New evidence that Ascension of Isaiah is a mythicist document

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
Post Reply
Giuseppe
Posts: 4636
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Vicenza (Italy)

New evidence that Ascension of Isaiah is a mythicist document

Post by Giuseppe » Mon Feb 19, 2018 6:10 am

I will quote later the correct quotes (I am posting by smartphone) but in essentia:

It is reported the death of one of the 12 apostles by hand of the "prince of this world" but not directly: "In the form of a human ruler". Probably Nero who killed Peter.

But in the case of the Son, he is killed directly by demons and by the prince of this world. Satan doesn't become humanoid to kill the Son. So the historicists have to explain why Satan becomes humanoid to kill "one of the 12 apostles" while he doesn't become humanoid to kill Jesus.

The mythicists have already the easy answer:
Jesus is killed in the place where Satan has to be simply himself (without need of appearing in the form of a human): in the "air".
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.

Giuseppe
Posts: 4636
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Vicenza (Italy)

Re: New evidence that Ascension of Isaiah is a mythicist document

Post by Giuseppe » Mon Feb 19, 2018 8:05 am

Here Satan becomes humanoid, more precisely Nero:

After it is consummated, Beliar the great ruler, the king of this world, will descend, who hath ruled it since it came into being; yea, he will descent from his firmament in the likeness of a man, a lawless king, the slayer of his mother: who himself (even) this king.
3. Will persecute the plant which the Twelve Apostles of the Beloved have planted. Of the Twelve one will be delivered into his hands.
4. This ruler in the form of that king will come and there will come and there will come with him all the powers of this world, and they will hearken unto him in all that he desires
While here it is not specified at all that Satan becomes humanoid:

And the god of that world will stretch forth his hand against the Son, and they will crucify Him on a tree, and will slay Him not knowing who He is.
Whereas we know now who were the "they" who crucified him on a tree:
and there will come with him all the powers of this world
clearly the same spiritual "archontes of this age" of 1 Cor 2:6-8.
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.

User avatar
GakuseiDon
Posts: 726
Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2013 5:10 pm

Re: New evidence that Ascension of Isaiah is a mythicist document

Post by GakuseiDon » Tue Feb 20, 2018 12:30 am

Giuseppe wrote:
Mon Feb 19, 2018 8:05 am
While here it is not specified at all that Satan becomes humanoid:
And the god of that world will stretch forth his hand against the Son, and they will crucify Him on a tree, and will slay Him not knowing who He is.
Well, looking at this and applying your logic:
1. Satan has a hand, therefore he is humanoid. (If he has hands, then he is humanoid!)
2. Satan is humanoid, therefore he crucified Jesus on earth.

Check.mate! :cheers:

Of course, I'm not serious. "Stretching forth a hand" and its variants indicates a use of power, often from a distance, and not necessarily with a literal hand nor literal 'handling'. Some examples:

Jer 27:5 I have made the earth, the man and the beast that are upon the ground, by my great power and by my outstretched arm...

Eze 14:9 I will stretch out my hand upon him [false prophet], and will destroy him from the midst of my people Israel...

Eze 25:13 Therefore thus saith the Lord GOD; I will also stretch out mine hand upon Edom, and will cut off man and beast from it

Exod 8:5 ...And the LORD spake unto Moses, Say unto Aaron, Stretch forth thine hand with thy rod over the streams, over the rivers, and over the ponds, and cause frogs to come up upon the land of Egypt.

So, while "Satan stretching forth his hand" may apply to some use of power in a sublunar heaven, it also may apply to it being used in an earthly setting as well.
It is really important, in life, to concentrate our minds on our enthusiasms, not on our dislikes. -- Roger Pearse

Giuseppe
Posts: 4636
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Vicenza (Italy)

Re: New evidence that Ascension of Isaiah is a mythicist document

Post by Giuseppe » Tue Feb 20, 2018 5:59 am

GakuseiDon wrote:
Tue Feb 20, 2018 12:30 am

So, while "Satan stretching forth his hand" may apply to some use of power in a sublunar heaven, it also may apply to it being used in an earthly setting as well.
surely, but please see what is strange (=surprising, =not probable) under a historicist reading of the passage about the Son, as I pointed out before:
And the god of that world will stretch forth his hand against the Son, and they will crucify Him on a tree, and will slay Him not knowing who He is.
I had thought that "they" could be the Romans and Jews. But this is very improbable considering who joins the humanoid Satan in killing Peter:
Of the Twelve one will be delivered into his hands.
4. This ruler in the form of that king will come and there will come and there will come with him all the powers of this world, and they will hearken unto him in all that he desires.
it doesn't seem that Nero/Satan had the entire Roman Empire against Peter!

Clearly Nero/Satan has "with him" all the spiritual "powers of this world".

As with Peter, so with the "they" who crucified the Son on the tree.
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.

User avatar
GakuseiDon
Posts: 726
Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2013 5:10 pm

Re: New evidence that Ascension of Isaiah is a mythicist document

Post by GakuseiDon » Tue Feb 20, 2018 11:19 pm

Giuseppe wrote:
Tue Feb 20, 2018 5:59 am
And the god of that world will stretch forth his hand against the Son, and they will crucify Him on a tree, and will slay Him not knowing who He is.
I had thought that "they" could be the Romans and Jews. But this is very improbable considering who joins the humanoid Satan in killing Peter:
Of the Twelve one will be delivered into his hands.
4. This ruler in the form of that king will come and there will come and there will come with him all the powers of this world, and they will hearken unto him in all that he desires.
it doesn't seem that Nero/Satan had the entire Roman Empire against Peter!

Clearly Nero/Satan has "with him" all the spiritual "powers of this world".

As with Peter, so with the "they" who crucified the Son on the tree.
Aren't the implications of that as follows?:

1. Nero (really Beliar/Satan) has "all the powers of this world" to kill Peter, which you take to mean "all the spiritual "powers of this world"".
2. You point out the similarity to how Satan stretches forth his hand against the Son, and "they will crucify him on a tree". You see the "they" as the spiritual powers who crucify Christ.

Well, if Peter can be killed on earth by all the spiritual powers of this world, why can't that passage in AoI as well as 1 Cor in Paul be read the same, i.e. Christ was killed on earth by all the spiritual powers of this world, just like Peter? (Not that I myself read 1 Cor that way, but it seems the implications of what you are arguing.)

Or am I misreading you somehow?
It is really important, in life, to concentrate our minds on our enthusiasms, not on our dislikes. -- Roger Pearse

Giuseppe
Posts: 4636
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Vicenza (Italy)

Re: New evidence that Ascension of Isaiah is a mythicist document

Post by Giuseppe » Tue Feb 20, 2018 11:45 pm

GakuseiDon wrote:
Tue Feb 20, 2018 11:19 pm
Well, if Peter can be killed on earth by all the spiritual powers of this world, why can't that passage in AoI as well as 1 Cor in Paul be read the same, i.e. Christ was killed on earth by all the spiritual powers of this world, just like Peter? (Not that I myself read 1 Cor that way, but it seems the implications of what you are arguing.)

Or am I misreading you somehow?
Maybe a table may help:

death of the Sondeath of Peter
And the god of that world will stretch forth his hand against the Son, Of the Twelve one will be delivered into his hands.
4. This ruler in the form of that king will come and there will come
and they will crucify Him on a tree, and will slay Him not knowing who He is.and there will come with him all the powers of this world, and they will hearken unto him in all that he desires.

THere is the same occurrence of ''they'', ''hand/s'' and ''ruler/god/prince of this world'' in both the events.

The only (telling) difference is that the killer of Peter is a Satan ''in the form of that king'' while the killer of the Son is Satan presumably in the his own form, without need of a humanoid mask.

This is in my view a strong indication that the author wanted to specify that the historical death of a historical man (Peter) could only be done possible on the earth by a humanoid ''Satan'' (=Nero). If the same author didn't specify in which humanoid form Satan and his evil archontes killed Jesus, this is probably why he didn't have that need: the (outer space) mythicist interpretation explains validly this fact.

Not just so the historicist interpretation.

So the entire goal of the thread is to point the fact that the ancient mind wasn't so different from our mind: spiritual beings can kill directly men only in the outer space, while spiritual beings can kill indirectly men (=via the assumption of a humanoid form) only on the earth.
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.

Giuseppe
Posts: 4636
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Vicenza (Italy)

Re: New evidence that Ascension of Isaiah is a mythicist document

Post by Giuseppe » Wed Feb 21, 2018 12:02 am

Note also another striking feature of the Ascension of Isaiah: in both the cases (of Peter and the Son) who assumes a humanoid form is the real winner of the fight:

in the case of Peter it is Satan who assumes the humanoid form since he seems the winner on Peter (and he knows what he is doing: killing one of the apostles).

in the case of Jesus it is the Son who assumes the humanoid form since he is really defeating an ignorant Satan in that trial (even if apparently he is the victim of Satan).

So the ''humanoid form'' in both the cases is related to the specific own world of the real victim: the earth for the historical Peter, the outer space for the mythological Satan.
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.

User avatar
GakuseiDon
Posts: 726
Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2013 5:10 pm

Re: New evidence that Ascension of Isaiah is a mythicist document

Post by GakuseiDon » Wed Feb 21, 2018 1:58 am

Giuseppe wrote:
Tue Feb 20, 2018 11:45 pm
Not just so the historicist interpretation.
Could I ask you not to call it "the historicist interpretation", please? It suggests to me that the argument is that a historical Nero (Satan or not) killed a historical Peter. I'm not arguing that AoI is evidence for any kind of historicity. It's clear that AoI has a Christ/Beloved who probably descended to earth in any extant version.

But as I've said many times, an earthly Jesus does not necessarily mean a historical Jesus. There are mythical arguments that have an earthly Jesus, for example GA Wells' Paul's Jesus.

Similarly, I don't know if Peter being killed by Nero is a historical event.
Giuseppe wrote:
Tue Feb 20, 2018 11:45 pm
So the entire goal of the thread is to point the fact that the ancient mind wasn't so different from our mind: spiritual beings can kill directly men only in the outer space, while spiritual beings can kill indirectly men (=via the assumption of a humanoid form) only on the earth.
So you are not arguing that in AoI it is spiritual forces that killed Peter? That seems to be the implication of your earlier comment "Clearly Nero/Satan has "with him" all the spiritual "powers of this world". As with Peter, so with the "they" who crucified the Son on the tree."

In your view, who killed Peter according to the AoI? Was it spiritual forces, even if indirectly? Or was it a humanoid Nero/Satan, with spiritual forces not involved?
It is really important, in life, to concentrate our minds on our enthusiasms, not on our dislikes. -- Roger Pearse

Giuseppe
Posts: 4636
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Vicenza (Italy)

Re: New evidence that Ascension of Isaiah is a mythicist document

Post by Giuseppe » Wed Feb 21, 2018 8:41 am

GakuseiDon wrote:
Wed Feb 21, 2018 1:58 am
Giuseppe wrote:
Tue Feb 20, 2018 11:45 pm
Not just so the historicist interpretation.
Could I ask you not to call it "the historicist interpretation", please? It suggests to me that the argument is that a historical Nero (Satan or not) killed a historical Peter. I'm not arguing that AoI is evidence for any kind of historicity.
I think that AoI is evidence of the (legend of the ?) anti-Christian persecution by Nero in Rome.


It's clear that AoI has a Christ/Beloved who probably descended to earth in any extant version.
No, it is not clear for me. The AoI has a Christ/Beloved who probably descended to the lower heavens as the place of the his crucifixion on a ''tree''.
But as I've said many times, an earthly Jesus does not necessarily mean a historical Jesus. There are mythical arguments that have an earthly Jesus, for example GA Wells' Paul's Jesus.
GA Wells never quotes the Ascension of Isaiah in his books, to my knowledge. Probably he thinks that his author knew the Gospels. Rather, Roger Parvus is a mythicist who argues for an earthly Jesus in AoI.
Similarly, I don't know if Peter being killed by Nero is a historical event.

I know that for the author of the AoI the killing of Peter by Nero is a historical event.

So you are not arguing that in AoI it is spiritual forces that killed Peter? That seems to be the implication of your earlier comment "Clearly Nero/Satan has "with him" all the spiritual "powers of this world". As with Peter, so with the "they" who crucified the Son on the tree."
I am not arguing that in AoI Peter is killed directly by demons. Peter is on the earth (we know it from the pauline epistles), ok? So whoever killed Peter directly, he was on the earth. So the AoI says that the killer of Peter were earthly forces - the Romans - lead by a particular human ruler (only the latter being really Satan masked as human being). I am arguing that the ''powers of this world'' who were allied with Satan in this episode were spiritual beings. They were not behind Romans, they were with Satan.
It is sufficient that only Satan is said to be behind Nero, to make that event an earthly event.

Because otherwise, if there was not the construct ''in the form of a human ruler'' related to Satan, I should think that Peter is killed in the outer space.

In your view, who killed Peter according to the AoI? Was it spiritual forces, even if indirectly? Or was it a humanoid Nero/Satan, with spiritual forces not involved?
who killed Peter were Romans of Nero. We know that the Romans killed directly Peter on the earth (from the only AoI) because it is mentioned that the killer of Peter is Satan ''in the form of a human ruler'' (who could only be Nero, based on other evidence, but this is a different discussion about what is that ''other evidence''). But the fact that according to the AoI the killer of Peter is Satan, doesn't mean that ''all the rulers of this world'' (what is a parallel of the term ''they'' in the Son passage) are Romans: no, they are only demons who are allied with Satan. But only Satan is masked as human being.

So in the Son passage we have that who kills directly Jesus is not Satan, but ''they''. Satan is behind ''they'', since the latter, and not the former, ''crucified the Son on a tree''. Based on the parallelism with the Peter's passage, who are more probably ''they''? They are the spiritual ''archontes of this world''.


Satan isn't said to be ''in the form of a human ruler'', nor ''they'' are said to be ''in the form of human rulers'' so the default interpretation is that the Son's event is not on the earth.

Basically, I am applying a particular strong form of the Argument from Silence:

1) if the author wants to specify that a killing happened on the earth, he very probably has to specify that the killer is ''in the form of a human ruler''.
2) the killer of Peter is Satan ''in the form of a human ruler''.
3) So the author wants to specify, via point 2, that Peter is killed on the earth.
4) the killer of the Son are the spiritual archontes lead by Satan and neither Satan nor ''they'' are ''in the form of human rulers''.
5) So the author wants to specify, via point 4, that the Son is killed not on the earth.
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.

Post Reply