Of some interest to Matthew's source for the Empty Tomb should be the Kiwi Hellenist last July especially 28 July. This comments upon some Hansen folklore, in its Roman-occupation Hellenic form for instance Phaedrus. One might consider the folklore deutero-Aesopic - or, given the misogyny, -Hesiodic.
The K.H. doesn't respect Neil Godfrey despite that Vridar's 2019 take... doesn't even touch on K.H.'s argument, as far as I can read both. At the time I bravely chose not to comment, lacking the competence. There's much on Vridar's site that irritates me but there's much more to be said for picking one's battles.
Anyway since Mark (as far as we know) doesn't mention a guard at the Tomb, I doubt he owes anything to the fable, and K.H. seems to back away from that too. Mark cared solely to establish the chain-of-custody; and Mark also couldn't have Peter there, likely for the simple reason all Christendom knew that Peter was not there. Matthew is he who introduced the guard. (Or Q. If you believe in Q. I don't.)
No comments:
Post a Comment