Where is the more strong evidence in Paul pointing to an outer space Jesus

[Bernard Muller]

1) on the earth the Romans had the monopoly of the crucifixion.

Certainly, in the Roman empire.
And Paul strongly suggested that the Crucifixion/Sacrifice occurred on earth (in the heartland of the Jews):
http://historical-jesus.info/19.html

Cordially, Bernard

[hakeem]

A quibble.

I deplore Carrier's use of "outer space" in this context. It is a grossly misleading anachronism. A more accurate term is "sub lunar realm" since that term is one to which the ancients themselves could relate. Outer space suggests the open expanse above the earth's atmosphere right on out to the ends of the universe. That's not where Couchoud, Doherty nor even Carrier, place the crucifixion. They believed Paul envisaged it very near the earth in a realm that contained thicker and more substantial stuff (albeit spiritual in some sense) than was found above the moon and closer to the throne of God. Everything below the moon was subject to change, decay, even death and dissolution. It was obvious. Look how the moon itself is not a perfectly smooth silvery surface even when full, and look how it is subject to shadowy changes and even disappears for a time every month or so, etc.

End of quibble.

In Thessalonians 1 it is clearly stated that the Jews killed the Lord Jesus [the Lord from heaven--God's own Son--the Creator]

The Pauline teachings are compatible with Acts of the Apostles and Christians writings.


1. Aristides Apology—“-it is said that God came down from heaven, and from a Hebrew virgin assumed and clothed himself with flesh; and the Son of God lived in a daughter of man…….But he himself was pierced by the Jews”

2. Justin Dialogue with Trypho--- your land may be desolate, and your cities burned with fire; and that strangers may eat your fruit in your presence, and not one of you may go up to Jerusalem.'……Accordingly, these things have happened to you in fairness and justice, for you have slain the Just One

3. Hippolytus Treatise Against the Jews –“for what reason, was the temple made desolate? ……it was because they killed the Son of their Benefactor”

4. Tertullian Answer to the Jews---let the Jews recognise their own fate — a fate which they were constantly foretold as destined to incur after the advent of the Christ, on account of the impiety with which they despised and slew Him.

5. Origen Against Celsus---“he ought to have said that the conspiracy against Jesus was the cause of these calamities befalling the people, since they put to death Christ”

6. Lactantius How the Persecutors Died----“I find it written, Jesus Christ was crucified by the Jews”.

7. Acts 10:39----And we are witnesses of all things which he did both in the land of the Jews, and in Jerusalem; whom they slew and hanged on a tree.

8. 1 Thessalonians 2 .14-15---- For ye, brethren, became followers of the churches of God which in Judaea are in Christ Jesus: for ye also have suffered like things of your own countrymen, even as they have of the Jews:15 Who both killed the Lord Jesus, and their own prophets, and have persecuted us; and they please not God, and are contrary to all men.

Christian writings of antiquity do not support the modern claim that Jesus was crucified in "outer space" or in the "sub lunar".

What is a sub-lunar or outer space tree?

In the Pauline writings it is claimed or implied the Lord from heaven [the Lord and SaviourJesus--the Last Adam] was hanged on a tree.

[GakuseiDon]

To me, if Paul understood Psalms 2 as a prophecy about the Messiah, then he would have assumed that Christ was crucified as a conspiracy at the end of this age by the kings and rulers of the earth. I doubt that Paul would have put much thought into this, like wondering 'Is it fair to include Jewish rulers or Roman rulers or Persian rulers into this?' Simply: the Hebrew Scriptures said it was them, so he went along with that.

the demons are already "kings of the earth" by definition of "archons of this aeon". And Satan was called in John the "Prince of this World". So it is perfectly possible that Paul read the Psalm as a prophecy.

True. It's possible that Paul saw Psalms 2 as a prophecy, and still thought of it as referring to demons rather than earthly kings. But I present it as the source for his 'information' in 1 Cor 2.

What I point out is that the "perfects" (addressed by Paul in 1 Cor 2:6-8), differently from the "foolish Galatians", don't need allusions to Psalm or metaphors (or even show of sacred dramas) by Paul, since they are enough "mature" to listen entirely all the truth: the demons crucified Jesus.

That's something that I don't really understand about the Dr Carrier/Doherty mythicist position: in a world where nearly everyone thought there were demons flying around, causing disasters and evil, why is it the more "mature" view that Jesus was killed by demons in the air, if that fit into the beliefs of people of the time? Why wouldn't the common people just go "yep! makes sense!" Why try to place the god on earth in a historical time-period at all? Not that I expect you to give a detailed answer to this, it's just that would be an inevitable question that would come up if Carrier mythicism became the mainstream position.

[GakuseiDon]

I heard (read online) that Doherty, a few years ago, conceded (with caveats) that 'Jesus' may have been described as having come to earth in Ascension of Isaiah. Is this correct and do you have a link?

Probably best to point you to Doherty's website, where he is responding to my review of his "Jesus: Neither God Nor Man" (my bolding below): http://jesuspuzzle.humanists.net/CritiquesDonJNGNM.htm

One assumes (insofar as we can pinpoint meanings imbedded in a document full of editings and amendments that are very hard to pin down in any exact way) that 'in your form' was indeed, in the mind of that particular editor (probably one subscribing to docetism, as in the nearby phrase 'they will think that he is flesh and a man'), a reference to human form and probably a reference to earth.

Doherty goes on to refer to other texts, though how that impacts on the implications of "probably a reference to earth" is not clear to me. The problem is that Doherty (and also Dr Carrier, who seems to be working from Doherty's analysis) missed that the Latin and Slavonic versions of AoI had "in your form" in it.

I also believe that Carrier suggests that there was a now-missing earlier version of A of I which better supports the 'not having descended to earth' hypothesis. I am not clear on whether this 'missing version' argument was his position from the beginning.

I'm working from memory here, as I don't want to spend too much time on this. (Maybe best to split this out into a separate thread if you want to go deeper into it.) The presumed earlier versions -- Latin and Slavonic -- has the Beloved descending into 'the world' in the form of man (Isaiah's form) and "dwelling among men, and in the world" (thanks to Tim O'Neill for reminding me on this), which probably was written by a docetic Christian. Carrier proposes an even earlier 'missing version', and wouldn't you know it, this earlier missing version exactly supports his mythicist theory! He is the only one proposing it though, and since his analysis starts with an error regarding "in your form", it pretty much dies from the start.

[MrMacSon]

I heard (read online) that Doherty, a few years ago, conceded (with caveats) that 'Jesus' may have been described as having come to earth in Ascension of Isaiah. Is this correct and do you have a link?

I also believe that Carrier suggests that there was a now-missing earlier version of A of I which better supports the 'not having descended to earth' hypothesis. I am not clear on whether this 'missing version' argument was his position from the beginning.
.

I'm not sure whether this 'missing version of A of I' argument was Carrier's position from the beginning either, but I think there are two versions of Ascension of Isaiah (at least), with one dated date later than the other. I understand a later-dated version might fit Carrier's argument better, but Carrier has tied his arguments about the role of Ascension of Isaiah [in the genesis of early Christianity] to the earlier version (as I think Carrier wants early Christianity to have kicked off in the mid-1st century, tied, I think, to Paul being a contemporary of Philo). I think Carrier has tied himself in knots, in some respects.

[GakuseiDon]

I deplore Carrier's use of "outer space" in this context. It is a grossly misleading anachronism. A more accurate term is "sub lunar realm" since that term is one to which the ancients themselves could relate.

I wouldn't even use "sub lunar realm", since that includes everything under the moon, including the earth. I'd suggest using "lower heavens" and "upper heavens".

[MrMacSon]

I deplore Carrier's use of "outer space" in this context. It is a grossly misleading anachronism. A more accurate term is "sub lunar realm" since that term is one to which the ancients themselves could relate.

perhaps 'sub-lunar heavens' ??

[GakuseiDon]

perhaps 'sub-lunar heavens' ??

Even better!

(Now for the hard ones: "euhemerism" and "arch-angel" )

[Kapyong]

Yup,
'sub-lunar heavens' seems best, and so very much better than 'outer-space'.
I criticised Dr Carrier for that, his humble reply was : "I showed why I was right in my book."

[Kapyong]

I'm the first kid on my block to have a Loeb account

Here are some cites of 'sublunar' that are interesting :

The84 high priest is bidden to put on a similar dressd when he enters the inner shrine to offer incense, because its fine linen is not, like wool, the product of creatures subject to death, and also to wear another, the formation of which is very complicated.e In this it would seem to be a likeness and copy of the universe. This is clearly shewn by the design. In the first85 place, it is a circular garment of a dark blue colour throughout, a tunic with a full-length skirt, thus symbolizing the air, because the air is both naturally black and in a sense a full-length robe stretching from the sublunar region above to the lowest recesses of the earth. Secondly, on this is set a piece86 of woven work in the shape of a breastplate, which symbolizes heaven.

Philo sees allegories and likenesses in a lot of scripture, there's one that includes the sublunar region (nothing specifically interesting though.)

2. That Knowledge by Astronomical Means is Attainable, and How Far.
A very few considerations would make it apparent to all that a certain power emanating from the eternal ethereal substance4 is dispersed through and permeates the whole region about the earth, which throughout is subject to change, since, of the primary sublunar elements, fire and air are encompassed and changed by the motions in the ether, and in turn encompass and change all else, earth and water and the plants and animals therein.

Apparently a common contemporary term, here refering to the sublunar elements found in the sublunar region.

Late Augustine describes several types of demons and gods :

The impiety of Porphyry, which surpasses even the error of Apuleius.
How much more humane and tolerable was the error of Apuleius, your fellow Platonist, who, for all that he held the lunar and sublunar demons in high regard, admitted in spite of himself that they alone are disturbed by the virus of passion and by mental storms!3 When it came, however, to the higher gods in the sky with their position in the realm of aether, whether they were visible and his eyes beheld them shining bright—that is, the sun, the moon and the other luminaries in those regions—or whether they were invisible and merely objects of his thought, he used all his power of argument to set them apart from any stain of such storms of passion.

• lunar demons
• sublunar demons
• higher gods (un disturbed by passion), including the moon?

(IIRC, some early Greeks thought dead souls went to the moon, or near the moon.)

Kapyong