The Gospel According To Mark – Clever Myth-Making
In my previous post (see below in 'My Previous Posts') I explained a few of the reasons why the canonical Gospels are anonymous works and are not, in any shape or form, historical documents or a biography of Jesus Christ.
In this post, we will be looking at the Gospel of Mark (70-73 AD) and seeing how it is a cleverly crafted piece of myth-making. Because this is only a post and not a book I will only be able to give a couple of examples based around the Passover narrative that help to illustrate the myth-making. There are so many examples that show Marks Gospel is a complete fabrication that I recommend the following books/articles below to those that are interested in doing more research.
Hidden Meaning in Mark's Gospel by Dick Harfield
On the Historicity of Jesus – Why We Might Have Reason for Doubt by Richard Carrier
David Fitzgerald. Jesus: Mything In Action, Vol 1, Vol 2 & Vol 3. By David Fitzgerald.Jesus Did Not Exist: A Debate Among Atheists. By Raphael Lataster.
The last three books also list numerous references to other authors dealing with the subject.
I will refer to the Gospel of Mark as simply Mark from here on in.
Let’s jump straight in and see an example of the way that Mark builds an allegorical myth. Mark 15.6-15 deals with Pontius Pilate and the release of Barabbas
Now it was the custom at the festival to release a prisoner whom the people requested. A man called Barabbas was in prison with the insurrectionists who had committed murder in the uprising. The crowd came up and asked Pilate to do for them what he usually did. “Do you want me to release to you the king of the Jews?” asked Pilate, knowing it was out of self-interest that the chief priests had handed Jesus over to him. But the chief priests stirred up the crowd to have Pilate release Barabbas instead. “What shall I do, then, with the one you call the king of the Jews?” Pilate asked them. “Crucify him!” they shouted. “Why? What crime has he committed?” asked Pilate. But they shouted all the louder, “Crucify him!” Wanting to satisfy the crowd, Pilate released Barabbas to them. He had Jesus flogged, and handed him over to be crucified. (New International Version)[1]
As a historical fact, this makes no sense what-so-ever. There is no record of there having been a custom of releasing a prisoner in this fashion. It is also extremely implausible that Pilate, well known for his ruthlessness and cruelty, would allow a murderer and rebel to go free. No this isn’t history at all. But why would Mark write it?
The name Barabbas points to what is happening here. Bar-Abbas means ‘Son of the Father’ in Aramaic (in some early Syriac Christian manuscripts he is even called Jesus Barabbas). In Marks story then we have two men, both of whom are ‘sons of the father’. One ends up being released while the other is killed.
This neatly mirrors the Yom Kippur Atonement Ceremony (Leviticus 16 and Mishnah, Yoma 6.)[2]. This yearly ritual entailed two identical goats being chosen. One was assigned to bear the sins of Israel and then let loose into the wilderness (This is where the term scapegoat comes from by the way) while the other was sacrificed to atone for those sins.
Mark has created his own parable here by having Barabbas (bearing the sins of murder and rebellion) being released. He is effectively saying that his readers should reject the sins of the Jews while instead embracing Jesus who was sacrificed so his blood will atone for those sins. However, he then goes one better.
The scapegoat of Yom Kippur is looked upon as being accursed
”And all of you spit upon it, and pierce it, and encircle its head with scarlet wool and thus let it be driven into the wilderness” (Barnabas 7.7-10)
In Marks story this is reversed with Jesus being treated exactly like the scapegoat; dressed in scarlet, scorned, beaten and spat upon and crowned and pierced while Barabbas, the actual scapegoat, is embraced by the Jews. Mark is pointing out Jewish blindness to what Jesus represents and that they have chosen their sins over their salvation.
Mark also mirrors the Jewish Passover in the rest of his Passover narrative. Let us look at the Torah ritual and how Mark has his Jesus copy it.
TORAH RITUAL:-
Passover lamb singled out and set aside on the tenth day of the month. (Exod 12.3)
MARK:-
Jesus is singled out by his triumphal entry into Jerusalem on the tenth of the month. (Mk.11)
TORAH RITUAL:-
The lamb is slain at twilight on the fourteenth day (Exod 12.6) then eaten when Passover begins on the fifteenth of the month. (the Jewish day begins at sundown so the lamb is slain just before sunset and eaten just after)
MARK:-
Jesus is symbolically eaten in place of the lamb on the fifteenth of the month (at the Last Supper – he declares the bread and wine to be his body and blood). They would normally be eating the Passover lamb. (Mk 14.16-17 & 14.22-24) Jesus is killed the next afternoon at exactly the same time (the ninth hour [3]) that the Passover lambs were slaughtered (although the day before) (Mk 15.33-34). At that time of year, the ninth hour corresponded to our 3 pm.
Mark has, therefore, symbolically represented Jesus as the Passover lamb and also (as we saw above in the Barabbas text) as the Yom Kippur goat.
He also cleverly ties in Jesus being known as the ‘firstfruits’ of the general resurrection (1 Cor. 15-20) and the Torah command that the day of the Firstfruits should take place the day after the first Sabbath following the Passover (Lev. 23.5,10-11) ie Sunday. Mark has Jesus rise from the dead on a Sunday symbolically linking him as the ‘firstfruits’ of the resurrected to the same ‘Day of Firstfruits’ (the offering of the first produce of the harvest).
Why?
Mark was a Christian response to the destruction of the Jewish Temple by the Romans in 70 AD. The whole Temple system of sacrifice (Passover and Yom Kippur) was gone, the Jewish nation was in complete disarray and perhaps many leaders of the early Christians were dead. What Mark does with his gospel is issue a general ‘There, there. Everything will be fine’ pat on the head to the Jewish/Christian community. He tells them that there is no need for the Temple cult anymore. It can be replaced this new brand of Christianity of faith and prayer and the renunciation of vengeance.
Mark also provided an easy and understandable gospel for the masses. There was no need to understand any deep esoteric meaning that the higher-ups in the Church may have been initiated into. Marks style of writing was deliberately down to earth and accessible to all. It also provided a blueprint for those who were converting people to this new faith.
We Have Only Skimmed The Surface
As I mentioned at the beginning, there are many examples that point to Mark being a completely made up (although brilliantly constructed) narrative. We haven’t touched on the parallels with Homers Iliad that Mark employs nor the narratives clever cyclic and Ring Structure construct. We haven’t explored how Marks Passover narrative seems to be based on a tale of Jesus ben Ananias written about by Josephus in his book ‘Jewish War’ Neither have we looked at how Mark mined the psalms for the crucifixion narrative or the fact that Jesus is modelled very closely on the mythic hero archetype of ancient literature.
To sum up. There is absolutely nothing in Mark that would lead one to conclude that Jesus was a historical figure. In fact, all the evidence points to Mark being a story made up to push a new cult.
Sources
[1] www.biblegateway.com
[2] Richard Carrier ‘On the Historicity of Jesus – Why We Might Have Reason for Doubt’ by Richard Carrier – Chapter 10 – ‘The Evidence of the Gospels’ – Section 4 – The Mythology of Mark.
[3] Josephus, Jewish War 6.423
David Fitzgerald. Jesus: Mything In Action, Vol 1, Vol 2 & Vol 3. By David Fitzgerald
Jesus Did Not Exist: A Debate Among Atheists. By Raphael Lataster.
Images
Trial of Jesus from www.gbcdecatur.org
Temple from www.mosaicmagazine.com
It's all nonsense. The gospels were written in the first century by eyewitnesses (Matthew, John) or those who talked to eyewitnesses (Mark, Luke). Other books of the New Testament were written by those who saw the risen Christ like Paul, James, and Jude.
The internal evidence of the books is overwhelming. We have passages such as these:
(Luke 1:1-4 NIV) Many have undertaken to draw up an account of the things that have been fulfilled among us, {2} just as they were handed down to us by those who from the first were eyewitnesses and servants of the word. {3} Therefore, since I myself have carefully investigated everything from the beginning, it seemed good also to me to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus, {4} so that you may know the certainty of the things you have been taught.
(2 Peter 1:16 NIV) We did not follow cleverly invented stories when we told you about the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but we were eyewitnesses of his majesty.
(1 Corinthians 15:3-8 NIV) For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance : that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, {4} that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, {5} and that he appeared to Peter, and then to the Twelve. {6} After that, he appeared to more than five hundred of the brothers at the same time, most of whom are still living, though some have fallen asleep. {7} Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles, {8} and last of all he appeared to me also, as to one abnormally born.
(Jude 1:3 NIV) Dear friends, although I was very eager to write to you about the salvation we share, I felt I had to write and urge you to contend for the faith that was once for all entrusted to the saints.
The bottom line is that people who try to destroy the authenticity of the Bible do so to justify their own sin or because they hate the way God runs the universe that He created.
I would like to briefly address the points you have made.
So to deal with the rest of your comment.
Finally:-
Have an enjoyable and safe holiday.
Information is taken from various sources including:-
David Fitzgerald. “Jesus, Mything In Action Vol II”
Richard Carrier. “On the Historicity Of Jesus.”
www.infidels.org
www.wiki.ironchariots.org