Concerning to this interesting text:
"The Gospel of Mark as Reaction and Allegory", by R.G.Price
After analyzing the Gospel of Mark -- checking it against its biblical references (of the Old Testment), the author concludes that the whole story is NOT based in any actual facts about Jesus, but only in literary evocations/citations of older texts (focused on the destruction of Israel).
The Gospel is, in that analysis, an allegory of the (contemporary) destruction of Jerusalem (70C.E.), unified by the allegorical character "Jesus". The text also suggests that the Gospel of Mark was influenced by Paul's texts.
What do you thing of Price's analysis?
Mark is usually thought to be telling of the events of the Jewish Revolt and the events that lead to the fall of Jerusalem and the destruction of the Temple that was devastating to the Jews at that the time. Jerusalem and the Temple were the center of religious life for Palestinian Jews, and the war with the Romans had wrecked the countryside and left thousands dead. So, it is easy to see why these horrible events were associate with the end times.
If Mark is speaking of the First Jewish Revolt, some had predicted earlier that the end would come during this war, which the author of Mark denied. Mark 13:7 "For nation will rise up against nation etc. an omen of the approaching period of the world, for the end is not yet." The author speaks of famine during this time when nation is rising against nation and Josephus reports the horrors of pestilence and famine during the First Jewish Revolt.
Mark 13: 6. "Many shall come in My name, saying, I am Christ, and shall deceive many."
The Jerusalem Church lead by James the Just had nothing to do with Christianity. They were not early Christians they were Jews. Hundreds of Christian gospels and sects existed, but Christianity had nothing to do with Judaism. The Gospels, written in Greek, with a messiah (savior god) had nothing to do with the Jewish term "mashiach", which means "the anointed one," and refers to the ancient practice of anointing kings with oil when they took the throne. The Jewish term mashiach refers to the one who will be anointed as king in the End of Days. It never meant a savior god that would die for sins. The word "mashiach" does not mean savior. The idea of a divine savior who sacrificed himself to save us from the consequences of our sins is utterly a Christian belief. It has no basis in Jewish thought. The Christian "messiah" comes from misinterpreting the word "mashiach". The Christian messiah is totally unrelated to the Jewish mashiach, a human king that would free the nation from Roman rule.
Paul the founder of Christianity's name was originally Saul. Paul came from Tarsus. Paul later claimed that he was a Jew of the Pharisee tribe of Benjamin. This is subject to doubt since the tribe of Benjamin had long ceased to exist, and Pharisee families were unknown in Tarsus. According to Paul's opponents he was a recent convert to Judaism. He was a tent maker or a leather-worker by trade not a scholar. James was the head of the Jerusalem church, and Paul or (Saul) opposed James. Saul was an active persecutor of the Jerusalem Church, entering its synagogues and arresting its members. Paul was collaborating with the high priest a Sadducee opponent of the Pharisees. It is very likely that Paul was employed by the Roman high priest to suppress movements that were regarded as a threat to the Roman occupation. Paul was traveling to Damascus when he had his vision. Damascus was not under Roman rule at the time. Paul was a persecutor of the Jews. Paul founded Christianity based on his vision of Jesus, this is weird, since an alleged Jewish Jesus or his disciples would have no reason to have established a "new religion". It is only the need to make it appear that Christianity and Judaism had some kind of continuity that led to the eventual watered down version was Paul's essential role.
There were hostilities between Paul and the Jerusalem Church. James was the leader of the Jerusalem Church. Paul diminished the importance of James through his "new religion" with the death of Jesus to save mankind from their sins, by making Jesus the messiah, and claiming that the Jews didn't recognize him. This view of Jesus' death seems to have come to Paul in his Damascus vision. Paul's visions do not have roots in Judaism, but in mystery-religion, with Paul was familiar with in Tarsus. The violent deaths of Osiris, Attis, Adonis, and Dionysus brought divination to their initiates. Paul, as founder of the new Christian mystery religion, initiated the Eucharist, echoing the communion meal of the mystery religions. The awkward insertion of eucharistic material based on I Corinthians 11:23-26 into the Last Supper accounts in the Gospels cannot disguise this, especially as the evidence is that the Jerusalem Church did not practice the Eucharist. The Jews considered all of this hogwash.
Follow us on:
ACA members! It's time to renew your ACA membership. You can do so online if you log in and then click here or check your e-mail for alternate instructions. Thanks for supporting the ACA.