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

[robert j]

There are no doubts that it's 1 Cor 2:6-8. The fact that demons crucified Jesus.

I’m not convinced this is a fact.

In Paul’s day, the term archon (ἄρχων) meant a human ruler or governor, not a demon. At least according the LSJ –--
http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/tex ... Da)%2Frxwn

As Bernard pointed out, when Paul meant to indicate a demon, he used the term daimonion -----

No, but I say that the things which the Gentiles sacrifice, they sacrifice to demons (δαιμονίοις) and not to God; and I do not want you to become sharers in demons (δαιμονίων). (1 Cor 10:20)

And Paul used “Satan” (Σατανᾶς) in terms of a spiritual deceiver or adversary.

I think the analysis related by GakuseiDon (page 1) using Psalm 2 provides a reasonable alternate solution for 1 Corinthians 2:6-8, and is entirely consistent with Paul’s modus operandi of using the Jewish scriptures to construct his system.

Earl Doherty in his Jesus Neither God Nor Man addresses the “rulers” in 1 Corinthians 2:6-8 (pp. 104-109, and then some), but I don’t find his arguments for demon spirits convincing.

I’m certainly willing to be convinced. Opinions, interpretations, and appeals to authority are all fine and dandy. But what I haven’t seen (maybe I’ve just missed it) is the term ἄρχων/ἄρχοντες (ruler/rulers) clearly used to refer to non-human demonic powers in any text dated to before the Roman-Jewish War.

[Giuseppe]

As Bernard pointed out, when Paul meant to indicate a demon, he used the term daimonion -----

No, but I say that the things which the Gentiles sacrifice, they sacrifice to demons (δαιμονίοις) and not to God; and I do not want you to become sharers in demons (δαιμονίων). (1 Cor 10:20)

And Paul used “Satan” (Σατανᾶς) in terms of a spiritual deceiver or adversary.

the "daimonions" of 1 Cor 10:20 were banal Pagan gods. Not the "archons of this aeon".
So we have Romans 8:20:

For the creation was subjected to frustration, not by its own choice, but by the will of the one who subjected it,

The one who subjected the creation to frustration cannot be a mere fallen angel as Satan but someone more powerful than him. A spiritual being.

I’m certainly willing to be convinced. Opinions, interpretations, and appeals to authority are all fine and dandy. But what I haven’t seen (maybe I’ve just missed it) is the term ἄρχων/ἄρχοντες (ruler/rulers) clearly used to refer to non-human demonic powers in any text clearly dated to prior to the Roman-Jewish War.

I may refer you to R. G. Price's mention of that evidence:

ἄρχων. [archon]:
In the LXX [Septuagint], too, the ἄρχων is one who exercises authoritative influence; the term is used for the national, local or tribal leader from Gn. to 2 Ch. In the historical books it is used for a general, though sometimes we also read of the ἄρχοντες τῶν ἱερ�*ων (Neh. 12:7). In the later books it more often denotes officials of the overlord of Palestine (ἄρχων τοῦ βασιλ�*ως, Da. 2:15).
In Da. Θ 10:13, 20f. cf. 12:1 (also Da. LXX: 10:13) it denotes the celestial beings which guard and represent earthly states (popularly identified with the corresponding peoples), and on the rank and power (→ ἀρχή) of which in the spirit world the position of these states depends. The ἄρχων of Israel has the name of Michael. His victory (or that of the One like a man) over the ἄρχοντες of the Persians and Greeks leads to the dominion of the Jews over these peoples.
2 To a large extent the ἄρχοντες are opponents of the people of God who are resisted by the One like a man (later the Messiah) and His allies, and who will be defeated in the last days. In its conflict with earthly enemies the people of God is really engaged with these celestial powers. The same concept is found in Pesikt. Kah., 23 (150b–151a): שרי אמות העולם ἄρχοντες ἐθνῶν τοῦ κόσμου, of Babylon, Greece etc. Cf. also M. Ex., 15, 1 (36b, 6 f., Friedm.): In the future world God will call the princes (שריהם) of the kingdoms to account before He calls the kingdoms themselves.
- Kittel's Unabridged Theological Dictionary of the New Testament

http://www.rationalrevolution.net/artic ... istory.htm

And naturally, a celestial "archon" is mentioned in the Book of Enoch:

http://frdb.talkfreethought.org/thearch ... stcount=12

[Giuseppe]

My last link in a correct form:
http://bcharchive.org/2/thearchives/sho ... 791&page=2

An old knowledge:

Hi Jeffrey,

What about the Greek fragments of 1 Enoch?

1 Enoch 6:3 kai eipen semiazas pros autous, os hn arcwn autwn
[codex Panopolitanus]
http://www.textexcavation.com/greek1enoch1-16.html

1 Enoch 6:3 And Semjaza, who was their leader, [Charles]
Bibleworks

Dave Hindley
Cleveland, OH USA

[Ben C. Smith]

I’m certainly willing to be convinced. Opinions, interpretations, and appeals to authority are all fine and dandy. But what I haven’t seen (maybe I’ve just missed it) is the term ἄρχων/ἄρχοντες (ruler/rulers) clearly used to refer to non-human demonic powers in any text dated to before the Roman-Jewish War.

Leviticus 20.5: 5 then I Myself will set My face against that man and against his family; and I will cut off from among their people both him and all those who play the harlot after him, by playing the harlot after Molech [LXX: εἰς τοὺς ἄρχοντας].

Daniel 10.13: 13 "But the prince of the kingdom of Persia was withstanding me for twenty-one days; then behold, Michael, one of the chief princes [LXX: εἷς τῶν ἀρχόντων τῶν πρώτων], came to help me, for I had been left there with the kings of Persia."

1 Enoch 6.3: 3 And Semjaza, who was their leader [ὃς ἦν ἄρχων αὐτῶν], said unto them, "I fear ye will not indeed agree to do this deed, and I alone shall have to pay the penalty of a great sin."

1 Enoch 6.7: 7 And these are the names of their leaders [τῶν ἀρχόντων αὐτῶν]: Samlazaz, their leader, Araklba, Rameel, Kokablel, Tamlel, Ramlel, Danel, Ezeqeel, Baraqijal, Asael, Armaros, Batarel, Ananel, Zaqiel, Samsapeel, Satarel, Turel, Jomjael, Sariel. These are their chiefs of tens.

1 Enoch 8.1: 1 And Azazel [Syncellus' recension adds: ὁ δέκατος τῶν ἀρχόντων] taught men to make swords, and knives, and shields, and breastplates, and made known to them the metals of the earth and the art of working them, and bracelets, and ornaments, and the use of antimony, and the beautifying of the eyelids, and all kinds of costly stones, and all coloring tinctures.

[Ben C. Smith]

I see Giuseppe beat me to it. But note the interesting LXX substitution of archontes for Molech.

[robert j]

I’m certainly willing to be convinced. Opinions, interpretations, and appeals to authority are all fine and dandy. But what I haven’t seen (maybe I’ve just missed it) is the term ἄρχων/ἄρχοντες (ruler/rulers) clearly used to refer to non-human demonic powers in any text dated to before the Roman-Jewish War.

Leviticus 20.5: 5 then I Myself will set My face against that man and against his family; and I will cut off from among their people both him and all those who play the harlot after him, by playing the harlot after Molech [LXX: εἰς τοὺς ἄρχοντας].

Daniel 10.13: 13 "But the prince of the kingdom of Persia was withstanding me for twenty-one days; then behold, Michael, one of the chief princes [LXX: εἷς τῶν ἀρχόντων τῶν πρώτων], came to help me, for I had been left there with the kings of Persia."

1 Enoch 6.3: 3 And Semjaza, who was their leader [ὃς ἦν ἄρχων αὐτῶν], said unto them, "I fear ye will not indeed agree to do this deed, and I alone shall have to pay the penalty of a great sin."

1 Enoch 6.7: 7 And these are the names of their leaders [τῶν ἀρχόντων αὐτῶν]: Samlazaz, their leader, Araklba, Rameel, Kokablel, Tamlel, Ramlel, Danel, Ezeqeel, Baraqijal, Asael, Armaros, Batarel, Ananel, Zaq1el, Samsapeel, Satarel, Turel, Jomjael, Sariel. These are their chiefs of tens.

1 Enoch 8.1: 1 And Azazel [Syncellus' recension adds: ὁ δέκατος τῶν ἀρχόντων] taught men to make swords, and knives, and shields, and breastplates, and made known to them the metals of the earth and the art of working them, and bracelets, and ornaments, and the use of antimony, and the beautifying of the eyelids, and all kinds of costly stones, and all coloring tinctures.

OK, I'm still willing to be convinced. But I don't think I'm splitting hairs here, but granted, my question above wasn't stated clearly enough.

The term used in these citations refers to "rulers" or "chiefs" but the nature of those are defined by other terms or names in the context of the passage. The term ἄρχων itself doesn't carry the specific nature of a ruler --- it could be a benevolent ruler or a devastating one --- it could be an earthly ruler, or a ruler of the fallen angels.

In 1 Corinthians 2:6-8, the archontes crucified the Lord of glory, but it is not clear, without further qualification, if the author intended human rulers or not.

Are there examples of the term itself, prior to the War, standing alone without being qualified further in the context, as meaning a non-human demonic power?

[archibald]

I think a significant factor and potential problem is Paul's texts may not have initially been about a Jesus or, if they were about a Jesus, or a Christ, they may not have been about the gospel Jesus.

Yes, they are apparently about someone.

We can only speculate. Personally, I am more convinced that they are about a Jewish man executed recently in Judea, who had followers prior to Paul, than I am by any other hypothesis. Without ruling anything out of course.

Passages about the resurrection might have been added later.

Personally, i think it would be very difficult to take out the general idea of someone supposedly cheating bodily death without making the main thrust of the letters, and almost all the theology, meaningless. Perhaps you meant one particular passage though?

(separately, I don't see a link between Philo's writings and the epistles attributed to Paul).

I am no expert. But once, I cited the epistle's use of the word 'man' (anthropos) as indicating that a man was being referred to and someone replied that Philo used it for a concept of Heavenly Man.

[iskander]

Leviticus 20:5
attachment

leviticus 20 5.PNG (57.95 KiB) Viewed 5748 times

[Ben C. Smith]

Also possibly relevant:

Philo, The Special Laws 3.13-14: 13 Some persons have conceived that the sun, and the moon, and the other stars are independent gods, to whom they have attributed the causes of all things that exist. But Moses was well aware that the world was created, and was like a very large city, having rulers [ἄρχοντας] and subjects in it; the rulers [ἄρχοντας] being all the bodies which are in heaven, such as planets and fixed stars; 14 and the subjects being all the natures beneath the moon, hovering in the air and adjacent to the earth. But that the rulers [ἄρχοντας] aforesaid are not independent and absolute, but are the viceroys of one supreme Being, the Father of all, in imitation of whom they administer with propriety and success the charge committed to their care, as he also presides over all created things in strict accordance with justice and with law. Others, on the contrary, who have not discovered the supreme Governor, who thus rules everything, have attributed the causes of the different things which exist in the world to the subordinate powers, as if they had brought them to pass by their own independent act.

[Ben C. Smith]

Are there examples of the term itself, prior to the War, standing alone without being qualified further in the context, as meaning a non-human demonic power?

Standing alone? What do you mean by that? The word is not standing alone in 1 Corinthians 2.6-8, either. They are "the rulers of this age."

I do not think you ought to be convinced that Paul means demonic forces here; I am not; I think it can go either way. This is not, for me, a mythicist proof text; rather, it is compatible with mythicism.

To turn your question around, though, is there any place where the term is used in conjuction with "this age" or something like it in which it must mean earthly rulers? (I have not searched exhaustively.)