Jesus from Outer Space

[Giuseppe]

From the link you quote I agree particularly with Wells here:

Perhaps Doherty's strongest point is Paul's assertion (1 Cor.2:8) that Jesus was crucified by supernatural forces (the archontes). I take this to mean that they prompted the action of human agents: but I must admit that the text ascribes the deed to the archontes themselves.

True, true, amen. Paul doesn't write "archontes of this cosmos", but "archontes of this aeon".

That admission of Wells has never come from his living fans as Ben.

[robert j]

George Wells:

Perhaps Doherty's strongest point is Paul's assertion (1 Cor.2:8) that Jesus was crucified by supernatural forces (the archontes). I take this to mean that they prompted the action of human agents: but I must admit that the text ascribes the deed to the archontes themselves.

https://infidels.org/library/modern/g_a ... liest.html

This post consists of criticism of Wells' statement; along with support of the theory of Paul's system that includes a spiritual, heavenly Jesus Christ that came to earth at some time in the unspecified past in the form of a man to suffer a redemptive and salvific death on behalf of humankind, as found by Paul with his creative and generative use of the Jewish scriptures.

I think Wells’ granting of a point here, implying at least that the use of the term “archons” does lend some support for a death by supernatural forces, is misguided. Sure, it's possible, but in Paul’s day the Greek term “archon” meant only a ruler, commonly a chief, prince, or governor. It could be a wise ruler or an evil one, a ruler of men, a ruler of angels, or a ruler of demons. The nature and characteristics of the ruler was provided by the surrounding context.

The immediate context in this passage in 1 Corinthians only identifies the rulers as “of this age” and as lacking in understanding of the hidden wisdom of God. It is possible the rulers were intended as demonic, or as humans influenced by demonic forces, or simply as human rulers.

However, I think Wells has failed to acknowledge an obvious solution here. That a possible, even probable, solution can be found in Paul’s typical modus operandi for developing his characterizations of his Jesus Christ. (I haven’t read Wells beyond bits and pieces posted by others, so I’m not sure what he may have written elsewhere on this topic).

Paul characterized the events and implications of his Jesus Christ based on creative and generative use of the Jewish scriptures. The salvific sufferings and death from Isaiah 53, the implied resurrection also from Isaiah 53, the redemption from the law on the tree from Deuteronomy, as the seed of Abraham from Genesis; the gathering of assemblies and the expected coming of the Lord and the coming wrath and the salvific “good news” at least in part from Joel 2. I think Psalm 2 as source material for the archons here, and for this passage in question in 1 Corinthians, is another pea in the same pod. And certainly human rulers found in the scriptures could readily be considered as "rulers of this age".

1 Corinthians 2:7-8

Psalm 2, LXX and [Comments]

But we speak in a mystery, the wisdom of God having been hidden, which God foreordained before the ages for our glory, which none of the rulers (ἀρχόντων/archons) of this age has understood. For if they had understood it, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory. (1 Corinthians 2:7-8)

The kings of the earth stood by and the rulers (άρχοντες/archons) gathered together against the Lord and against his anointed (χριστού/Christou) one. (Psalm 2:2) [The rulers did not understanding the hidden wisdom of God ---] The one dwelling in heavens derides them, and the Lord ridicules them. Then he shall speak to them in his anger; and in his rage he will disturb them. (Psalm 2:4) [And where did Paul consistently look for the hidden wisdom of God? --- The scriptures.]

And following very close behind in Psalm 2 is a clear allusion commonly applied to Christ ---

The Lord said to me, you are my son, today I engendered you. Ask from me and I will give to you nations for your inheritance; and for your possession the ends of the earth. (Psalm 2:7-9)

I think Paul’s use of Psalm 2 here is clearly well within the range of his exegetical norms and I think provides the most likely solution for 1 Corinthians 2:7-8.


nota bene: By way of acknowledgement, GakuseiDon provided on this forum a good analysis of the interrelationships between Psalm 2 and Corinthians 2:7-8 two or 3 years ago.

nota bene 2: My apologies in advance if I don't follow-up on this --- I just couldn't help myself from posting this, but I have exceeded by far the time I have intended to curently devote to the forum.

[maryhelena]

George Wells:

Perhaps Doherty's strongest point is Paul's assertion (1 Cor.2:8) that Jesus was crucified by supernatural forces (the archontes). I take this to mean that they prompted the action of human agents: but I must admit that the text ascribes the deed to the archontes themselves.

https://infidels.org/library/modern/g_a ... liest.html

This post consists of criticism of Wells; along with support of the theory of a spiritual, heavenly Jesus Christ that came to earth at some time in the unspecified past in the form of a man to suffer a redemptive and salvific death on behalf of humankind, as found by Paul with his creative and generative use of the Jewish scriptures.

Support for theology is not on my agenda. Not only is this theory unscientific it is also not humanitarian. Lets give Paul the benefit of the doubt here....he was not attempting to put over some anti-humanitarian agenda.

I think Wells’ granting of a point here, implying at least that the use of the term “archons” does lend some support for a death by supernatural forces is misguided. Sure, it's possible, but in Paul’s day the Geek term “archon” meant only a ruler, commonly a prince or king. It could be a wise ruler or an evil one, a ruler of men, a ruler of angels, or a ruler of demons. The nature and characteristics of the ruler was provided by the surrounding context.

That's all Carrier and Doherty need for their theory. It's possible to interpret the passage the way they do.

The immediate context in this passage in 1 Corinthians only identifies the rulers as “of this age” and as lacking in understanding of the hidden wisdom of God. It is possible the rulers were intended as demonic, or as humans influenced by demonic forces, or simply as human rulers.

However, I think Wells has failed to acknowledge an obvious solution here. That a possible, even probable, solution can be found in Paul’s typical modus operandi for developing his characterizations of his Jesus Christ. (I haven’t read Wells beyond bits and pieces posted by others, so I’m not sure what he may have written elsewhere on this topic).

It's all interpretation. Which interpretation appeals to one will be dependent on ones approach to the material being questioned. A theological approach will yield one result. A scientific, a humanitarian or a philosophical approach will yield other possibilities for the Pauline text.

Paul characterized the events and implications of his Jesus Christ based on creative and generative use of the Jewish scriptures. The salvific sufferings and death from Isaiah 53, the implied resurrection also from Isaiah 53, the redemption from the law on the tree from Deuteronomy, as the seed of Abraham from Genesis; the gathering of assemblies and the expected coming of the Lord and the coming wrath and the salvific “good news” at least in part from Joel. I think Psalm 2 as source material for the archons here, and for this passage in question in 1 Corinthians, is another pea in the same pod. And certainly human rulers found in the scriptures could readily be considered as "rulers of this age".

1 Corinthians 2:7-8

Psalm 2, LXX and [Comments]

But we speak in a mystery, the wisdom of God having been hidden, which God foreordained before the ages for our glory, which none of the rulers (ἀρχόντων/archons) of this age has understood. For if they had understood it, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory. (1 Corinthians 2:7-8)

The kings of the earth stood by and the rulers (άρχοντες/archons) gathered together against the Lord and against his anointed (χριστού/Christou) one. (Psalm 2:2) [Evidence of the rulers not understanding the hidden wisdom of God ---] The one dwelling in heavens derides them, and the Lord ridicules them. Then he shall speak to them in his anger; and in his rage he will disturb them. (Psalm 2:4) [And where did Paul consistently look for the hidden wisdom of God? --- The scriptures.]

And following very close behind in Psalm 2 is a clear allusion commonly seen as applied to Christ ---

The Lord said to me, you are my son, today I engendered you. Ask from me and I will give to you nations for your inheritance; and for your possession the ends of the earth. (Psalm 2:7-9)

I think Paul’s use of Psalm 2 here is clearly well within the range of his exegetical norms and I think provides the most likely solution for 1 Corinthians 2:7-8.

As above.....interpretations will depend upon ones approach to the text.

nota bene: By way of acknowledgement, GakuseiDon provided on this forum a good analysis of the interrelationships between Psalm 2 and Corinthians 2:7-8 two or 3 years ago.

nota bene 2: My apologies in advance if I don't follow-up on this --- I just couldn't help myself from posting this, but I have exceeded by far the time I have intended to curently devote to the forum.

[davidmartin]

RJ, one the enduring perceptions i have of Christianity is the belief in the supernatural universe consisting of opposing entities
i realise a large chunk of people reject this supernatural aspect and maybe that informs your view?
acknowledging it doesn't mean the interpretation suggested in prior posts is true in the least as it can be interpreted in lots of ways
i wonder if you might get further trying one of these interpretations instead of seeming to go against that supernatural teaching inherent in Christianity

[robert j]

This post consists of criticism of Wells; along with support of the theory of a spiritual, heavenly Jesus Christ that came to earth at some time in the unspecified past in the form of a man to suffer a redemptive and salvific death on behalf of humankind, as found by Paul with his creative and generative use of the Jewish scriptures.

Support for theology is not on my agenda.

Paul's system is in large part a theological system, hence theological interpretations must certainly be involved.

And just in case there may be some confusion, in my post above I have edited the paragraph you cite here to clarify that the theory I support is about Paul's system as presented in his letters. I do not believe that a spiritual, heavenly Jesus Christ actually came to earth at some time in the unspecified past in the form of a man to suffer a redemptive and salvific death.

[Secret Alias]

I am not for the 'outer space' interpretation. This is the closest I've seen in early Patristic writings:

Therefore the Lord came down bringing the peace which is from heaven to those on earth, as the Apostle says, "Peace on the earth and glory in the heights." Therefore a strange and new star arose doing away with the old astral decree, shining with a new unearthly light, which revolved on a new path of salvation, as the Lord himself, men's guide, who came down to earth to transfer from Fate to his providence those who believed in Christ. [Ex Theo 74]

[maryhelena]

This post consists of criticism of Wells; along with support of the theory of a spiritual, heavenly Jesus Christ that came to earth at some time in the unspecified past in the form of a man to suffer a redemptive and salvific death on behalf of humankind, as found by Paul with his creative and generative use of the Jewish scriptures.

Support for theology is not on my agenda.

Paul's system is in large part a theological system, hence theological interpretations must certainly be involved.

And just in case there may be some confusion, in my post above I have edited the paragraph you cite here to clarify that the theory I support is about Paul's system as presented in his letters. I do not believe that a spiritual, heavenly Jesus Christ actually came to earth at some time in the unspecified past in the form of a man to suffer a redemptive and salvific death.

Thanks for clarification.

So are you proposing that Paul was preaching an anti humanitarian message..... a message you don't yourself subscribe to......but then are you not acknowledging that a theological interpretation of Paul is nonsence...... hence meaningless....

[Giuseppe]

I am not for the 'outer space' interpretation. This is the closest I've seen in early Patristic writings:

Therefore the Lord came down bringing the peace which is from heaven to those on earth, as the Apostle says, "Peace on the earth and glory in the heights." Therefore a strange and new star arose doing away with the old astral decree, shining with a new unearthly light, which revolved on a new path of salvation, as the Lord himself, men's guide, who came down to earth to transfer from Fate to his providence those who believed in Christ. [Ex Theo 74]

Thanks, the patristic writings talks also about a cosmic cross in outer space in the Valentinian system. So Carrier's answer about my question:

That belief is attested too late to be of any use in reconstructing the origins of Christianity.

I mention such beliefs in general only in two sentences in OHJ and only as proofs of concept, i.e. that some groups could imagine such things (pp. 580-81, 609-610, and that only in regards nativities, although the same point would extend to crucifixions).

Gnosticism, BTW, didn’t exist. It’s a modern construct that actually had no ancient correlate.

(my underline)

[Giuseppe]

I think Wells’ granting of a point here, implying at least that the use of the term “archons” does lend some support for a death by supernatural forces, is misguided.

note that the same midrashic source meant by you ("The rulers of earth conspire against..." etc) has moved "Luke" to add names (Herod) in the list of the traditional killers, while under your scenario the same midrashical source would have moved Paul to reduce humans and Archontes to the only Archontes. Contradiction.

At any case, the first exegete to see that particular Psalm behind 1 Cor 2:8 was named Paul-Louis Couchoud.

[davidmartin]

Gnosticism, BTW, didn’t exist. It’s a modern construct that actually had no ancient correlate

This isn't a very honest statement, and is clearly intended to add support to his dismissal of gnostic myths shedding any light on things
While it is true (and everyone knows it that gets past a cursory examination) that 'Gnosticism' is a modern construct - it's a construct designed to contain various streams of attested ancient belief and groups that did exist
The idea is these groups shared some basic material in common to place them in the category with debate ongoing over whether such and such a group should be within it or not and what the construct even means... we know all that 100 years ago! To quibble over the term isn't honest

Some of the 'gnostic' myths can be dated to at least the early 2nd century before disappearing into the mists of time but even then there's fragments of earlier stuff. The situation isn't much worse than for orthadox writings, so to casually dismiss 'gnostic' writings is very presumptuous and lazy
The mythicists just are doing that same thing orthodox apologists are doing!

I declare war on mythicists - they're dishonest and their time is past. At some point the source material was too confusing for them so they decided to make things up and come up with their own new myth. How Gnostic! What makes it more absurd is they dismiss the very same ancient mythologists in whose footsteps they follow. What a load of tosh. Move over idiots you are getting far more of the limelight than you deserve!