My first instinct here, which led to the proposal, is to pan back a bit and look at what the author of the Gospel of Mark was doing in the passages just before and just after the difficult crux interpretum. Perhaps the clues there could alert us to the most likely manner in which the author was weaving his narrative here. Certainly it seems a better idea than treating a couple sentences in complete isolation.
Part I -- The Context of Mark, Before and After the Passage in Question, and the Author's Approach Taken There
Let's take a brief recap of four segments before and four after. For elaborate justification of the parallels, the literature abounds. This is not an exhaustive treatment of the passion story by any means, just a bit of well-worn wisdom to establish the context. All scriptural parallels here are located in the Torah, Psalms, and Isaiah, and sometimes there are more options than those that are presented. (Also, I'm not claiming that every last detail is motivated by scriptural precedent, as there is still room for the author of the Gospel of Mark to be his own storyteller, beyond stringing together these beads.)
Before--The Barabbas Story (cf. Leviticus 16)
Mark 15:6-15a
Leviticus 16:3-116 Now at the feast he used to release for them one prisoner for whom they asked. 7 And among the rebels in prison, who had committed murder in the insurrection, there was a man called Barabbas. 8 And the crowd came up and began to ask Pilate to do as he usually did for them. 9 And he answered them, saying, “Do you want me to release for you the King of the Jews?” 10 For he perceived that it was out of envy that the chief priests had delivered him up. 11 But the chief priests stirred up the crowd to have him release for them Barabbas instead. 12 And Pilate again said to them, “Then what shall I do with the man you call the King of the Jews?” 13 And they cried out again, “Crucify him.” 14 And Pilate said to them, “Why, what evil has he done?” But they shouted all the more, “Crucify him.” 15 So Pilate, wishing to satisfy the crowd, released for them Barabbas
In this passage, "Jesus" plays the role of "the goat on which the lot fell for the Lord" to "use it as a sin offering," while "Barabbas" plays the part of "the goat on which the lot fell for Azazel shall be presented alive before the Lord to make atonement over it, that it may be sent away into the wilderness to Azazel."3 But in this way Aaron shall come into the Holy Place: with a bull from the herd for a sin offering and a ram for a burnt offering. 4 He shall put on the holy linen coat and shall have the linen undergarment on his body, and he shall tie the linen sash around his waist, and wear the linen turban; these are the holy garments. He shall bathe his body in water and then put them on. 5 And he shall take from the congregation of the people of Israel two male goats for a sin offering, and one ram for a burnt offering.
6 “Aaron shall offer the bull as a sin offering for himself and shall make atonement for himself and for his house. 7 Then he shall take the two goats and set them before the Lord at the entrance of the tent of meeting. 8 And Aaron shall cast lots over the two goats, one lot for the Lord and the other lot for Azazel. 9 And Aaron shall present the goat on which the lot fell for the Lord and use it as a sin offering, 10 but the goat on which the lot fell for Azazel shall be presented alive before the Lord to make atonement over it, that it may be sent away into the wilderness to Azazel.
11 “Aaron shall present the bull as a sin offering for himself, and shall make atonement for himself and for his house. He shall kill the bull as a sin offering for himself."
There is also a bull (which is a "sin offering") and a ram (which is a "burnt offering") in this passage, which do not find parallels in Mark 15:6-15a.
On the other hand, as Neil Godfrey shows below, it is at least possible that this is a reference to the two birds of Leviticus 14, one of which is sacrificed and the other of which is released, which in turn would mean that there could be a slightly different twist on at least one element of the Simon passage (i.e., whether Simon is identified as a 'ram').
Before--Scourging (cf. Isaiah 53:5)
Mark 15:15b
Isaiah 53:5and having scourged Jesus, he delivered him to be crucified.
Before--Tormentors Gathered Together Gleefully (cf. Psalm 35:15)But He was pierced through for our transgressions,
He was crushed for our iniquities;
The chastening for our well-being fell upon Him,
And by His scourging we are healed.
Mark 15:16-18
Psalm 35:1516 And the soldiers led him away inside the palace (that is, the governor's headquarters), and they called together the whole battalion. 17 And they clothed him in a purple cloak, and twisting together a crown of thorns, they put it on him. 18 And they began to salute him, “Hail, King of the Jews!”
Before--Humiliation and Spitting (cf. Isaiah 50:6)But at my stumbling they gathered in glee,
they gathered together against me;
ruffians whom I did not know
tore at me without ceasing;
Mark 15:19-20a
Isaiah 50:6And they were striking his head with a reed and spitting on him and kneeling down in homage to him. 20 And when they had mocked him, they stripped him of the purple cloak and put his own clothes on him.
After--Offered Wine Mixed with Gall (cf. Psalm 69:21)I gave my back to those who struck me,
and my cheeks to those who pulled out the beard;
I did not hide my face
from insult and spitting.
Mark 15:23
Psalm 69:2123 And they offered him wine mixed with myrrh, but he did not take it.
After--Casting of Lots for Garments (cf. Psalm 22:18)They gave me poison for food,
and for my thirst they gave me vinegar to drink.
Mark 15:24
Psalm 22:18And they crucified him and divided his garments among them, casting lots for them, to decide what each should take.
After--Crucified with Robbers (cf. Isaiah 53:12)they divide my garments among them,
and for my clothing they cast lots.
Mark 15:25-28
Isaiah 53:1225 And it was the third hour when they crucified him. 26 And the inscription of the charge against him read, “The King of the Jews.” 27 And with him they crucified two robbers, one on his right and one on his left. [ESV note: "Some manuscripts insert verse 28: 'And the Scripture was fulfilled that says, "He was numbered with the transgressors."'"]
After--The Reproach, with Wagging Heads, of All Who See Him (cf. Psalm 22:6-8)Therefore I will allot him a portion with the great,
and he shall divide the spoil with the strong;
because he poured out himself to death,
and was numbered with the transgressors;
yet he bore the sin of many,
and made intercession for the transgressors.
Mark 15:29-32
Psalm 22:6-8And those who passed by derided him, wagging their heads and saying, “Aha! You who would destroy the temple and rebuild it in three days, 30 save yourself, and come down from the cross!” 31 So also the chief priests with the scribes mocked him to one another, saying, “He saved others; he cannot save himself. 32 Let the Christ, the King of Israel, come down now from the cross that we may see and believe.” Those who were crucified with him also reviled him.
6 But I am a worm, and not human;
scorned by others, and despised by the people.
7 All who see me mock at me;
they make mouths at me, they shake their heads;
8 “Commit your cause to the Lord; let him deliver—
let him rescue the one in whom he delights!”
Part II -- The Context of Early Christianity and the Importance Attached to Numbers 19 for the Christ
Other literature found in the context of early Christianity ascribes importance to the Numbers 19 passage for describing their Christ and his death.
Numbers 19:1-10
Consider likewise:Now the Lord spoke to Moses and to Aaron, saying, 2 “This is the statute of the law that the Lord has commanded: Tell the people of Israel to bring you a red heifer without defect, in which there is no blemish, and on which a yoke has never come. 3 And you shall give it to Eleazar the priest, and it shall be taken outside the camp and slaughtered before him. 4 And Eleazar the priest shall take some of its blood with his finger, and sprinkle some of its blood toward the front of the tent of meeting seven times. 5 And the heifer shall be burned in his sight. Its skin, its flesh, and its blood, with its dung, shall be burned. 6 And the priest shall take cedarwood and hyssop and scarlet yarn, and throw them into the fire burning the heifer. 7 Then the priest shall wash his clothes and bathe his body in water, and afterward he may come into the camp. But the priest shall be unclean until evening. 8 The one who burns the heifer shall wash his clothes in water and bathe his body in water and shall be unclean until evening. 9 And a man who is clean shall gather up the ashes of the heifer and deposit them outside the camp in a clean place. And they shall be kept for the water for impurity for the congregation of the people of Israel; it is a sin offering. 10 And the one who gathers the ashes of the heifer shall wash his clothes and be unclean until evening. And this shall be a perpetual statute for the people of Israel, and for the stranger who sojourns among them.
Hebrews 7:26
Hebrews 9For it was fitting for us to have such a high priest, holy, innocent, undefiled, separated from sinners and exalted above the heavens;
Hebrews 1311But when Christ came as high priest of the good things that are now already here,a he went through the greater and more perfect tabernacle that is not made with human hands, that is to say, is not a part of this creation. 12He did not enter by means of the blood of goats and calves; but he entered the Most Holy Place once for all by his own blood, thus obtainingb eternal redemption. 13The blood of goats and bulls and the ashes of a heifer sprinkled on those who are ceremonially unclean sanctify them so that they are outwardly clean. 14How much more, then, will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself unblemished to God, cleanse our consciences from acts that lead to death,c so that we may serve the living God!
15For this reason Christ is the mediator of a new covenant, that those who are called may receive the promised eternal inheritance—now that he has died as a ransom to set them free from the sins committed under the first covenant.
16In the case of a will,d it is necessary to prove the death of the one who made it, 17because a will is in force only when somebody has died; it never takes effect while the one who made it is living. 18This is why even the first covenant was not put into effect without blood. 19When Moses had proclaimed every command of the law to all the people, he took the blood of calves, together with water, scarlet wool and branches of hyssop [different part(s) of the Torah invoked here], and sprinkled the scroll and all the people. 20He said, “This is the blood of the covenant, which God has commanded you to keep.”e 21In the same way, he sprinkled with the blood both the tabernacle and everything used in its ceremonies. 22In fact, the law requires that nearly everything be cleansed with blood, and without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness.
23It was necessary, then, for the copies of the heavenly things to be purified with these sacrifices, but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these. 24For Christ did not enter a sanctuary made with human hands that was only a copy of the true one; he entered heaven itself, now to appear for us in God’s presence.
And even more directly:11 For the bodies of those animals whose blood is brought into the holy places by the high priest as a sacrifice for sin are burned outside the camp. 12 So Jesus also suffered outside the gate in order to sanctify the people through his own blood. 13 Therefore let us go to him outside the camp and bear the reproach he endured.
Barnabas 8
It may also be noteworthy, in this regard, that the only Gospel that has eliminated Simon the Cyrenian (the Gospel of John) is also the only Gospel that has introduced the hyssop into his narrative of the crucifixion:Barnabas 8:1
But what think ye meaneth the type, where the commandment is given
to Israel that those men, whose sins are full grown, offer an heifer
and slaughter and burn it, and then that the children take up the
ashes, and cast them into vessels, and twist the scarlet wool on a
tree (see here again is the type of the cross and the scarlet wool),
and the hyssop, and that this done the children should sprinkle the
people one by one, that they may be purified from their sins?
Barnabas 8:2
Understand ye how in all plainness it is spoken unto you; the calf is
Jesus, the men that offer it, being sinners, are they that offered
Him for the slaughter. After this it is no more men (who offer); the
glory is no more for sinners.
Barnabas 8:3
The children who sprinkle are they that preached unto us the
forgiveness of sins and the purification of our heart, they to whom,
being twelve in number for a testimony unto the tribes (for there are
twelve tribes of Israel), He gave authority over the Gospel, that
they should preach it.
Barnabas 8:4
But wherefore are the children that sprinkle three in number? For a
testimony unto Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, because these are mighty
before God.
Barnabas 8:5
Then there is the placing the wool on the tree. This means that the
kingdom of Jesus is on the cross, and that they who set their hope on
Him shall live for ever.
Barnabas 8:6
And why is there the wool and the hyssop at the same time? Because
in His kingdom there shall be evil and foul days, in which we shall
be saved; for he who suffers pain in the flesh is healed through the
foulness of the hyssop.
Barnabas 8:7
Now to us indeed it is manifest that these things so befell for this
reason, but to them they were dark, because they heard not the voice
of the Lord.
John 19:29
"A jar full of sour wine was standing there. So they put a sponge full of the wine on a branch of hyssop and held it to his mouth."
It can be noted that the word 'hyssop' is a relatively rare one in the Bible, being found primarily in the context of these ritual practices in the Torah (link here). There are two stray references outside the Torah, and there are two references in the New Testament (the ones in Hebrew and John listed above).
We can also find the author of the Gospel of Matthew turning the robe into a scarlet robe, thus fulfilling the bit about scarlet material:
Matthew 27:28
"They stripped him and put a scarlet robe on him."
Overall we can find enough evidence that early Christians applied the Numbers 19 passage and its concepts to the death of Jesus.
Part III -- Recap of the Information Reviewed So Far
So far we have reviewed the following information:
(1) The author of the Gospel of Mark draws extensively on Isaiah and the Psalms, along with at least one part of the Torah (Leviticus 16 and the "two goats" with the Jesus goat used as a "sin offering"), when constructing his narrative of the death of Jesus. (Again, for detailed commentary on this, seek elsewhere.)
(2) The early Christians also drew upon Numbers 19:1-10 (and the spotless red heifer) when describing the nature of the death of Jesus.
(3) There are some loose strands of scriptural application to the death of Jesus that we have not yet identified in the Gospel of Mark--these include:
(3-a) the 'ram' used as a 'burnt offering' from Leviticus 16 [the use of Leviticus 16 here may be a uniquely Markan idea]
(3-b-1) the 'bull' from Leviticus 16 also used as a "sin offering" [the use of Leviticus 16 here may be a uniquely Markan idea]
(3-b-2) and the 'heifer' from Numbers 19 (which is found in Hebrews 9:13 and Barnabas 8:2)
(3-c) the 'hyssop' from Numbers 19 and parallels (which is found in John 19:29, Hebrews 9:19, and Barnabas 8)
(3-d) the 'scarlet' wool or material from Numbers 19 and parallels (which is found in Matthew 27:28, Hebrews 9:19, and Barnabas 8)
(3-e) the 'outside the camp' from Numbers 19 (which is found in Hebrews 13:11-13)
So, can we find any of these five elements from Numbers 19:1-10 in the narrative of the Gospel of Mark?
Part IV -- The Nature of the Hypothesis
Let's just clarify the nature of the hypothesis right away. Here is the general scheme from Leviticus 16, which the author of the Gospel of Mark evidently uses at least in the story of Barabbas, overlaid on the characters from the Gospel (and the Numbers 19 passage, which is read together with Leviticus 16 by the author of Mark and is not supposed to be drawn as a parallel to Leviticus 16 in this table).
| Type | Leviticus 16 | The Gospel of Mark | Numbers 19 Description |
| Sin Offering | Goat #1 | Jesus | -- |
| Into the Wilderness | Goat #2 | Barabbas | -- |
| Sin Offering | Bull | Jesus | Spotless Red Heifer |
| Burnt Offering | Ram | Simon | Cedar Wood, Hyssop, Scarlet (Cloth or Wool) |
On the other hand, if Leviticus 16 is not in mind for the Barabbas passage, then no such table is required. In such a case, the author of the Gospel of Mark would be drawing on two different passages, one with two birds (Leviticus 14), one of which is released and another of which is sacrificed, and another one with the spotless red heifer (which is Jesus) and the items thrown in with it (which is Simon). On yet the other hand again, however, the references in Hebrews to the sacrifices of animals like Jesus ("blood of goats and bulls and the ashes of a heifer," not including birds but referencing precisely both Leviticus 16 and Numbers 19 together) and the reference in Barnabas to the scarlet being specifically 'scarlet wool' (as such could be from a ram) might still be suggested to help shore up the idea that Leviticus 16 specifically is in mind for the description of Simon as a ram and for the Barabbas passage.
And here, then, are the seven allusions to Numbers 19:1-10 that could be detected in Mark 15:20b-22. (There is also one possible allusion to Leviticus 16, the 'ram', which would complete the picture there that the author started to draw in the earlier story of Barabbas. 'Jesus' appears twice, once in each story, as the 'sin offering', while Barabbas and Simon claim only one of the animals in the Leviticus 16 scene.)
| Wording of Mark 15:20b-22 | Meaning Suggested | Wording in Numbers 19 / Leviticus 16 |
| (1) 'Him' (αὐτὸν), Jesus (15:15, Ἰησοῦν) | Jesus | 'Red Heifer Without Blemish' (δάμαλιν πυρρὰν ἄμωμον) |
| (2) 'Lead Out' (ἐξάγουσιν) | Lead Out | 'Lead Out' (ἐξάξουσιν) |
| (3) 'Conscripted' (ἀγγαρεύουσιν) | Taken and Used | 'Take' (λήμψεται), 'Throw' (ἐμβαλοῦσιν) |
| (4) 'Cyrenean' (Κυρηναῖον) | A Plant Stalk (Famous Association) | 'Hyssop' (ὕσσωπον) |
| (5-a) 'Father of Alexander' (τὸν πατέρα Ἀλεξάνδρου) | The Ram (Famous Association) | 'Ram' (κριὸν) |
| (5-b) 'Of Alexander' (Ἀλεξάνδρου) | or, Helper of Man | or, Leviticus 16 Not Invoked |
| (6) 'And of Rufus' (καὶ Ῥούφου) | Scarlet, Red (Latin) | 'Scarlet', 'Red' (κόκκινον) Cloth or Wool |
| (7) 'Stake' (σταυρὸν) | Wood | 'Cedar Wood' (ξύλον κέδρινον) |
| (8-a) 'Golgotha, a place' (Γολγοθᾶν, τόπον) | A Place Outside the Settlement | 'Outside the Camp to a Clean Place' (ἔξω τῆς παρεμβολῆς εἰς τόπον καθαρὸν) |
| (8-b) 'Place of the Skull' (τόπος Κρανίου), ...and crucified him (15:24, καὶ σταυροῦσιν αὐτὸν) | A Place of Death | 'And Slaughtered It' (καὶ σφάξουσιν αὐτὴν) |
Three of the elements can be found in Numbers 19:2b-3 ([1] Jesus, [2] Lead Out, [8] A Place Outside the Settlement, Which Is a Place of Death) and also later parts of the passage in Numbers ('outside the camp' and death or burning being repeated). They find their parallel in Mark 15:20b and Mark 15:22.
| Tell the people of Israel to bring you a red heifer without defect[1], in which there is no blemish, and on which a yoke has never come. And you shall give it to Eleazar the priest, and it shall be taken[2] outside the camp[8] and slaughtered before him. | And they led[2] him out to crucify him.[1] ... And they brought him to the place called Golgotha (which means Place of a Skull).[8] |
There are two exact verbal matches here: the verb 'lead out' (ἐξάγουσιν / ἐξάξουσιν) and the noun 'place' (τόπον / τόπον).
Four of the elements can all be found in Numbers 19:6 ([3] Taken and Used, [4] A Plant Stalk, [6] Scarlet, [7] Wood) and Mark 15:21.
| And the priest shall take[3] cedar wood[7], and hyssop[4], and scarlet[6], and throw[3] it into the midst of the burning of the heifer. | They compelled[3] a passer-by, who was coming in from the country, to carry his cross[7]; it was Simon of Cyrene[4], the father of Alexander and Rufus[6]. |
This, then, is a verse which Simon alone, it is suggested, is here to fulfill, being artfully thrown into the crucifixion drama by the author of the Gospel of Mark, along with Jesus and his sacrifice, in order to fulfill the particular details enumerated by Numbers 19:6 and doing so in an allusive way (which, like the Barabbas passage, is written in such a way that not every reader will grasp the inner meaning but which every reader will understand on some level).
The last element, as stated before, identifies Simon as the "ram" which is a burnt offering in Leviticus 16, just as "Barabbas" is the other goat from the same passage, both providing a point of comparison with Jesus. It is Jesus alone who is the "sin offering" in that passage (first as a goat, then as a bull or, to use the female-gendered language of Numbers 19, as a heifer).
This is the hypothesis. But what of some of the particular associations claimed? What are those based on?
Part V -- The Associations Claimed Defended as Plausible
(1) 'Him' (αὐτὸν), Jesus (15:15, Ἰησοῦν) // Jesus // 'Red Heifer Without Blemish' (δάμαλιν πυρρὰν ἄμωμον)
This is considered a plausible association on account of the fact that other early Christian texts identify Jesus with this heifer (most clearly, Barnabas 8:2), on account of the fact that the author of Mark uses extensive scriptural typology to develop his account of the death of Jesus, and on account of the fact that the author of the Gospel of Mark, in roughly similar fashion to the other early Christian texts surveyed, attaches great significance of the death of Jesus as a sacrifice of sorts (Mark 10:45, "to give my life as a ransom for many").
(2) 'Lead Out' (ἐξάγουσιν) // Lead Out // 'Lead Out' (ἐξάξουσιν)
This is considered a plausible association on account of the fact that it is the same exact verb, conjugated grammatically in each place, and being employed in similar contexts. I am not the first to notice this (see, for example, this 1851 book)
(3) 'Conscripted' (ἀγγαρεύουσιν) // Taken and Used // 'Take' (λήμψεται), 'Throw' (ἐμβαλοῦσιν)
The verb used in the Gospel of Mark is rare in antiquity, being considered a Persian loan word for the act of "impressment" or "dragooning" or "commandeering," temporarily requiring the services of someone (as, for example, to carry something, as it is indeed used here). In Christian texts, it is found elsewhere only in the famous saying that 'if one should press you to go one mile, go with him two'. On this account, Dennis R. MacDonald develops an idea according to which this saying was developed by Mark into his passion narrative, but we do not have any attestation to that saying and its verb before Matthew 5:41 (no parallel in Luke) and the Didache.
The explanation of the scriptural parallel does not require a hypothetical source (the five books of Moses being likely read by the author of Mark). As to the strength of the correspondence, the meanings can be considered roughly similar, although the verbs are different.
(4) 'Cyrenean' (Κυρηναῖον) // A Plant Stalk (Famous Association) // 'Hyssop' (ὕσσωπον)
This item is one of the three things thrown into the burning sacrifice of the heifer, and thus we are interested to know if we can identify all three. The hypothesis that any one of them might be identified strengthens the other two, as the identification of the use of Numbers 19 strengthens the idea that this particular part found in Numbers 19:6, whose elements also informed the authors of Hebrews and of Barnabas, might be found in the Gospel of Mark.
Pliny the Elder, in the first century, writes about this plant extensively (chapter 15 sometimes titled 'Laserpitium, Laser, and Maspetum' and chapter 49 sometimes titled 'Laser: Thirty-Nine Remedies'). Pliny introduces it by saying, "Next to these, laserpitium claims our notice, a very remarkable plant, known to the Greeks by the name of 'silphion,' and originally a native of the province of Cyrenaica." It is described as being held in vaults and worth its weight in silver. Its fame can only have increased in the latter half of the first century, due to the difficulty of finding any, as Pliny mentions:
(As to this 'notion', which is here credited with the disappearance of the plant in Cyrenaica, Pliny writes, "They used to feed the cattle there upon it; at first it purged them, but afterwards they would grow fat, the flesh being improved in flavour in a most surprising degree.")For these many years past, however, it has not been found in Cyrenaica, as the farmers of the revenue who hold the lands there on lease, have a notion that it is more profitable to depasture flocks of sheep upon them. Within the memory of the present generation, a single stalk is all that has ever been found there, and that was sent as a curiosity to the Emperor Nero.
It can be asked how strong the association is between Cyrene and the laserpitium (Latin) or silphion (Greek) plant found there. And it can be answered that it is an association of the very highest degree, which anyone back then can be expected to know. The Wikipedia entry
Silphium reads:Here is an example of such a Cyrenian coin.It was the essential item of trade from the ancient North African city of Cyrene, and was so critical to the Cyrenian economy that most of their coins bore a picture of the plant.
While it cannot be claimed, perhaps, that everyone, even the most slow-witted, would have discovered the allusion, it is quite apparent enough that the author could have put it in for his more clever readers to discover the meaning. It is, after all, from the author of the Gospel of Mark that we get the expression "speaking in parables" (Mark 3:23, 4:2, 4:10, 4:11, 4:13, 4:33, 4:34, 12:1, 12:12). The author, in the words of Jesus, specifically explains that the parables have this purpose (Mark 4:11-12):
Thus it is not especially surprising if there are some parts of the Gospel itself, if the author permitted himself to speak in parables and not just through the mouthpiece of Jesus, which have a "secret" meaning which only those adept at interpretation can understand. It would, of course, seem that the author of the Gospel of Mark has outdone himself here, particularly, at Mark 15:21, given that neither the author of Matthew nor of Luke understood it well enough to repeat the complete reference, while the author of John explicitly denies it. Even so, John re-introduces this very element ('hyssop') elsewhere in his Gospel, just as Matthew re-introduces another element ('scarlet') into his, so these other writers agreed in principle with the application of the scripture, even if they did not perceive the way in which the author of the Gospel of Mark achieved it.“To you has been given the secret of the kingdom of God, but for those outside everything is in parables, so that
“they may indeed see but not perceive,
and may indeed hear but not understand,
lest they should turn and be forgiven.”
In any case, this medicinal plant was one of the chief, if not the chief, permanent associations made with Cyrene (it being said that the plant was brought there shortly before the founding of the city at Cyrene) at the time of the writing of the Gospel of Mark (late 1st or early 2nd century AD). It is thus completely plausible that the author of Mark could expect some of his readers to pick up on the association, if (of course) the author of Mark were inclined to leave any symbolic hints in his narrative at all (which is an argument for another post, or to be satisfied by reference to the points collected by Neil Godfrey and Joe Wallack).
Hyssopus officinalis was also a medicinal plant.(5-a) 'Father of Alexander' (τὸν πατέρα Ἀλεξάνδρου) // The Ram (Famous Association) // 'Ram' (κριὸν)
(5-b) 'Of Alexander' (Ἀλεξάνδρου) // or, Helper of Man // or, Leviticus 16 Not Invoked
The existence of some kind of "Ram" association with Simon, from Leviticus 16, is made more likely if we believe, as contemporary scholarship would already incline us to do, that the Barabbas story draws on Leviticus 16. This is because, as such, the elements of the bull and the ram are left out of the use of Leviticus 16. Interpreting Simon as a sort of character that is similar to Barabbas would then create associations with all the four animals mentioned in Leviticus 16, with both one of the goats and the bull being associated with Jesus as the 'sin offering'.
The question, then, is whether someone might associate "the father of Alexander" (τὸν πατέρα Ἀλεξάνδρου) with a ram. And the answer is, yes.
Firstly, Alexander is rightly famous enough to be known merely by the mention of a name. If an Alexander is mentioned in a narrative without any further identification, and if we are left to think about what that Alexander could mean in a general context (without supposing it has any particular referent in context), then Alexander the Great is one of the first associations that would come to mind.
(Yes, I took Carrier to task for something similar, which still doesn't make much sense to me, but the only thing he could really have gotten right is the easy association of Alexander with Alexander the Great, which is something that I would be foolish to deny.)
Secondly, "the father of Alexander," as made famous through the claim to divine parentage that was emblazoned on his coins, was the god Zeus-Ammon. The latter part, the Egyptian god Amun, was identified with the Greek god Zeus. A composite image of the bearded Zeus and the ram-horned Ammon formed the reference to Zeus-Ammon, the father of Alexander.
Here is a coin from Cyrene showing Zeus-Ammon, with the beard and ram horns.
According to the Livius entry for Ammon, "The god Ammon, who is usually shown with the horns of a ram, was initially venerated by Libyan desert tribes only." Further, it says, Ammon is a "name of a Libyan deity and his oracle in an oasis in Egypt's western desert. It became famous after Alexander the Great made a detour to consult the god." It may not be a coincidence, then, that the author of the Gospel of Mark draws on both "of Cyrene" (a place in northern Africa) and the "father of Alexander" (Zeus-Ammon, with Ammon being a ram-horned deity from northern Africa). Perhaps the use of one descriptive phrase suggested the use of the other to the author.
Here is a silver tetradrachm showing a ram-horned Alexander, indicating that his father was divine, giving him an attribute of Ammon-Ra (ram horns):
The horns of Alexander are variously noted down through history, including the history of the Jewish tradition (Daniel 8:21, Antiquities 6.8.5, Quran 18.94). While Daniel identifies Alexander as "a goat" in his vision, it need not be supposed that this would suppress the knowledge of Alexander's ram-horned deity that was claimed to be his father.
I consider this association to be plausible. It may be the weakest link in the presentation, but that does not mean that the presentation is bad, because most attempts to explain the passage will draw on some weak link or another due to the fact that the reference here is indeed obscure. If it is accepted as something that can't be ruled out, that's all that I would ask here. The rest of the associations (including the parallels of the Barabbas story to Leviticus 16, which has a ram) cited may help the weaker one.
Finally, because this reference has little to do with Numbers 19, it could find a different meaning if the connection to Leviticus 16 is dropped, while still retaining all the close correspondences found here between the Gospel of Mark and the Numbers 19:1-10 passage about the red heifer and what is burnt with it. As such, it might (in such a view) revert, for example, to a reference to the literal meaning of the Greek name "Alexander," one translation of which is "helper of man." This would accord with the function of Simon, as a helper of the man Jesus, who himself is a helper of men.
(6) 'And of Rufus' (καὶ Ῥούφου) // Scarlet, Red (Latin) // 'Scarlet', 'Red' (κόκκινον) Cloth or Wool
The word "Rufus" means "red" in Latin (lexicon). The word often translated "scarlet" (κόκκινον) is a common Greek word for red and can be used, as a substantive adjective, for red clothing or material.
If Simon is identified as an archetypal "ram," corresponding to Leviticus 16, then this also explains how he could be associated with "red" material, as found in Numbers 19, identified by the author of Barnabas at 8:1 specifically as "red wool" (τὸ ἔριον τὸ κόκκινον).
The author may have chosen to identify two so-called sons of the father here specifically because he wanted to write a secret meaning into his narrative. It is not as though the author does not extol such hidden parabolic interpretation or does not extensively make puns or allusions to scripture elsewhere. This particular symbolism may have been one of the gems that the author was personally proud of, not unlike the pride that the author of Barnabas shows at finding 'Jesus' and the 'Cross' in the number 318. If so, that would explain how its meaning could disappear into obscurity in the other Gospels.
(7) 'Stake' (σταυρὸν) // Wood // 'Cedar Wood' (ξύλον κέδρινον)
A 'cross', 'stake', or beam is made out of wood. The reference in Numbers 19 is to cedar wood, which is thrown into the burning sacrifice of the heifer.
(8-a) 'Golgotha, a place' (Γολγοθᾶν, τόπον) // A Place Outside the Settlement // 'Outside the Camp to a Clean Place' (ἔξω τῆς παρεμβολῆς εἰς τόπον καθαρὸν)
(8-b) 'Place of the Skull' (τόπος Κρανίου), 'crucified him' (15:24) // A Place of Death // 'And Slaughtered It' (καὶ σφάξουσιν αὐτὴν)[/td]
Both Jesus and the spotless red heifer are slain outside the settlement, which is a 'camp' (παρεμβολήν) in the Torah and the city of Jerusalem in Mark. The high likelihood of this being an intentional description of the sacrifice of Jesus, based specifically on passages such as Numbers 19, is already indicated by the references regarding "suffering outside the gate" (πύλης) and "burning outside the camp" (παρεμβολῆς) in Hebrews 13, which would appear to be a text written before the destruction of the temple (Hebrews 9:6-10, 10:1-4) and thus before the Gospel of Mark.
The verbal correspondence on the word 'place' (τόπον) is exact.
Part VI -- Where Does This Leave Us?
There are several specific results here:
(1) The argument that the mention of the two sons "Alexander and Rufus" means that they must be specific historical people known to the audience is controverted. There is at least one possible explanation under which this is not intended to be a reference to historical people.
(2) For those who wish to establish that the Gospel of Mark has a particular authorial intent to tell an accurate story of literal events, they need to engage themselves on a wider variety of the aspects of the text of Mark. They cannot rely solely on this passage to secure their opinions.
(3) For those who are already inclined to see the author of the Gospel of Mark as skillful and, particularly, adept at weaving scripture into his passion narrative, this explanation should have some level of intrinsic probability as a consequence of that general point of view.
(4) The exact relationship between this passage and the two sayings of Jesus that have been read in connection with it, verbally and conceptually (Mark 8:34, Matthew 5:41), may need to be re-evaluated in the context of this reading, if it is accepted as plausible or likely.
(5) The connection described above with Leviticus 16 and the Barabbas story might be the first to budge, if we were to modify the hypothesis slightly. One suggestion, below, mentioned by Neil, regards the story of the two birds. If so, then the reference to "Alexander" here might have a different meaning, such as one of the literal meanings of the Greek name, "helper of man." This accords with the function of Simon in the narrative, as a helper of a man, Jesus, who is himself helping men.
I appreciate any critical and productive comments based on a careful reading. Thank you.
