Uncovering the Markan Allegory

[FallentoReason]

I thought that I should probably start backing up my claim that the Gospels are allegory. Strictly speaking actually, Mark is the true allegory and became the 'foundation' for which the Jesus myth took off, with the other Gospels clearly missing the point of Mark. We know it took off from here because the evidence is there in the NT in the form of Matthew, Luke and John. Anyways, that's a whole different discussion though. Let's have a look at Mark.

---JOHN THE BAPTIST AS ELIJAH---

The beginning of Mark gives us an insight on who John the Baptist was meant to represent and even a little about why Mark was written.

Mark 1:2,3
[2] As it is written in the prophets, behold, I send my messenger before your face, who will prepare your way, [3] the voice of one crying in the wilderness: 'prepare the way of the Lord, make his paths straight'.

This is setting up the reader to expect a character to fit this role. The next verse introduces us to this character: "[4]John appeared, baptizing in the wilderness...". Further down we get given a key description of what John is wearing: "[6]Now John was clothed with camel's hair and wore a leather belt around his waist and ate locusts and wild honey."

The author of Mark brilliantly gives us the information needed to understand that John the Baptist is Elijah. Let's have a look at what he was referencing:

Mark 1:2 is a reference to Malachi 3:1 which reads: "[1] Behold, I send my messenger and he will prepare the way before me...". This is our first clue. Note that the end of Malachi (4:5) ends with this: "[5] Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the great and terrible day of the LORD comes." The next verse being referenced (Mark 1:3) comes from Isaiah 40:3 which reads: "[3] A voice of one crying out in the wilderness: 'Prepare the way of the Lord; make straight the paths of our God.'" The third reference (Mark 1:6) points to 2 Kings 1:8 which leaves us without a doubt that John the Baptists represents Elijah: "[8] They replied, 'He was a man with a garment of hair and with a leather belt around his waist.' The king said, 'That was Elijah the Tishbite.'"

From the very beginning it should be noted that Mark was cleverly referencing the OT through the story he was telling. This is explicitly saying that by no means was he writing history. Well, what is the point of Mark then? To answer this question we need to understand why he was referencing those books.

The first book he references, Malachi, talks about the coming judgement of God on Israel. Then the second book being referenced is Isaiah where in chapter 39 it talks about the Babylonians coming to plunder Jerusalem and then Isaiah 40 talks of this as having been a punishment for the sins of the people which has now been paid. From this we see that the first two scriptural references made in Mark refer to passages that talk about destruction and judgment brought upon the Jews. Both passages also describe this punishment as having been fulfilled and say that a time of healing will follow as the favor of the Lord returns to the Jews.

The beginning of Mark seems to be related to events that happened around the time of it being written, like the destruction of Jerusalem which was 'fulfilled' in 70 A.D. It seems like the author of Mark reacted to this by writing Mark.

[Godscreated]

I thought that I should probably start backing up my claim that the Gospels are allegory. Strictly speaking actually, Mark is the true allegory and became the 'foundation' for which the Jesus myth took off, with the other Gospels clearly missing the point of Mark. We know it took off from here because the evidence is there in the NT in the form of Matthew, Luke and John. Anyways, that's a whole different discussion though. Let's have a look at Mark.

---JOHN THE BAPTIST AS ELIJAH---

The beginning of Mark gives us an insight on who John the Baptist was meant to represent and even a little about why Mark was written.

Mark 1:2,3
[2] As it is written in the prophets, behold, I send my messenger before your face, who will prepare your way, [3] the voice of one crying in the wilderness: 'prepare the way of the Lord, make his paths straight'.

This is setting up the reader to expect a character to fit this role. The next verse introduces us to this character: "[4]John appeared, baptizing in the wilderness...". Further down we get given a key description of what John is wearing: "[6]Now John was clothed with camel's hair and wore a leather belt around his waist and ate locusts and wild honey."

The author of Mark brilliantly gives us the information needed to understand that John the Baptist is Elijah. Let's have a look at what he was referencing:

Mark 1:2 is a reference to Malachi 3:1 which reads: "[1] Behold, I send my messenger and he will prepare the way before me...". This is our first clue. Note that the end of Malachi (4:5) ends with this: "[5] Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the great and terrible day of the LORD comes." The next verse being referenced (Mark 1:3) comes from Isaiah 40:3 which reads: "[3] A voice of one crying out in the wilderness: 'Prepare the way of the Lord; make straight the paths of our God.'" The third reference (Mark 1:6) points to 2 Kings 1:8 which leaves us without a doubt that John the Baptists represents Elijah: "[8] They replied, 'He was a man with a garment of hair and with a leather belt around his waist.' The king said, 'That was Elijah the Tishbite.'"

From the very beginning it should be noted that Mark was cleverly referencing the OT through the story he was telling. This is explicitly saying that by no means was he writing history. Well, what is the point of Mark then? To answer this question we need to understand why he was referencing those books.

The first book he references, Malachi, talks about the coming judgement of God on Israel. Then the second book being referenced is Isaiah where in chapter 39 it talks about the Babylonians coming to plunder Jerusalem and then Isaiah 40 talks of this as having been a punishment for the sins of the people which has now been paid. From this we see that the first two scriptural references made in Mark refer to passages that talk about destruction and judgment brought upon the Jews. Both passages also describe this punishment as having been fulfilled and say that a time of healing will follow as the favor of the Lord returns to the Jews.

The beginning of Mark seems to be related to events that happened around the time of it being written, like the destruction of Jerusalem which was 'fulfilled' in 70 A.D. It seems like the author of Mark reacted to this by writing Mark.

Malachi 4:5 is about the day that Christ returns and this will mark the end. You are trying to pick verses that do not apply to the ministry of Christ.
Mark 1:6 and 2Kings 1:8 shows that these two men serving God wore the same type of clothing, clothing commonly worn by many men.

[Norfolk And Chance]

Yes, and it's still all made up.

[Minimalist]

the Lord, whom ye seek, shall suddenly come to his temple, even the messenger of the covenant, whom ye delight in: behold, he shall come, saith the Lord of hosts.

2 But who may abide the day of his coming? and who shall stand when he appeareth? for he is like a refiner's fire, and like fullers' soap:

3 And he shall sit as a refiner and purifier of silver: and he shall purify the sons of Levi, and purge them as gold and silver, that they may offer unto the Lord an offering in righteousness.

Well, it makes a nice bass "recitativo" and aria in Handel's Messuah and a short but spiffy chorus after the bass sits down.

But still, nothing but fucking drivel.

[FallentoReason]

Malachi 4:5 is about the day that Christ returns and this will mark the end.

Correct. It also explicitly says that on this day Elijah will be sent. You can't get past the fact that it's another reference to Elijah. It's there in black and white.

You are trying to pick verses that do not apply to the ministry of Christ.

This is the irony of the entire Christian faith. Can't you see I'm not doing the picking? The 'picking' has already been done by Mark from the OT. Later people that read this (Matthew, Luke) got confused and thought it must have been literal history and therefore the misunderstanding that Christ was a person was born.

The biggest religion in the world was sparked by an allegory.

Mark 1:6 and 2Kings 1:8 shows that these two men serving God wore the same type of clothing, clothing commonly worn by many men.

Within the first 6 verses of Mark there are 3 references to the OT. Two of these are directly linked to Elijah. Coincidence? I don't think so.

[Godscreated]

Malachi 4:5 is about the day that Christ returns and this will mark the end.

Correct. It also explicitly says that on this day Elijah will be sent. You can't get past the fact that it's another reference to Elijah. It's there in black and white.

Yes go to Revelations there is were this verse is confirmed, Elijah and Moses will be sent at the end of time as messengers of the Gospel. John the Baptist was not Elijah.

You are trying to pick verses that do not apply to the ministry of Christ.

This is the irony of the entire Christian faith. Can't you see I'm not doing the picking? The 'picking' has already been done by Mark from the OT. Later people that read this (Matthew, Luke) got confused and thought it must have been literal history and therefore the misunderstanding that Christ was a person was born.

No Mark writes about the life of Jesus and tells it as he experienced it as a disciple. Mark picked out nothing form the OT, Christ's life revealed the OT prophecies written about Him. Many were not even recognized until after Christ's resurrection, they could not and would not have be recognized as prophecies if Jesus had not fulfilled them. Yes you are picking by believing and announcing this stuff. Stuff you've gotten from others.

The biggest religion in the world was sparked by an allegory.

All the allegorical religions and their gods are long dead, explain why Christianity isn't.

Mark 1:6 and 2Kings 1:8 shows that these two men serving God wore the same type of clothing, clothing commonly worn by many men.

Within the first 6 verses of Mark there are 3 references to the OT. Two of these are directly linked to Elijah. Coincidence? I don't think so.

So, Mark is sighting prophecies fulfilled, many people ate honey an locus in those days and still do today, it is a healthy diet. No coincidence, fulfilled prophecies. The references you want to make into something they are not do have a purpose, to show that John the Baptist was equal to Elijah in his serves to God. Where does it say in the OT that Elijah had his head cut off, why wasn't such a great servant as John the Baptist taken up into heaven without dying.

[Minimalist]

if Jesus had not fulfilled them.

Jesus didn't fulfill shit.

The mashiach will bring about the political and spiritual redemption of the Jewish people by bringing us back to Israel and restoring Jerusalem (Isaiah 11:11-12; Jeremiah 23:8; 30:3; Hosea 3:4-5).

He will establish a government in Israel that will be the center of all world government, both for Jews and gentiles (Isaiah 2:2-4; 11:10; 42:1).

He will rebuild the Temple and re-establish its worship (Jeremiah 33:18).

He will restore the religious court system of Israel and establish Jewish law as the law of the land (Jeremiah 33:15).

Like a shitty ballplayer your boy went 0-4. Ship his sorry ass back to the minors.

[FallentoReason]

Yes go to Revelations there is were this verse is confirmed, Elijah and Moses will be sent at the end of time as messengers of the Gospel. John the Baptist was not Elijah.

Correct. John was not literally Elijah but an allegory for Elijah, as the references show.

No Mark writes about the life of Jesus and tells it as he experienced it as a disciple.

I don't know if you even believe what you said? 'Tradition' says Mark was the disciple of Peter NOT Jesus. No one disputes the fact that Mark was NOT a witness account. 'Tradition' even confirms that.

Mark picked out nothing form the OT, Christ's life revealed the OT prophecies written about Him.

Why is there no reason to believe that he referenced the bits I have shared? Christ's life was an allegory because it can be shown that Mark was writing allegorically not historically.

Many were not even recognized until after Christ's resurrection,

Mark didn't write about a resurrection.

they could not and would not have be recognized as prophecies if Jesus had not fulfilled them.

Clearly if Mark was using the OT as the basis for what he was writing then the character of Jesus was undeniably going to 'fulfil' these things, but in an allegorical manner because it can be shown that Mark wasn't writing history.

Yes you are picking by believing and announcing this stuff. Stuff you've gotten from others.

What's wrong with doing a little research? You can't discredit what could be potentially the truth because it's 'stuff from others'. The truth is the truth.

All the allegorical religions and their gods are long dead, explain why Christianity isn't.

Because those communities that gave us Matthew, Luke and John took Mark the wrong way. In fact, let's take a step back from Christianity. If we together suppose that Mark was actually writing allegorically then we can conclude Jesus wasn't a person. Remember we're just assuming here alright? Now, if this were true then TRUE Christianity is no different to the Mithraic mysteries (that word should sound familiar. Paul likes using the word 'mystery' quite a bit). The early Church i.e. Catholicism and Mithraism had the same rituals that were related to their 'saviour' Gods. What I'm getting at here, and somewhat expanding on your question, is that Christianity is nothing special. It's actually interchangeable with Mithraism but it so happens that Mark decided to write this allegory which has now sparked an entire series of events which brings us to today; where there are 2.2 billion people that have misunderstood what these cults consisted of.

Mark 1:6 and 2Kings 1:8 shows that these two men serving God wore the same type of clothing, clothing commonly worn by many men.

Within the first 6 verses of Mark there are 3 references to the OT. Two of these are directly linked to Elijah. Coincidence? I don't think so.

So, Mark is sighting prophecies fulfilled, many people ate honey an locus in those days and still do today, it is a healthy diet. No coincidence, fulfilled prophecies. The references you want to make into something they are not do have a purpose, to show that John the Baptist was equal to Elijah in his serves to God.

You can't have your cake and eat it. Either it is or it isn't a reference to Elijah.

The thing that doesn't work with your view that all this is history and at the same time they were actually 'mirroring' the OT is that it just doesn't happen that way in reality. We might as well be reading a script for a play because that's what you're really suggesting; these Gospels that are supposedly genuine history happened in such a way that e.g. John happened to be wearing the same clothing as Elijah so that he would reflect his godliness like Elijah. Can't you see that the more realistic conclusion is that a man simply used the OT to write how he felt about the destruction of Jerusalem?

Where does it say in the OT that Elijah had his head cut off, why wasn't such a great servant as John the Baptist taken up into heaven without dying.

The whole point to the references that Mark makes are that they relate to the punishment the Jews got for their sins i.e. Jerusalem being destroyed. Nothing more, nothing less as far as I can see.