By James F. McGrath
Clarence L. Goodwin Chair in New Testament Language and Literature
Butler University
October 2014
There is, however, a common element of ancient thought which has important implications for the understanding of Ascension of Isaiah. In 7:10 we read, “And as above, so also on earth, for the likeness of what (is) in the firmament is here on earth.” As Carrier notes, “the narrative goes out of its way to explain that the firmament contains copies of everything on earth.”[23] And yet, presumably because of his aim to present a case for mythicism, Carrier does not discuss the natural implication of this: that even if the celestial Beloved only descended as far as the firmament, and was crucified there by demons, this would mirror some corresponding occurrence on earth.
my bolding
Tread softly because you tread on my dreams.
W.B. Yeats
Yep, also lack of oxygen for the Carrier-Doherty mythicist theory. As McGrath has set out to show, this theory is hoist by it's own petard i.e. the Ascension of Isaiah is not the trump card that Carrier would like it to be. If the celestial Jesus is crucified, killed, in some celestial sphere - there must also be a corresponding crucifixion on tera-firma. The Jerusalem above reflects the Jerusalem below.....
Tread softly because you tread on my dreams.
W.B. Yeats
Peter Kirby wrote:It's good to see McGrath using evidence in his arguments.
I found it interesting that McGrath seems prepared, almost, to concede the point that Ascension of Isaiah could reference a heavenly type crucifixion - while simultaneously upholding a terrestrial realm crucifixion.
Now...............all we need is for Carrier to concede the point that a heavenly celestial crucifixion does not negate a terrestrial crucifixion - and a way out of the historicist v mythicist deadlock might be on the cards. History mattered to the gospel writers - the Carrier-Doherty mythicists can't keep running away from that reality.....
James McGrath: And so, turning to the question posed in the title of this article, does Ascension of Isaiah envisage Jesus being crucified in outer space, on the firmament, as Richard Carrier claims? That reading of the text still seems to me unlikely ........
.......even if Ascension of Isaiah does have this view, that the celestial Beloved descends from the highest heaven to the firmament and no further, then that still does not support mythicism. Ascension of Isaiah emphasizes that what happens on the firmament is mirrored in the terrestrial realm.
Tread softly because you tread on my dreams.
W.B. Yeats
Open the pod bay doors Hal.
I'm sorry Jesus. I can't do that.
It is interesting seeing this response to Carrier and Doherty by McGrath.
Thanks MH! The central text here is the "Ascension of Isaiah".
A terminus post quem is the earliest time the event may have happened, and a terminus ante quem is the latest.
The terminus post quem for the "Ascension of Isaiah" is the late first century. What is the corresponding terminus ante quem ?
Be well,
LC
A "cobbler of fables" [Augustine]; "Leucius is the disciple of the devil" [Decretum Gelasianum]; and his books "should be utterly swept away and burned" [Pope Leo I]; they are the "source and mother of all heresy" [Photius]
I found it interesting that McGrath seems prepared, almost, to concede the point that Ascension of Isaiah could reference a heavenly type crucifixion - while simultaneously upholding a terrestrial realm crucifixion.
Now...............all we need is for Carrier to concede the point that a heavenly celestial crucifixion does not negate a terrestrial crucifixion - and a way out of the historicist v mythicist deadlock might be on the cards. History mattered to the gospel writers - the Carrier-Doherty mythicists can't keep running away from that reality.....
There is absolutely nothing in Ascension of Isaiah indicating the crucifixion was not on earth. I wonder where anybody can read the crucifixion happens in the celestial realm.
Again I researched the matter here http://historical-jesus.info/100.html and the conclusion of my blog post is:
"It is evident the original Greek text was entirely Jewish and then slightly interpolated (at 9:14 & 16) by a Docetic Christian. Then two interpolators (Docetic Christians themselves), separately, on two different copies, added more different additions/insertions, some of them overtly Christian in nature. These two resulting copies may have been furthermore interpolated when new ones were made from them.
The original Greek text, even after being added on with its two "tentative" Christian-like interpolations (9:14,16), did not have "Son", "first-begotten", "Jesus" or "Christ" in it.
Therefore, the ascent of Isaiah and descent & then ascent of the Beloved were not originally Christian. But later, probably in the 2nd century, when Docetism was adopted among some Gnostic Christians, the original Jewish Greek text got manipulated in order to serve the Christian cause.
I know that this thinking is very much far removed from Dr. Carrier's observations in OHJ on 'the Ascension of Isaiah':
The 'they' who will think he is a and not know who he is and kill him are only ever said to be Satan and angels. No other subject is mentioned for that pronoun, nor is any other implied. God clearly intends Jesus to do nothing more than go to the firmament, and for no other reason than to be killed by Satan and his sky demons, rise from the dead and conduct affairs there for over a year (doing what, it's not said), and then ascend to heaven. In other words, instead of conducting a ministry on earth, Jesus is commanded to go straight to the end and die, and rise from the dead, and then remain where he had for a year and a half (9.16; cf. 10.12-14; although the duration is omitted in some versions), and then ascend to the heavens. The 'tree' on which is crucified (9.14) is thus implied to be one of the 'copies' of trees that we are told are in the firmament (7.10).
Of course, even with all its (highly suspected) interpolations, the text of 'Ascension of Isaiah' does not say what I bolded from page 41 of Carrier's 'On the Historicity Of Jesus' (OHJ). This is just pure speculations.
Furthermore, Paul indicated Jesus' crucifixion happened in the heartland of the Jews, among Jews (http://historical-jesus.info/19.html).
Cordially, Bernard
I believe freedom of expression should not be curtailed
