Romans 5:6 : when is precisely the “right time”

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
Post Reply
Giuseppe
Posts: 13732
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Romans 5:6 : when is precisely the “right time”

Post by Giuseppe »


For while we were still in weakness, still at the opportune time Christ died for the ungodly.

(Romans 5:6)

ἔτι γὰρ Χριστὸς ὄντων ἡμῶν ἀσθενῶν ἔτι κατὰ καιρὸν ὑπὲρ ἀσεβῶν ἀπέθανεν.


ἀσθενῶν is translated (wrongly) "weak", or "in weakness", but it means more precisely “without strength”.

It means, even more precisely, "without strength of life". De facto, it is the essential feature of the Archons:


Galatians 4:9:

But now that you know God—or rather are known by God—how is it that you are turning back to those weak and miserable forces?



νῦν δὲ γνόντες Θεόν, μᾶλλον δὲ γνωσθέντες ὑπὸ Θεοῦ, πῶς ἐπιστρέφετε πάλιν ἐπὶ τὰ ἀσθενῆ καὶ πτωχὰ στοιχεῖα, οἷς πάλιν ἄνωθεν δουλεῦσαι θέλετε;


1 Corinthians 1:27 :

But God chose the foolish things of the world to shame the wise; God chose the weak things of the world ...


ἀλλὰ τὰ μωρὰ τοῦ κόσμου ἐξελέξατο ὁ Θεός ἵνα καταισχύνῃ τοὺς σοφούς, καὶ τὰ ἀσθενῆ τοῦ κόσμου ἐξελέξατο ὁ Θεός ἵνα καταισχύνῃ τὰ ἰσχυρά,


But why were the Archons considered "without strength"? Because they alone were absolutely unable to instill LIFE in their creation.

To give LIFE to the souls of the human beings, they had to dismember the body of a higher divine being into pieces, so that each of those pieces could infuse life into their creation.

Hence, after the creation of the material world but before the infusion of the vital divine spirit in men, the Archons had to crucify the Son of God. That is also the sense of the Parable of Sower (see the Naassenes regarding it).

CONCLUSION:

Romans 5:6 should be translated so:

For while we were still without the divine pneuma in us, still at the opportune time [=before the animation of the material world ] Christ died for the ungodly.

ça va sans dire, the passage is 100% evidence of mythicism.
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.
Giuseppe
Posts: 13732
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: Romans 5:6 : when is precisely the “right time”

Post by Giuseppe »

So Richard Carrier:

Although minimal mythicism is compatible with any timeline, in OHJ I assume that the “revealed death” occurred in the 30’s AD (in accordance with the “eons” logic we find in later documents like Hermas). Not at the dawn of time. Though minimal mythicism predicts nothing as to when the death occurred, except “in the past.” But I can’t see the logic of the death occurring before even creation. It had to reverse the sin of Adam and Satan, so it had to occur not only after Adam’s sin in Eden, but even after the fall of Satan. And thus certainly, post creation. There is no sound way to get the Pauline epistles or the early Christian logic to fit any other scenario.
That still allows a possible ancient death (and hence Paul could be saying “we” in Romans 5 as in “humanity,” not “we” as in his current generation; likewise, he does not explicitly say the visions of Jesus occurred the third day after his death in 1 Cor. 15, only that he rose the third day after; Paul doesn’t actually say how long after that it was before Jesus revealed this). But I don’t see any need to argue for that. And I don’t anywhere in OHJ.
So Romans 5 poses no issue for OHJ.

(my bold)
https://www.richardcarrier.info/archive ... ment-22654

It is interesting the reference to Hermas. I know that both Couchoud and Doherty think that Hermas is a 'mythicist' Christian sect. I should see again that text.
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.
Giuseppe
Posts: 13732
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: Romans 5:6 : when is precisely the “right time”

Post by Giuseppe »

In this old thread there are a list of “reasons” for a recent crucifixion in Paul.

http://bcharchive.org/2/thearchives/sho ... l?t=158630


Ignoring (rightly) the “arguments” about Mark, I would raise the following objections:
Evidence that Paul regarded Jesus as a real human being in real human history, not from the age of myth:

1. Jesus must have lived after Adam, since Paul calls him the latter Adam (1 Corinthians 15.22, 45).

2. Jesus must have lived after Abraham, since Paul calls him the seed (descendant) of Abraham (Galatians 3.16).

3. Jesus must have lived after Moses, since Paul says that he was the end of the law of Moses (Romans 10.4-5).

4. Jesus must have lived after David, since Paul calls him the seed (descendant) of David (Romans 1.4).
I don't see a so great difference between that “real human history” and the “age of myth”.
Evidence that Paul regarded Jesus as having lived recently, within living memory, as an older contemporary:

1. Paul claims to have had dealings with the brother of the Lord, James (Galatians 1.19; 1 Corinthians 9.5).
It doesn't prove that the Jesus cult was born only then, when Paul or James appeared. There could be a pre-christian cult of Jesus.
2. Paul believes he is living in the end times (1 Corinthians 10.11), that he himself (1 Thessalonians 4.15; 1 Corinthians 15.51) or at least his converts (1 Thessalonians 5.23; 2 Corinthians 4.14) might well live to see the parousia. Paul also believes that the resurrection of Jesus was not just an ordinary resuscitation of the kind Elijah or Elisha supposedly wrought; it was the first instance of the general resurrection from the dead at the end of the age (1 Corinthians 15.13, 20-28). When, then, does Paul think Jesus rose from the dead? If, for Paul, he rose from the dead at some point in the indeterminate past, then we must explain either (A) why Paul thought the general resurrection had begun (with Jesus) well before the end times or (B) why Paul regarded the end times as a span of time stretching from the misty past all the way to the present. If, however, Paul regarded the resurrection of Jesus as a recent phenomenon, all is explained. The resurrection of Jesus was the beginning of the general resurrection and thus the ultimate sign that the end times were underway.
The answer to (A): Because Paul knows only recently that Jesus was risen. Not that Jesus was risen recently. It was the gift of the gnosis the first sign of the end times.


The answer to (B): Paul regarded the end times as a span of time stretching from the revelation (of the knowledge about the death and resurrection of Jesus) all the way to the present. Again, it was the gift of the gnosis the first sign of the end times. The recent revelation about the resurrection of Jesus was the beginning of the general resurrection and thus the ultimate sign that the end times were underway.
3. Paul expects that he might see the general resurrection in his own lifetime (1 Corinthians 15.51). He also calls Jesus the firstfruits of that resurrection. Since the firstfruits of the harvest precede the main harvest itself by only a short time, the very metaphor works better with a short time between the resurrection of Jesus and the resurrection of the rest of the dead, implying that the resurrection of Jesus was recent for Paul.
the same metaphor works better with a short time between the revelation of the resurrection of Jesus - a revelation that is happened only recently - and the resurrection of the rest of the dead, implying that the revelation of the resurrection of Jesus - and not the resurrection of Jesus - was recent for Paul.
4. There is, for Paul, no generation gap between the death of Jesus and the resurrection of Jesus (1 Corinthians 15.4). Furthermore, there is no generation gap between the recipients of the resurrection appearances and Paul himself; he is personally acquainted with the first recipient of a resurrection appearance (1 Corinthians 15.5; Galatians 1.18). Is there a gap between the resurrection and the first appearance? The flow of 1 Corinthians 15.3-8 would certainly not suggest one; however, I believe we can go further.
Still, these words are missing totally the point about the fatidic importance of the revelation in the present, recent time. To paraphrase it, “ There may be, for Paul, a generation gap between the death/resurrection of Jesus and the revelation of the death/resurrection of Jesus”.
Paul claims that Jesus was the end of the law for those who have faith (Romans 10.4), that he was raised from the dead in order to justify humans (Romans 4.25), and that this justification comes by faith (Romans 5.1) in Jesus (Romans 3.22). Paul also claims that no one can have faith unless he first hears the gospel from a preacher (Romans 10.14) who is sent (Romans 10.15). Finally, Paul acknowledges that it was at the present time (Romans 3.26) that God showed forth his justice apart from the law (Romans 3.21), and that the sent ones, the apostles, were to come last of all (1 Corinthians 4.9); he also implies that the resurrection appearances were the occasion of the sending out of apostles (1 Corinthians 9.1; 15.7, 9; Galatians 1.15-16). If we presume that, for Paul, Jesus was raised in the distant past but only recently revealed to the apostles, we must take pains to account for this gap; why, for Paul, did Jesus die in order to end the law and justify humans but then wait indefinitely before making this justification available to humans? If, however, we presume that, for Paul, Jesus was raised recently, shortly before appearing to all the apostles, all is explained. That was the right time (Romans 5.6).
Apart the fact that only “God” (read: revelation) may define something “the right time”, the answer to the question:
why, for Paul, did Jesus die in order to end the law and justify humans but then wait indefinitely before making this justification available to humans?

...the answer is rather easy to be found. Because there is at work an implicit recognition of the specific God's love for the apostles (like Paul), the only insiders who can share the privilege about the revelation of the secret death and resurrection of Jesus in the remote past. Paul himself talks about himself as a predestinate in Galatians 1:15-16:

But when God, who set me apart from my mother’s womb and called me by his grace, was pleased to reveal his Son in me so that I might preach him among the Gentiles, my immediate response was not to consult any human being.

Paul talks about the Perfects themselves as predestinate from the remote past to share the sacre gnosis(1 Corinthians 2):
No, we declare God’s wisdom, a mystery that has been hidden and that God destined for our glory before time began.

Hence, the fact that a remote secret was broken only now, this only fact marks the intrinsic superiority of the Perfects. Even more so than the other scenario of a recent crucifixion.
5. Paul writes that God sent forth his son to redeem those under the law in the fullness of time (Galatians 4.4). It is easier to suppose that, for Paul, the fullness of time had some direct correspondence to the end of the ages (1 Corinthians 10.11) than to imagine that the fullness of time came, Jesus died, and then everybody had to wait another long expanse of time for the death to actually apply to humanity.
Earl Doherty has proved that Galatians 4:4 talks about the revelation being happened “in the fulness of time”, not about the death and resurrection of Jesus being happened then.

Frankly, reading again that post, my feeling is that it seems to be written by a Christian apologist more than by the author of my knowledge. But it is only my feeling. :facepalm:
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.
Giuseppe
Posts: 13732
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: Romans 5:6 : when is precisely the “right time”

Post by Giuseppe »

Still:
Ben C. Smith wrote: Sat Jun 22, 2019 6:20 pm The main question I have for anybody who thinks that Paul did not regard Jesus' death as recent is this: what time frame does "the fullness of time" (Galatians 4.4) or "the right time" (Romans 5.6) refer to? What did Paul have in mind? Anything hazy here is simply out for me, because the text implies that Paul has a time in mind.
"the fullness of time" (Galatians 4:4) is definitely proved beyond any doubt (by Earl Doherty) as a reference to the time of the revelation, not the time of an appearance in the world.


"The right time" (Romans 5:6) , docet Carrier, "allows a possible ancient death (and hence Paul could be saying “we” in Romans 5 as in “humanity,” not “we” as in his current generation)". More specifically, that "time" is "right" according (probably) to God, it is the time that God has in mind, not Paul. Hence it is part of the "God’s wisdom, a mystery that has been hidden and that God destined for our glory before time began". That time is probably secret, known only for insiders like Paul. Translated for us outsiders: that time is undefined.

The default position when in the language of mystery a similar temporal expression is used, is by need the undefined past, not the recent time.
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.
Post Reply