recall correct from the history books that prior to about 1900 CE there was no naked sex?