The other of the two rich men said to him: Master, what good thing must I do that I may live? He said to him: Man, fulfil the law and the prophets. He answered him: That have I done. He said to him: Go and sell all that thou possessest and distribute it among the poor, and then come and follow me. But hte rich man then began to scratch his head and it (the saying) pleased him not. And the Lord said to him: How canst though say, I have fulfilled the law and the prophets? For it stands written in the law: Love thy neighbor as thyself; and behold, many of the brethren, sons of Abraham, are begrimed with dirt and die of hunger - and thy house is full of many good things and nothing at all comes forth from it to them! And he turned and said to Simon, his disciple, who was sitting by him: Simon, son of Jona, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of heaven.
Many commentators have noted that not only does (a) the story of Dives and Lazarus follow in the Diatessaron tradition but (b) the context of this narrative seems to naturally anticipate that story coming immediately after it.
Notice that there is a discussion of whether the Law gives 'life' just as we see in the Lazarus narrative. Also there is the bit about 'and behold, many of the brethren, sons of Abraham, are begrimed with dirt and die of hunger - and thy house is full of many good things and nothing at all comes forth from it to them' which anticipates the opening lines of the Dives and Lazarus narrative.
In any event these things have already been written about by other scholars before me. The bottom line being the unmistakable interweaving of stories from Mark and Luke in our canonical tradition into a seamless narrative which works the themes of life, death and the Law.
What I find particularly striking is the possibility that this trend might have continued into LGM 1 or a parallel resurrection related to it. I mean when we really think about it all that has ever been written about Secret Mark has reinforced whether or not it 'enough like canonical Mark' or 'too much like canonical Mark' (and thus 'proof' apparently that Morton Smith forged it).
I think that we should take the discussion outside of these rather silly confines and ask whether or not Secret Mark and its two additions - (a) a resurrection (and baptism?) narrative and (b) that little addition in the middle of his journey into Jericho - might be related to the Diatessaron tradition.
In the latter case (LGM 2) there can be no doubt what so ever:
Secret Mark inserted material at Mark 10:41
And he comes into Jericho, and the sister of the youth whom Jesus loved and his mother and Salome were there, and Jesus did not receive them ...
We don't know what followed these words. We have no more information about what Clement originally wrote from this point in the original text. Our canonical text of Mark reads:
Then they came to Jericho. As Jesus and his disciples, together with a large crowd, were leaving the city, a blind man, Bartimaeus (that is, the Son of Timaeus), was sitting by the roadside begging. When he heard that it was Jesus of Nazareth, he began to shout, "Jesus, Son of David, have mercy on me!"
Yet what are the odds that the Diatessaron would have an insertion IN THE EXACT SAME PLACE AS SECRET MARK? The Diatessaron reads:
And when Jesus entered and passed through Jericho, there was a man named Zacchaeus, rich, and chief of the publicans. And he desired to see Jesus who he was; and he was not able for the pressure of the crowd, because Zacchaeus was little of stature. And he hastened, and went before Jesus, and went up into an unripe fig tree to see Jesus: for he was to pass thus. And when Jesus came to that place, he saw him, and said unto him, Make haste, and come down, Zacchaeus: today I must be in thy house. And he hastened, and came down, and received him joyfully. And when they all saw, they murmured, and said, He hath gone in and lodged with a man that is a sinner. So Zacchaeus stood, and said unto Jesus, My Lord, now half of my possessions I give to the poor, and what I have unjustly taken from every man I give him fourfold. Jesus said unto him, Today is salvation come to this house, because this man also is a son of Abraham. For the Son of man came to seek and save the thing that was lost. And when Jesus went out of Jericho, he and his disciples, there came after him a great multitude. And there was a blind man sitting by the way side begging. And his name was Timaeus, the son of Timaeus. And he heard the sound of the multitude passing, and asked, Who is this? etc ...
Yes, there is no proof here that LGM 2 was ever part of the Diatessaron but that's not the point. There are undoubtedly thousands of words in the Gospel of Mark. What are the chances that two wholly unrelated texts would add material AT THE EXACT SAME PLACE IN THE GOSPEL.
Yet in the case of this developing narrative in the single, long gospel known to Clement's successor Origen it is impossible not to see that that rich youth left stranded in hell is abruptly cut off when he asks:
Lord, unless one rise up again, they will not believe. Abraham said to him: If they believe not Moses and the prophets, neither will they believe, if one rise again.
This is the conversation between the rich youth and Abraham in the underworld. If we didn't know better we would expect Jesus should be resurrecting this guy right out of Hades. Yet, this doesn't appear in any surviving gospel text right?
Wrong ...
The Acts of John (which Connolly has already demonstrated depends on a Diatessaron for its gospel citations) not only seems to echo the same 'set up' for the Dives and Lazarus story (i.e. two rich individuals ending up with different fates in the underworld) but also has a resurrection narrative immediately follow this story. Let's cite directly from two sources which know the contents of the Acts of John. The first develops as follows:
Then the holy John said unto them: Go, and redeem to you the lands which ye have sold, for ye have lost the estates of heaven. [cf. Luke 12:16] Buy yourselves silken raiment, that for a time ye may shine like the rose which showeth its fragrance and redness and suddenly fadeth away. For ye sighed at beholding your servants and groaned that ye were become poor. Flourish, therefore, that ye may fade: be rich for the time, that ye may be beggars for ever. Is not the Lord's hand able to make riches overflowing and unsurpassably glorious? but he hath appointed a conflict for souls, that they may believe that they shall have eternal riches, who for his name's sake have refused temporal wealth. [cf. Mark 10:21] Indeed, our master told us concerning a certain rich man who feasted every day and shone with gold and purple, at whose door lay a beggar, Lazarus, who desired to receive even the crumbs that fell from his table, and no man gave unto him. And it came to pass that on one day they died, both of them, and that beggar was taken into the rest which is in Abraham's bosom, but the rich man was cast into flaming fire: out of which he lifted up his eyes and saw Lazarus, and prayed him to dip his finger in water and cool his mouth for he was tormented in the flames. And Abraham answered him and said: Remember, son, that thou receivedst good things in thy life, but this Lazarus likewise evil things. Wherefore rightly is he now comforted while thou art tormented, and besides all this, a great gulf is fixed between you and us, so that neither can they come thence hither, nor hither thence. But he answered: I have five brethren: I pray that some one may go to warn them, that they come not into this flame. And Abraham said to him: They have Moses and the prophets, let them hear them. To that he answered: Lord, unless one rise up again, they will not believe. Abraham said to him: If they believe not Moses and the prophets, neither will they believe, if one rise again. And these words our Lord and Master confirmed by examples of mighty works: for when they said to him: Who hath come hither from thence, that we may believe him? he answered: Bring hither the dead whom ye have. And when they had brought unto him a young man which was dead (Ps.-Mellitus: three dead corpses), he was waked up by him as one that sleepeth, and confirmed all his words.
But wherefore should I speak of my Lord, when at this present there are those whom in his name and in your presence and sight I have raised from the dead: in whose name ye have seen palsied men healed, lepers cleansed, blind men enlightened, and many delivered from evil spirits ? But the riches of these mighty works they cannot have who have desired to have earthly wealth. Finally, when ye yourselves went unto the sick and called upon the name of Jesus Christ, they were healed: ye did drive out devils and restore light to the blind. Behold, this grace is taken from you, and ye are become wretched, who were mighty and great. And where as there was such fear of you upon the devils that at your bidding they left the men whom they possessed, now ye will be in fear of the devils.
There can be no doubt that in the earliest versions of this narrative Leucius (the author of the original Acts of John) is citing from a Diatessaron that had Jesus resurrect the young rich person to 'confirm all his words.' John makes clear when he is speaking in his own voice (and not citing from the Diatessaron when he says "why should I speak of my Lord, when at this present there are those whom in his name and in your presence and sight I have raised from the dead? etc."
The point of course is not that this is an exact match for LGM 1 but that within the original single, long gospel tradition which preceded Irenaeus' refashioning of the gospel into four there were a variety of texts which confirmed the basic understanding that a resurrection narrative followed the Lazarus and Dives story.
Something to consider when evaluating the authenticity of Morton Smith's discovery ...
If you are interested in reading how this observation fits within my greater understanding of the workings of Secret Mark WITHIN the contemporary Alexandrian Church please go here
If you want to read more about how Alexandrian Christianity was rooted in the Jewish traditions of Alexandria, Philo of Alexandria and more feel free to purchase my new book here
