Mark was not an apocalypticist but he derided the apocalypticism of the Pillars

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
Post Reply
Giuseppe
Posts: 13732
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Mark was not an apocalypticist but he derided the apocalypticism of the Pillars

Post by Giuseppe »

The people around Jesus were so idiots when they said:

“Listen, he’s calling Elijah.”
...
“Now leave him alone. Let’s see if Elijah comes to take him down,”

..since they didn't realize that Elija was already arrived in the person of John the Baptist.

The pattern detected by myself here is: they wait 'something' in the immediate future, but that 'something' is already happened.

But then, if this is a typical case of derision of apocalytpicism by "Mark" (author), in virtue of the same reason, also in the following case "Mark" is deriding real apocalypticists:

“Truly I tell you, some who are standing here will not taste death before they see that the kingdom of God has come with power.”

(Mark 9:1)

The attention seems to be all focused on the coming kingdom of God, etc, but really the irony is that «the standing ones» par excellence, i.e. the Pillars, had already seen in the past what they believed to see in the future:

After six days Jesus took Peter, James and John with him and led them up a high mountain, where they were all alone

(Mark 9:2)

Hence Mark derides the apocalypticism of the Pillars. I wonder if then the power of the Pillars was someway connected with their apocalypticism. This had to be the case, insofar "Mark" disturbed himself to invent a parody of the term «Pillars» along the lines of a veiled contempt of their strong apocalypticism.

The apocalypticism assumes the coming destruction of the earthly Temple. A Temple is supported by Pillars. Remember that the Pillars of Hercules were really the Temple devoted to the Phoenician god Melquart, hence the two Pillars were the basic part of that Temple.

Hence Peter, James and John considered themselves the «Pillars» of a new coming celestial Temple.

Paul in 1 Corinthians 3:10-15 throws accusations against the Pillars' claim of building a new Temple on themselves:

By the grace God has given me, I laid a foundation as a wise builder, and someone else is building on it. But each one should build with care. 11 For no one can lay any foundation other than the one already laid, which is Jesus Christ. 12 If anyone builds on this foundation using gold, silver, costly stones, wood, hay or straw, 13 their work will be shown for what it is, because the Day will bring it to light. It will be revealed with fire, and the fire will test the quality of each person’s work. 14 If what has been built survives, the builder will receive a reward. 15 If it is burned up, the builder will suffer loss but yet will be saved—even though only as one escaping through the flames.

Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.
Giuseppe
Posts: 13732
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: Mark was not an apocalypticist but he derided the apocalypticism of the Pillars

Post by Giuseppe »

A strong evidence of the fact that the my view about the apocalypticist meaning connected with the term «Pillars» is correct is given by Revelation 3:12:

12 The one who is victorious I will make a pillar in the temple of my God. Never again will they leave it. I will write on them the name of my God and the name of the city of my God, the new Jerusalem, which is coming down out of heaven from my God; and I will also write on them my new name.



The Book of Revelation is the Gospel of the Pillars.
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.
Post Reply