I might consider this but the issue is that you misunderstood "first and last"
Revelation 3:14 explains the meaning of "first" therefore what you have counted is actually after Jesus, not before.
Yeah that's a comment about God not the demigod magic blood atonement sacrifice. But still the reference is useless because from 5-300 B.C the Hebrews were greatly influenced by the Persian religion while the Persians occupied Israel. Most of the Persian myths were borrowed by the Hebrews. Revelation was a big one. Sorry, it's. aPersian myth.
"Arising initially in
Zoroastrianism (Persian), apocalypticism was developed more fully in
Judaic, Christian, and
Islamic eschatological speculation"
Apocalypticism - Wikipedia
Revelations
Zoroaster taught that the blessed must wait for this culmination till Frashegird and the 'future body' (Pahlavi 'tan i pasen'), when the earth will give up the bones of the dead (Y 30.7).
This general resurrection will be followed by the Last Judgment, which will divide all the righteous from the wicked, both those who have lived until that time and those who have been judged already. Then Airyaman, Yazata of friendship and healing, together with Atar, Fire, will melt all the metal in the mountains, and this will flow in a glowing river over the earth. All mankind must pass through this river, and, as it is said in a Pahlavi text, 'for him who is righteous it will seem like warm milk, and for him who is wicked, it will seem as if he is walking in the • flesh through molten metal' (GBd XXXIV. r 8-r 9). In this great apocalyptic vision Zoroaster perhaps fused, unconsciously, tales of volcanic eruptions and streams of burning lava with his own experience of Iranian ordeals by molten metal; and according to his stern original teaching, strict justice will prevail then, as at each
individual j udgment on earth by a fiery ordeal. So at this last ordeal of all the wicked will suffer a second death, and will perish off the face of the earth. The Daevas and legions of darkness will already have been annihilated in a last great battle with the Yazatas; and the river of metal will flow down into hell, slaying Angra Mainyu and burning up the last vestige of wickedness in the universe.
Ahura Mazda and the six Amesha Spentas will then solemnize a lt, spiritual yasna,
offering up the last sacrifice (after which death wW be no more), and making a preparation of the mystical 'white haoma', which
will confer immortality on the resurrected bodies of all the blessed, who will partake of it. Thereafter men will beome like the Immortals themselves, of one thought, word and deed, unaging, free from sickness, without corruption, forever joyful in the kingdom of God upon earth. For it is in this familiar and beloved world, restored to its original perfection, that, according to Zoroaster,
eternity will be passed in bliss, and not in a remote insubstantial Paradise. So the time of Separation is a renewal of the time of Creation, except that no return is prophesied to the original uniqueness of living things. Mountain and valley will give place once more to level plain; but whereas in the beginning there was one plant, one animal, one man, the rich variety and number that have since issued from these will remain forever.
hm, if you think passages to prophecies and psalms (which are also prophecies) were used as narratives rather than references to fulfillment by apostles while writing NT then that says enough, I mean how else would apostles claim fulfillment if not by referring to OT? why would referring to OT indicate something wrong?
Why else? Because Mark was writing a fictional narrative?
Earlier in
Mark (chapter 5), we hear about another obviously fictional story about Jesus resurrecting a girl (the daughter of a man named Jairus) from the dead, this miracle serving as another obvious marker of myth, but adding to that implausibility is the fact that the tale is actually a rewrite of another mythical story, told of Elisha in
2 Kings 4.17-37 as found in the OT, and also the fact that there are a number of very improbable coincidences found within the story itself.
Another way Mark develops this theme is through an elegant ring composition, another common literary device popular at the time (used in myth). In the central part of Mark’s narrative (revolving around Jesus’ travel by sea), Mark carefully crafted nested cycles of themes specifically to convey an underlying message about faith and one’s ability (or lack thereof) to understand the gospel. Here is what the ring structure looks like:
Cycle 1:
Phase 1 (4.1-34) — Jesus with crowds by the sea (preaching from a boat)
Phase 2 (4.35-41) — Eventful crossing of the sea
Phase 3 (5.1-20) — Landing with healings/exorcisms
Interval 1: Step 1 (5.21-43) — First stop (after an uneventful boating)
Step 2 (6.1-6) — Second stop
Step 3 (6.6-29) — Going around
Cycle 2:
Phase 1 (6.30-44) — Jesus with crowds by the sea (with an uneventful boating)
Phase 2 (6.45-52) — Eventful crossing of the sea
Phase 3 (6.53-55) — Landing with healings/exorcisms
Interval 2: Step 1 (6.56-7.23) — Going around
Step 2 (7.24-30) — First stop
Step 3 (7.31-37) — Second stop
Cycle 3:
Phase 1 (8.1-12) — Jesus with crowds by the sea (with an uneventful boating)
Phase 2 (8.13-21) — Eventful crossing of the sea
Phase 3 (8.22-26) — Landing with healings/exorcisms
It’s really quite brilliantly crafted when you look at it: three triadically composed intervals, each of which contains one triadically composite minimal unit. Furthermore, every “Phase 1” in all cycles, takes place during the day and describes Jesus’ actions with crowds on one side of the sea. Every “Phase 2” occurs on the evening of that same day (though not stated explicitly in Cycle 3’s “Phase 2”, it is implied by what would have been a long sea crossing), and also describes actions between Jesus and the twelve disciples in the boat while in transit across the sea. Each “Phase 3” represents Jesus’ healing (and/or exorcising) of people who either come to him or that are brought to him following his arrival on the other side of the sea. Then there are other healings or exorcisms that are interspersed among the intervals that follow each “Phase 3”. Each cycle of this triad occupies one day, so the whole ring structure represents three days, ending with a resolution on the third day — all of which concludes by transitioning into a debate regarding who Jesus really is and what the gospel really is (
Mark 8.27-9.1, which is the first time we hear Jesus speak about any of this himself).
Total fiction.
Which is a quote of
Psalms 22:2, jesus' words on the cross, the end of this psalms says that this is God's work.
Do you consider this Jesus' word with meaning or do you consider it as apostles narrative rather than Jesus' last words?
No it's fiction. Mark is creating this already popular story but a Jewish version. Mark is borrowing from Psalms to create a narrative. By using Barabbas Mark is making a statement about the choice of Messiah.
Additionally, in this story, Mark seems to be pointing out how the Jews are erroneously viewing Jesus as the scapegoat, where Jesus is scorned, beaten, spat upon, crowned and pierced, and dressed in scarlet, and though Barabbas is the actual scapegoat, the Jews mistakenly embrace him instead. So Mark seems to be portraying the Jews as acting completely blind to the situation and choosing their sins (i.e. Barabbas) rather than their salvation (i.e. Jesus). Finally, this story seems to suggest that the Jews have also chosen the wrong model for the expected messiah. Whereas Barabbas could be seen as the murderous revolutionary, in line with the common Jewish belief that the messiah was expected to be a kind of revolutionary military leader, Jesus on the other hand, exemplified the suffering servant model of the messiah (another Jewish messianic model, though arguably less popular than the former), and one that would circumvent any need for a military revolution by enacting a spiritual victory through his death instead. So the Jews appear to have chosen the type of messiah they want, rather than the type of messiah that God wants instead (or so Mark believes anyway). Furthermore, rather than using a random lottery (i.e. God) to choose which “goat” would serve as the scapegoat, and which would serve as the atonement, the Jews removed God from the equation and made the choice themselves. If one looks at all of these elements together, we can see just how brilliant Mark’s story is, having multiple allegorical layers weaved into one.
-
the Gospels appear to be fictional historical biographies, likely written by specially interested Christians whose intent was to edify Jesus, just like many other fictional historical biographies that were made for various heroes and sages in antiquity. In fact, all students of literary Greek (the authors of the Gospels wrote their manuscripts in literary Greek), commonly used this fictional biographical technique as a popular rhetorical device — where they were taught to invent narratives about famous and legendary people, as well as to build a symbolic or moral message within it, and where they were taught to make changes to traditional stories in order to make whatever point they desired within their own stories.
So we already have a bit of contemporary background information showing us that fictional biographies were commonplace at the time,
The Gospels as Allegorical Myth, Part I of 4: Mark
