- (1) the enemies of Paul become the enemies of Mark's Jesus
- (2) the enemies of Paul were Jewish Christians
- therefore: the enemies of Mark's Jesus were Jewish Christians, also
Is really sure that the enemies of Paul were Jewish Christian Judaizers?
If the answer is no, then the only other best candidate for enemies of Paul are the Gnostics. A best term I would use here is: anti-demiurgists.
(The question of date doesn't matter here, since Paul could be written after the 70 CE, when the Gnostics already existed).
Assuming anti-demiurgists as enemies of Paul, the immediate corollary is that the 'scribes and pharisees' in Mark allegorize not more Judaizers, but the same descendants of the anti-demiurgists who opposed Paul.
Prima facie, this implication may appear absurd and de facto a confutation of the premise itself.
Secunda facie, without, by this, to prove anything, I wonder:
if the true identity of Jesus's Father was in discussion, and if Paul's and Mark's enemies were adorers of a Jesus son of Father ("Bar-Abbas") who was enemy of YHWH and his messiah, then, in order to confute their claims, "Mark" (author)
- would have made Satan the deity enemy of his "Jesus"/Paul (this is already per se an implicit confutation of the anti-demiurgists, according to which the enemy of Jesus was YHWH)
- would have made the 'scribes and pharisees' the human enemies of his "Jesus"/Paul, which is equivalent to judaize the same anti-demiurgists in the story: the 'scribes and pharisees' adore YHWH but they are enemies of Jesus, whereas the anti-demiurgists adore Jesus but they are enemies of YHWH. In addition: the scribes and pharisees are enemy of Jesus within the same cult (around YHWH) whereas the anti-demiurgists are enemy of Paul within the same cult (around Jesus).
Other "coincidences":
- in the story, the "scribes and pharisees" support Barabbas against Jesus "called Christ": is not Bar-Abbas an allegory of the same "Jesus Son of Father" adored by anti-demiurgists? Hence, are not the 'scribes and pharisees' an allegory of the same anti-demiurgists?
- Paul is elitist as to knowledge, and so Mark's Jesus is jealous to reveal his true identity, whereas the anti-demiurgists insist on the revelation of their gnosis, just as their Gospel avatars, the "scribes and pharisees", insist on the revelation of their teachings/traditions.
- Paul is adaptable, and so Mark's Jesus opens to "sinners"/gentiles, whereas the anti-demiurgists want that the adorers of YHWH should be excluded/ghettoized , just as the 'scribes and pharisees' want that the sinners should be excluded/ghettoized .
- Paul insists on resurrection of the dead, and so Mark's Jesus rises, whereas the anti-demiurgists claim that they are already risen in this life, hence they show frank contempt against who would hope in a carnal resurrection, just as the 'scribes and pharisees' show contempt against Jesus's claim of descending from the cross (remember that Philo, in On the Posterity of Cain and His Exile 17.61, compares souls being attached to bodies to men being attached to crosses via crucifixion).
In the same way the chief priests and the teachers of the law mocked him among themselves. “He saved others,” they said, “but he can’t save himself! Let this Messiah, this king of Israel, come down now from the cross, that we may see and believe.”
(Mark 15:32)
Mark was a mere executor of Paul's last will and he used crypticism to convey paulinism.
I think that a great part of this conclusion derives, ultimately, from the true identity of the enemies of Paul, since the other hypotheses (that Mark adored YHWH, that Mark was a true pauline, that Mark was against the enemies of Paul and only of Paul) have already been proved.
Hence, I raise again the question:
WHO WERE THE TRUE ENEMIES OF PAUL ?