Why the Archon of this World kills just his son (and not the Son of Father)
Posted: Thu Jan 03, 2019 12:42 am
In a curious version of Ascension of Isaiah, there is the following passage:
viewtopic.php?f=3&t=4683#p93631
I think that the only possible explanation for the very strange fact that Satan killed his Son, is that the Son of the Supreme God assumed the appearance, in the last level where he descended to, of the creatures of the "god of this world". Since we know that that appearance is a human appearance, then we should conclude that the god of this world was also the creator of that world. So, there is a distinction at work between the demiurge and the supreme god.
The Son died in the flesh of one of the creatures of the demiurge. We have a separationist view insofar the Son of the Father didn't suffer really, while a creature of the Creator (hence his son) suffered by hand of the Creator himself.
This view seems to be in nuce the same reported later about the first readers of Mark:
Against Heresies (Book III, Chapter 11)
So the god of that world, by killing the mere man possessed by the Son of the Father, kills really only one of the his creatures on earth, without knowing really the identity of the his victim. The Archon believed that that man was an intruder, but really the victim was only a mere man: the true his spiritual possessor was not truly killed by the Archon.
So in 1 Cor 2:6-8 Paul would be saying that Jesus was not really crucified by the archons, but only the his mere clone in the flesh was crucified. Even so, the Archons's sin was a sin of hybris: an act of revolt against the Lord of the Glory.
Et princeps mundi illius propter filium ejus extendet manus suas in eum et suspendent illum in ligno, et occidet eum nesciens qui sit.
viewtopic.php?f=3&t=4683#p93631
And the god of that world will stretch out his hand against the Son of him [of the god of that world], and they will lay their hands upon him and hang him upon a tree, not knowing who he is.
I think that the only possible explanation for the very strange fact that Satan killed his Son, is that the Son of the Supreme God assumed the appearance, in the last level where he descended to, of the creatures of the "god of this world". Since we know that that appearance is a human appearance, then we should conclude that the god of this world was also the creator of that world. So, there is a distinction at work between the demiurge and the supreme god.
The Son died in the flesh of one of the creatures of the demiurge. We have a separationist view insofar the Son of the Father didn't suffer really, while a creature of the Creator (hence his son) suffered by hand of the Creator himself.
This view seems to be in nuce the same reported later about the first readers of Mark:
Those, again, who separate Jesus from Christ, alleging that Christ remained impassible, but that it was Jesus who suffered, preferring the Gospel by Mark, if they read it with a love of truth, may have their errors rectified.
Against Heresies (Book III, Chapter 11)
So the god of that world, by killing the mere man possessed by the Son of the Father, kills really only one of the his creatures on earth, without knowing really the identity of the his victim. The Archon believed that that man was an intruder, but really the victim was only a mere man: the true his spiritual possessor was not truly killed by the Archon.
So in 1 Cor 2:6-8 Paul would be saying that Jesus was not really crucified by the archons, but only the his mere clone in the flesh was crucified. Even so, the Archons's sin was a sin of hybris: an act of revolt against the Lord of the Glory.