Ascension of Isaiah and the Nativity passage

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
User avatar
neilgodfrey
Posts: 3608
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 4:08 pm

Ascension of Isaiah and the Nativity passage

Post by neilgodfrey » Thu Jun 23, 2016 1:39 pm

All commentaries I have seen on the AoI advise that 11.2-22 of the AoI has been inserted into an earlier text. Manuscript, stylistic and thematic arguments are cited. But a more recent researcher, Norelli, has argued otherwise. Here's a refresher on what we're talking about:
11.2. And I indeed saw a woman of the family of David the prophet, named Mary, and Virgin, and she was espoused to a man named Joseph, a carpenter, and he also was of the seed and family of the righteous David of Bethlehem Judah.

3. And he came into his lot. And when she was espoused, she was found with child, and Joseph the carpenter was desirous to put her away.

4. But the angel of the Spirit appeared in this world, and after that Joseph did not put her away, but kept Mary and did not reveal this matter to any one.

5. And he did not approach May, but kept her as a holy virgin, though with child.

6. And he did not live with her for two months.

7. And after two months of days while Joseph was in his house, and Mary his wife, but both alone.

8. It came to pass that when they were alone that Mary straight-way looked with her eyes and saw a small babe, and she was astonished.

9. And after she had been astonished, her womb was found as formerly before she had conceived.

10. And when her husband Joseph said unto her: "What has astonished thee?" his eyes were opened and he saw the infant and praised God, because into his portion God had come.

11. And a voice came to them: "Tell this vision to no one."

12. And the story regarding the infant was noised broad in Bethlehem.

13. Some said: "The Virgin Mary hath borne a child, before she was married two months."

14. And many said: "She has not borne a child, nor has a midwife gone up (to her), nor have we heard the cries of (labour) pains." And they were all blinded respecting Him and they all knew regarding Him, though they knew not whence He was.

15. And they took Him, and went to Nazareth in Galilee.

16. And I saw, O Hezekiah and Josab my son, and I declare to the other prophets also who are standing by, that (this) hath escaped all the heavens and all the princes and all the gods of this world.

17. And I saw: In Nazareth He sucked the breast as a babe and as is customary in order that He might not be recognized.

18. And when He had grown up he worked great signs and wonders in the land of Israel and of Jerusalem.

19. And after this the adversary envied Him and roused the children of Israel against Him, not knowing who He was, and they delivered Him to the king, and crucified Him, and He descended to the angel (of Sheol).

20. In Jerusalem indeed I was Him being crucified on a tree:

21. And likewise after the third day rise again and remain days.

22. And the angel who conducted me said: "Understand, Isaiah": and I saw when He sent out the Twelve Apostles and ascended.
Unfortunately Norelli's argument for the "authenticity" of the above passage is in Italian and I don't read Italian. But I have extracted Norelli's 3 page excursis in Ascensio Isaiae. 2, Commentarius and run it through Google Translator. I'll make that my next post. It would be fantastic if anyone who read Italian had the time and interest to smooth out the translation.
vridar.org Musings on biblical studies, politics, religion, ethics, human nature, tidbits from science

User avatar
neilgodfrey
Posts: 3608
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 4:08 pm

Re: Ascension of Isaiah and the Nativity passage

Post by neilgodfrey » Thu Jun 23, 2016 1:53 pm

Pages from CorpvsChristianorvm_8-Commentary-2.pdf
Norelli's Excursis arguing that 11.2-22 belongs to the original section of AoI's chapters 6 to 11.
(148.8 KiB) Downloaded 252 times
I have set it out paragraph by paragraph, the Italian para and its machine translation, but the Italian copy here will sometimes need to be corrected against the original in the attached file. Greek and other language fonts have obviously been a disaster.

Excursus X : II carattere originario di A I 11,2-22

Excursus X :The original character of A The 11.2-22


Tutto ciò vale naturalmente se si ammette il carattere originario dei v. 2-22. Ma già la struttura del passo induce ad ammetterlo. Infatti la solenne dichiarazione dell'angelo, presente sia in E che in SL2, secondo cui proprio per questo è stato inviato da Dio, mal si giustifica nella situazione di SL2, dove essa compare tra il descensus e I'ascensus del Diletto, e introduce solo due scolorite frasi sulla dimora del Diletto nel mondo in forma umana, seguite dalle notizie sulla sua ascensione nel firmamento, senza che si sappia né da dove né come vi é arrivato. La forma letteraria di 11,1, così pregnante nel suo riferimento a una speciale rivela- zione, appare dunque sproporzionata a ciò che la segue in SL2•

All this of course is true if one accepts the originating status of v . 2-22 . But already the step structure is conducive to admit it . In fact, the solemn declaration of the angel , this is in E and in SL2 , that for this reason it was sent by God , poorly justified in the situation of SL2 , where it appears between descensus and I'ascensus of the Beloved , and introduces only two discolored phrases concerning the residence of the Beloved in the world in human form , followed by the news of his ascension into the firmament , without knowing nor where or how you has arrived . The literary form of 11,1 , so poignant in its reference to a special revelation , appears disproportionate to what follows in SL2 •

Esaminiamo le frasi che in SL2 stanno al posto dei v. 2-22 di E. «Né infatti prima di te alcuno vide, né dopo di te potrà vedere ciò che tu hai visto e udito~~ ripete - come CHARLES, p. XXIV, aveva visto- 8,11, dove però questa forma s'inserisce molto meglio sia nel contesto immediato che in quello largo. <<Vidi uno simile a un figlio d'uomo>~ secondo CHARLES, p. XXVI-XXVII e p. L, sarebbe stato originario; l'avrebbe eliminato l'editore di G1 (capostipite perduto della recensione di AI 6-11 conservata in ELI) in quanto, dalla fine del I secolo, se ne evitò l'uso come titolo messianico perché induceva a supporre l'esclusiva umanità di Cristo, laddove il redattore di G1 mostra, al contrario, tracce di docetismo. Il testo originario di 6-11 avrebbe con- tenuto, secondo CHARLES, p. XXVI, anche la successiva espressione cum hominibus habitare (cito L2), che si trova in Leg 2,11 opiJ.J.wv "ara{Ja{vEtV è" TWV oveavwv "aì Toiç àv-
Oewnotç avvavaareùpeaOat "arà ràç ~p,edeaç eliJéaç C). La successiva frase et non cognoverunl eum (cito L2) viene messa da Charles in parallelo con il v. 19 E (<<non sapendo essi chi era>~); egli si richiama a 9,14 che conterrebbe la stessa idea (p. xxiv). Questa frase sembra effettivamente riassumere il motivo dell'ignoranza umana nei confronti del Diletto nel mondo, così largamente orchestrata in 11,2-22 E, a conti- nuazione dell'ignoranza angelica manifestatasi nel descensus attraverso i cinque cieli inferiori.

(l) Ricordo che, secondo Charles, Leg dipenderebbe dalla recensione di 6-11 anteriore alla differenziazione tra G1, subarchetipo di ELI, e G2, subar- chetipo di SL2.


We review the sentences in SL2 are in place of v. 2-22 E. "Neither fact before you anyone saw, or since you can see what you have seen and heard ~~ repeats - as CHARLES, p. XXIV had seen- 8.11, where, however, this form fits much better in both the immediate context and in the sea. << I saw one like a son of man> ~ second CHARLES, p. XXVI and XXVII-p. L, would be original state; would have eliminated the publisher of G1 (lost the founder of the review of AI 6-11 stored in ELI) as from the end of the first century, he avoided the use as a messianic title because it led him to assume the exclusive humanity Christ, where the editor of G1 shows, on the contrary, traces of Docetism. 6-11 The original text would con- tent, according CHARLES, p. XXVI, also the subsequent expression cum hominibus habitare (I quote L2), located in Leg 2:11 opiJ.J.wv "ara {{Ja vEtV is" TWV oveavwv "AI Toic AV-
Oewnotç avvavaareùpeaOat "arà RAC ~ p, EDEAC eliJéaç C). The next sentence does not cognoverunl et eum (I quote L2) is put Charles in parallel with v. 19 E (<< not knowing who they were> ~); he 9.14 recalls that would contain the same idea (p. xxiv). This sentence does indeed seem to sum up the cause of human ignorance towards the Beloved in the world, so widely orchestrated from 11.2 to 22 and, in continuation of 'angelic ignorance manifested in descensus through five lower heavens.

( L ) recall that , according to Charles , Leg depend on the review of 6-11 prior to the differentiation between G1 , subarchetipo ELI , and G2 , subar- archetype of SL2 .



Ora, a me pare che l'intero periodo et vidi similem filii hominis et cum hominibus habitare et in mundo, et non cogno- verunt eum (così L2 ; trascurabili le varianti di S) dipenda in realtà da tre versetti neotestamentari: Ap 1,12-13 eloov imà Àvxvlaç xevaàç )taì èv péacp TWV ÀVXVtWV opowv v{òv àv- Oewnov (cf. Ap 14,14; il motivo viene da Dn 7,13; Ez 1,26); Gv l,14 )taì oÀoyoç aàe~ lyévero )taì Èa)t~vwaev èv 1piv (Vulg. et habitavit in nobis); Gv 1,10 Èv np )!Oapcp r]v ... )taì o )!Oapoç avròv OV)t eyvw (Vulg. in mundo erat ... el mundus eum non cognovit).

Now , it seems to me that the whole time I saw similem et filii hominis et cum hominibus habitare et in mundo , et non cogno- verunt eum (as L2 ; negligible S variants ) depends actually three New Testament verses : Rev 1 12-13 eloov IMA Àvxvlaç xevaàç ) Tai EV péacp TWV ÀVXVtWV opowv v OV { AV Oewnov (Rev 14,14 ; the reason comes from Dn 7.13 ; Ez 1:26) ; Jn l , 14 ) Tai oÀoyoç AAE ~ lyévero ) Tai EA ) t ~ vwaev EV 1piv ( Vulg . Habitavit et in nobis ) ; Jn 1,10 EV np ) ! Oapcp r ] v ... ) Tai O ) ! Oapoç avròv OV ) t eyvw ( Vulg . In ... el mundo erat mundus eum non cognovit ) .

Quanto al avvavaareéq;eaOm suggerito da Charles, sulla base di Leg 2,11, come corrispondente di habilare, il termine compare nel NT solo in una variante occidentale ad Al l0,41 (circa i discepoli che vivono con Gesù 40 giorni dopo la sua resurrezione). A partire dalla fine del II sec. - inizio del III diventa un termine tecnico per indicare: (1) la vita di Cristo con gli apostoli o degli apostoli con Cristo dopo la sua resurrezione; e soprattutto (2) la vita di Cristo sulla terra come uomo tra gli uomini, come qui in Al-Leg (').Ma il testo fondamentale è Bar 3,38 LXX perà rovro ènì rijç yijç wq;O'Yj )taì èv Toiç àvOewnotç avvaveareaq;'Yj. riferito in origine alla sapienza e che è probabilmente alla base di una presumibile interpolazione cristiana in Tesi. Dan 5,13 )!V(_Jwç earat èv péacp avrijç ( = di Gerusalemme), roiç àvOew- notç avvavaareeq;6pevoç, )!ai éiywç 'laea~À {JamÀevwv èn' avrovç èv rannvwaet )!ai èv nrwxet~. Leg potrebbe aver ripreso questo uso, divenuto corrente, mentre in A l la deri- vazione chiaramente giovannea del contesto rende preferì- bile ricondurre <<abitare•> a Gv 1,14 èa)t~vwaev; Leg 2,11, che non corrisponde ad alcun episodio di A l, è un inter- vento largamente redazionale che, mentre sembra riprendere lessico e motivi di A l e), in realtà utilizza una fraseo- logia piuttosto neotestamentaria e teologumeni estranei ad A I (il Diletto 'Km:a{JaÀei È'K -rov a-rE(!HVfla-roç wv-rov Beliar, in contrasto con AI 4,2.14; cf. invece Le 10,18; Gu 12,31; Ap 12,7-9). Il tema del non riconoscimento di Gesù, impor- tante in 11,2-22, può aver catalizzato questi testi del pro- logo giovanneo.

(l) Per i riferimenti cf. LAMPE s. v. (p. 1301); noterei inoltre Ireneo, Dem. 44: ~le Fils de Dieu s'approcha d' Abraham pour l'entretenir *; ibid.: «le Fils de Dieu dans une forme humaine s'entretiendrait avec les hommes ''; 45: « toutes les visions de ce genre signifient le Fils de Dieu conversant avec les hommes et présent parmi eux *; 46: • c'est lui qui, dans le buisson, s'entretint avec Molse *; trad. L. M. FROIDEVAux, lrénée de /,yon. Démons- lralion de la prédication apostolique. Nouvel/e lraduction de l'arménien auec introduction el notes (SC 62), Paris 1959, p. 102-105; qui« intrattenersi con* gli uomini sembra formare proprio il filo che unisce i testimonia.

(2) Cf. le indicazioni a margine date da CuARLES, p. T4:l.



How to avvavaareéq; eaOm suggested by Charles, on the basis of Leg 2.11 as corresponding habilare, the term appears in the NT only in a western variant Al l0,41 (about the disciples who live with Jesus 40 days after his resurrection). As of the end of the second century. - Beginning of III becomes a technical term to indicate: (1) the life of Christ with the apostles, or the apostles with Christ after his resurrection; and above (2) Christ's life on earth as a man among men, as here in Al-Leg ( ') .But the fundamental text Bar 3:38 LXX Pera rovro Eni rijç yijç wq; O'Yj) Tai eV Toic àvOewnotç avvaveareaq; 'Yj. reported originally to wisdom and that is probably the basis of a presumed Christian interpolation in Thesis. Dan 5:13)! V (_Jwç earat EV péacp avrijç (= Jerusalem), ROIC àvOew- NOTC avvavaareeq; 6pevoç,)! To éiywç 'LAEA ~ À {JamÀevwv ship loaded' avrovç rannvwaet eV)! To EV nrwxet ~. Leg may have taken this use, become current, while in A l the resulting innovation clearly Johannine context makes it preferable to bring live << •> at 1:14 EA) t ~ vwaev; Leg 2.11, which does not correspond to any episode of A l, is an intervention largely editorial that while seems to repeat the vocabulary and patterns of A), actually uses a tech- phraseology rather foreign to the New Testament and teologumeni AI ( the Beloved 'Km: a {JaÀei È'K -rov a-rE (! HVfla Roc-wv-P Belial, as opposed to AI 4,2.14; cf. Le instead 10,18; Gu 12:31; Rev 12: 7-9). the theme of the non-recognition of Jesus, important in 11.2 to 22, may have catalyzed these texts pro- John's logo.

( L ) For references cf. LAMPE s . v . ( P . 1301 ) ; I would note also Irenaeus , Dem . 44 : ~ the Fils de Dieu s'approcha d ' Abraham pour l' entretenir * ; ibid .: " The Fils de Dieu dans une forms s'entretiendrait humaine avec les hommes ' ' ; 45 : " toutes les visions de ce genre signifient the Fils de Dieu conversant avec les hommes et présent parmi eux * ; 46 : • c'est him here , dans le buisson , s'entretint avec Molse * ; trad . L. M. Froidevaux , lrénée de / , yon . Démons- lralion de la Prédication apostolique . Nouvel / and lraduction de l' arménien auec introduction and notes ( SC 62 ) , Paris , 1959, p . 102-105 ; here " to spend time with * men seem to form just the thread that unites the witness .

( 2 ) Cf. the indications on the sidelines given by CuARLES , p . t4 : l .



In definitiva, le frasi che in SL2 stanno al posto di 11,2-22 appaiono l'opera di un revisore che, eliminando un testo giudicato insostenibile sia per il carattere sospetto delle sue fonti (testimonia apocrifi), sia soprattutto per il deciso doce- tismo, ha fabbricato l'allusione alla vicenda terren:t del Diletto (indispensabile tra discesa e ascesa) mediante poche frasi ispirate a passi neotestamentari e del resto abbastanza mal suturate con quanto precede e quanto segue.

Ultimately , the sentences in SL2 are instead of 11.2 to 22 appear the work of an auditor , eliminating unsustainable judged text for both the suspect nature of his sources ( witness apocryphal ) , and above all to the strong doce - Semitism , has made the allusion to the story terren : t of the Beloved (essential between descent and ascent ) by a few sentences inspired by New Testament passages and the rest pretty badly sutured with what precedes and what follows .

Una sorprendente conferma del carattere originario di 11,2-22 viene dalla fortissima probabilità - a mio avviso, praticamente la certezza - che questo brano, benché non compreso nella versione di AI 6-11 utilizzata dai catari, fosse tuttavia conosciuto da questi ultimi, come mostra una predica del << perfetto•> Guillaume Belibaste riferita da Arnaud Sicre nel registro d'inquisizione di Jacques Four- nier C). Se ne veda la dimostrazione in NoRELLI, Studi, c. 15. Questo episodio non doveva tuttavia essere noto a Beli- baste nel contesto dell'A/, ma in quello più generale della tradizione dell'insegnamento cataro. Il testo primitivo dell'AI, con 11,2-22, doveva dunque essere noto agli elabo- ratori delle dottrine bogomile in oriente, e ciò sia che la revisione rappresentata da SL2 sia opera bogomila, sia che sia opera ortodossa e).

A striking confirmation of the original character of 11.2 to 22 is the strong probability - in my opinion , virtually the certainty - that this piece , although not included in the version of AI 6-11 used by the Cathars , however, was known by them, as shown in a sermon of perfect << • > Guillaume Belibaste reported by Arnaud Sicre in the register of inquisition of Jacques Four- nier C ) . If they see the demonstration in Norelli , studies, c . 15. This episode , however, was not to be known to the Belimo baste in the context of A / , but in the more general teaching of the Cathar tradition. The primitive text of AI , with 11.2 to 22 , must therefore be known to elabo- ers of Bogomile doctrines in the East , and this is that the review represented by Bogomil SL2 is the work , whether it is work , and Orthodox ) .
vridar.org Musings on biblical studies, politics, religion, ethics, human nature, tidbits from science

User avatar
Giuseppe
Posts: 8308
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: Ascension of Isaiah and the Nativity passage

Post by Giuseppe » Fri Jun 24, 2016 12:50 am

Hi Neil,
I would have the opposed problem, because my English is very poor. Therefore I can help to correct only relatively your translation. In what follows, I have corrected only the English, but I have left as before the Greek quotes.

Excursus X : II carattere originario di A I 11,2-22

Excursus X :The original character of AI 11.2-22


Tutto ciò vale naturalmente se si ammette il carattere originario dei v. 2-22. Ma già la struttura del passo induce ad ammetterlo. Infatti la solenne dichiarazione dell'angelo, presente sia in E che in SL2, secondo cui proprio per questo è stato inviato da Dio, mal si giustifica nella situazione di SL2, dove essa compare tra il descensus e I'ascensus del Diletto, e introduce solo due scolorite frasi sulla dimora del Diletto nel mondo in forma umana, seguite dalle notizie sulla sua ascensione nel firmamento, senza che si sappia né da dove né come vi é arrivato. La forma letteraria di 11,1, così pregnante nel suo riferimento a una speciale rivela- zione, appare dunque sproporzionata a ciò che la segue in SL2•

All this is true of course if one accepts the original status of the verses 2-22 . But already the structure of the passage moves to admit it . In fact, the solemn declaration of the angel ,found both in in E and in SL2 , according to which just in virtue of this reason he was sent by God , doesnt'fit in the situation of SL2, where it [the declaration] appears between the descensus and the ascensus of the Beloved , and introduces only two discolored phrases concerning the residence of the Beloved into the world in a human form, followed by the news of his ascension into the firmament, without that the reader can know neither where nor how he has arrived there. The literary form of 11,1 , so poignant in its reference to a special revelation, appears thus disproportionate to what follows in SL2•

Esaminiamo le frasi che in SL2 stanno al posto dei v. 2-22 di E. «Né infatti prima di te alcuno vide, né dopo di te potrà vedere ciò che tu hai visto e udito~~ ripete - come CHARLES, p. XXIV, aveva visto- 8,11, dove però questa forma s'inserisce molto meglio sia nel contesto immediato che in quello largo. <<Vidi uno simile a un figlio d'uomo>~ secondo CHARLES, p. XXVI-XXVII e p. L, sarebbe stato originario; l'avrebbe eliminato l'editore di G1 (capostipite perduto della recensione di AI 6-11 conservata in ELI) in quanto, dalla fine del I secolo, se ne evitò l'uso come titolo messianico perché induceva a supporre l'esclusiva umanità di Cristo, laddove il redattore di G1 mostra, al contrario, tracce di docetismo. Il testo originario di 6-11 avrebbe con- tenuto, secondo CHARLES, p. XXVI, anche la successiva espressione cum hominibus habitare (cito L2), che si trova in Leg 2,11 opiJ.J.wv "ara{Ja{vEtV è" TWV oveavwv "aì Toiç àv-
Oewnotç avvavaareùpeaOat "arà ràç ~p,edeaç eliJéaç C). La successiva frase et non cognoverunl eum (cito L2) viene messa da Charles in parallelo con il v. 19 E (<<non sapendo essi chi era>~); egli si richiama a 9,14 che conterrebbe la stessa idea (p. xxiv). Questa frase sembra effettivamente riassumere il motivo dell'ignoranza umana nei confronti del Diletto nel mondo, così largamente orchestrata in 11,2-22 E, a conti- nuazione dell'ignoranza angelica manifestatasi nel descensus attraverso i cinque cieli inferiori.

(l) Ricordo che, secondo Charles, Leg dipenderebbe dalla recensione di 6-11 anteriore alla differenziazione tra G1, subarchetipo di ELI, e G2, subar- chetipo di SL2.


We examine now the sentences that in SL2 are in place of v. 2-22 E. "In fact Neither before you anyone saw, nor after you anyone can see what you have seen and heard ~~ repeats - like CHARLES, p. XXIV, had seen- 8.11, where, however, this form fits much better in both the immediate context and in the large context. ''I saw one like a son of man'' ~ according to CHARLES, p. XXVI and XXVII and p. L, would be been original; the editor of G1 (lost founder of the review of AI 6-11 stored in ELI) would have eliminated it as, from the end of the first century, it was avoided the use of it as a messianic title because it led to assume the exclusive humanity of Christ, where the editor of G1 shows, on the contrary, traces of Docetism. The original text of 6-11 would have had, according to CHARLES, p. XXVI, also the subsequent expression cum hominibus habitare (I quote L2), located in Leg 2:11 opiJ.J.wv "ara {{Ja vEtV is" TWV oveavwv "AI Toic AV-
Oewnotç avvavaareùpeaOat "arà RAC ~ p, EDEAC eliJéaç C). The next sentence et not cognoverunt eum (I quote L2) is put by Charles in parallel with the verse 19 E (''not knowing who he was'' ~); he recalls 9,14 that would contain the same idea (p. xxiv). This sentence does seem indeed to sum up the cause of the human ignorance about the Beloved in the world, so widely orchestrated in 11.2-22 and, in continuation of the angelic ignorance manifested into the descensus through the five lower heavens.

(I) recall that , according to Charles, Leg would depend on the review of 6-11 prior to the differentiation between G1 , sub-archetype of ELI , and G2 , sub-arrchetype of SL2 .



Ora, a me pare che l'intero periodo et vidi similem filii hominis et cum hominibus habitare et in mundo, et non cogno- verunt eum (così L2 ; trascurabili le varianti di S) dipenda in realtà da tre versetti neotestamentari: Ap 1,12-13 eloov imà Àvxvlaç xevaàç )taì èv péacp TWV ÀVXVtWV opowv v{òv àv- Oewnov (cf. Ap 14,14; il motivo viene da Dn 7,13; Ez 1,26); Gv l,14 )taì oÀoyoç aàe~ lyévero )taì Èa)t~vwaev èv 1piv (Vulg. et habitavit in nobis); Gv 1,10 Èv np )!Oapcp r]v ... )taì o )!Oapoç avròv OV)t eyvw (Vulg. in mundo erat ... el mundus eum non cognovit).

Now , it seems to me that the whole paragraph et vidi similem filii hominis et cum hominibus habitare et in mundo, et non cogno- verunt eum (as L2 ; we can ignore the variants of S) depends actually from three New Testament verses: Rev 1,12-13 eloov IMA Àvxvlaç xevaàç ) Tai EV péacp TWV ÀVXVtWV opowv v OV { AV Oewnov (cfr Rev 14,14 ; the motif comes from Dn 7.13 ; Ez 1:26) ; Jn l ,14 ) Tai oÀoyoç AAE ~ lyévero ) Tai EA ) t ~ vwaev EV 1piv ( Vulg. et habitavit in nobis) ; Jn 1,10 EV np ) ! Oapcp r ] v ... ) Tai O ) ! Oapoç avròv OV ) t eyvw (Vulg. in mundo erat ... el mundus eum non cognovit) .

Quanto al avvavaareéq;eaOm suggerito da Charles, sulla base di Leg 2,11, come corrispondente di habilare, il termine compare nel NT solo in una variante occidentale ad Al l0,41 (circa i discepoli che vivono con Gesù 40 giorni dopo la sua resurrezione). A partire dalla fine del II sec. - inizio del III diventa un termine tecnico per indicare: (1) la vita di Cristo con gli apostoli o degli apostoli con Cristo dopo la sua resurrezione; e soprattutto (2) la vita di Cristo sulla terra come uomo tra gli uomini, come qui in Al-Leg (').Ma il testo fondamentale è Bar 3,38 LXX perà rovro ènì rijç yijç wq;O'Yj )taì èv Toiç àvOewnotç avvaveareaq;'Yj. riferito in origine alla sapienza e che è probabilmente alla base di una presumibile interpolazione cristiana in Tesi. Dan 5,13 )!V(_Jwç earat èv péacp avrijç ( = di Gerusalemme), roiç àvOew- notç avvavaareeq;6pevoç, )!ai éiywç 'laea~À {JamÀevwv èn' avrovç èv rannvwaet )!ai èv nrwxet~. Leg potrebbe aver ripreso questo uso, divenuto corrente, mentre in A l la deri- vazione chiaramente giovannea del contesto rende preferì- bile ricondurre <<abitare•> a Gv 1,14 èa)t~vwaev; Leg 2,11, che non corrisponde ad alcun episodio di A l, è un inter- vento largamente redazionale che, mentre sembra riprendere lessico e motivi di A l e), in realtà utilizza una fraseo- logia piuttosto neotestamentaria e teologumeni estranei ad A I (il Diletto 'Km:a{JaÀei È'K -rov a-rE(!HVfla-roç wv-rov Beliar, in contrasto con AI 4,2.14; cf. invece Le 10,18; Gu 12,31; Ap 12,7-9). Il tema del non riconoscimento di Gesù, impor- tante in 11,2-22, può aver catalizzato questi testi del pro- logo giovanneo.

(l) Per i riferimenti cf. LAMPE s. v. (p. 1301); noterei inoltre Ireneo, Dem. 44: ~le Fils de Dieu s'approcha d' Abraham pour l'entretenir *; ibid.: «le Fils de Dieu dans une forme humaine s'entretiendrait avec les hommes ''; 45: « toutes les visions de ce genre signifient le Fils de Dieu conversant avec les hommes et présent parmi eux *; 46: • c'est lui qui, dans le buisson, s'entretint avec Molse *; trad. L. M. FROIDEVAux, lrénée de /,yon. Démons- lralion de la prédication apostolique. Nouvel/e lraduction de l'arménien auec introduction el notes (SC 62), Paris 1959, p. 102-105; qui« intrattenersi con* gli uomini sembra formare proprio il filo che unisce i testimonia.

(2) Cf. le indicazioni a margine date da CuARLES, p. T4:l.



How to avvavaareéq; eaOm suggested by Charles, on the basis of Leg 2.11 as correspondent of habilare, the term appears in the NT only in a western variant of Al l0,41 (about the disciples who live with Jesus 40 days after his resurrection). From the end of the II CE.- start of III CE becomes a technical term to indicate: (1) the life of Christ with the apostles, or the life of the apostles with Christ after his resurrection; and especially (2) Christ's life on earth as a man among men, as here in Al-Leg (') .But the fundamental text is Bar 3,38 LXX Pera rovro Eni rijç yijç wq; O'Yj) Tai eV Toic àvOewnotç avvaveareaq; 'Yj. reported originally about the wisdom and that is probably the basis of a presumed Christian interpolation in Tesi. Dan 5:13)! V (_Jwç earat EV péacp avrijç (= Jerusalem), ROIC àvOew- NOTC avvavaareeq; 6pevoç,)! To éiywç 'LAEA ~ À {JamÀevwv ship loaded' avrovç rannvwaet eV)! To EV nrwxet ~. Leg may have taken again this use, became current, while in Al the resulting clearly Johannine derivation of the context makes it preferable to link <<abitare•> with Gv 1:14 EA) t ~ vwaev; Leg 2.11, which does not correspond to any episode of AI e), is an intervention largely editorial that while seems to repeat the vocabulary and patterns of AI e), actually uses a phraseology rather alien to the New Testament and teologumeni alien to AI ( the Beloved 'Km: a {JaÀei È'K -rov a-rE (! HVfla Roc-wv-P Belial, as opposed to AI 4,2.14; cf. Le instead 10,18; Gu 12:31; Rev 12: 7-9). the theme of the non-recognition of Jesus, important in 11.2,22, may have catalyzed these texts pro [meaning: in support of]- John's logo.

( L ) For references cf. LAMPE s . v . ( P . 1301 ) ; I would note also Irenaeus , Dem . 44 : ~ the Fils de Dieu s'approcha d ' Abraham pour l' entretenir * ; ibid .: " The Fils de Dieu dans une forms s'entretiendrait humaine avec les hommes ' ' ; 45 : " toutes les visions de ce genre signifient the Fils de Dieu conversant avec les hommes et présent parmi eux * ; 46 : • c'est him here , dans le buisson , s'entretint avec Molse * ; trad . L. M. Froidevaux , lrénée de / , yon . Démons- lralion de la Prédication apostolique . Nouvel / and lraduction de l' arménien auec introduction and notes ( SC 62 ) , Paris , 1959, p . 102-105 ; here " to spend time with* the men seem to form just the thread that links the testimonia.

( 2 ) Cfr. the indications in margin given by CHARLES , p . t4 : l .



In definitiva, le frasi che in SL2 stanno al posto di 11,2-22 appaiono l'opera di un revisore che, eliminando un testo giudicato insostenibile sia per il carattere sospetto delle sue fonti (testimonia apocrifi), sia soprattutto per il deciso doce- tismo, ha fabbricato l'allusione alla vicenda terren:t del Diletto (indispensabile tra discesa e ascesa) mediante poche frasi ispirate a passi neotestamentari e del resto abbastanza mal suturate con quanto precede e quanto segue.

Ultimately, the sentences that are in SL2 in the place of 11,2-22 appear the work of an editor who, by removing a text judged unsustainable for both the suspect nature of his sources (apocryphal testimonia), and above all the strong docetism, has fabricated the allusion to the heartly story of the Beloved (necessary between descent and ascent) by a few sentences inspired by New Testament passages and at any case henough badly sutured with what precedes and what follows .

Una sorprendente conferma del carattere originario di 11,2-22 viene dalla fortissima probabilità - a mio avviso, praticamente la certezza - che questo brano, benché non compreso nella versione di AI 6-11 utilizzata dai catari, fosse tuttavia conosciuto da questi ultimi, come mostra una predica del << perfetto•> Guillaume Belibaste riferita da Arnaud Sicre nel registro d'inquisizione di Jacques Four- nier C). Se ne veda la dimostrazione in NoRELLI, Studi, c. 15. Questo episodio non doveva tuttavia essere noto a Beli- baste nel contesto dell'A/, ma in quello più generale della tradizione dell'insegnamento cataro. Il testo primitivo dell'AI, con 11,2-22, doveva dunque essere noto agli elabo- ratori delle dottrine bogomile in oriente, e ciò sia che la revisione rappresentata da SL2 sia opera bogomila, sia che sia opera ortodossa e).

A surprising confirmation of the original character of 11,2-22 comes from the strong probability - in my opinion, virtually the certainty - that this piece, although not included in the version of AI 6-11 used by the Cathars, however, was known by them, as shown in a sermon of the ''perfect•'' Guillaume Belibaste reported by Arnaud Sicre in the register of inquisition of Jacques Fournier C). Cfr. the demonstration in Norelli, Studi, c. 15. This episode, however, was not to be known by Belibaste in the context of AI, but in the more general teaching of the Cathar tradition. The primitive text of AI , with 11,2-22 , must therefore be known among the authors of the Bogomile doctrines in the East, and this in both cases, that the review represented by Bogomil SL2 is a Bomomile work , or that it is an Orthodox work) .
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.

User avatar
neilgodfrey
Posts: 3608
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 4:08 pm

Re: Ascension of Isaiah and the Nativity passage

Post by neilgodfrey » Fri Jun 24, 2016 2:08 pm

Thank you Guiseppe. I'll work on inserting the Greek text and refining some of the translation a little more. Appreciated.
vridar.org Musings on biblical studies, politics, religion, ethics, human nature, tidbits from science

User avatar
Ben C. Smith
Posts: 8246
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Ascension of Isaiah and the Nativity passage

Post by Ben C. Smith » Fri Jun 24, 2016 2:22 pm

I will have the Greek lines typed up here (not inserted yet) in about 5 minutes.
ΤΙ ΕΣΤΙΝ ΑΛΗΘΕΙΑ

User avatar
Ben C. Smith
Posts: 8246
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Ascension of Isaiah and the Nativity passage

Post by Ben C. Smith » Fri Jun 24, 2016 2:26 pm

I think these are all the Greek phrases and words:

ὁ μέλλων καταβαίνειν ἐκ τῶν οὐρανῶν καὶ τοῖς ἀνθρώποις συναναστρέφεσθαι κατὰ τὰς ἡμετέρας εἰδέας

εἶδον ἑπτὰ λυχνίας χρυσᾶς καὶ ἐν μέσῳ τῶν λυχνιῶν ὅμοιον υἱὸν ἀνθρώπου

καὶ ὁ λόγος σὰρξ ἐγένετο καὶ ἐσκήνωσεν ἐν ἡμῖν

ἐν τῷ κόσμῳ ἦν ... καὶ ὡ κόσμος αὐτὸν οὐκ ἔγνω

συναναστρέφεσθαι

μετὰ τοῦτο ἐπὲ τῆς γῆς ὤφθη καὶ ἐν τοῖς ἀνθρώποις συνανεστράφη

κύριος ἔσται ἐν μέσῳ αὐτῆς (= Jerusalem), τοῖς ἀνθρώποις συναναστρεφόμενος, καὶ ἅγιος Ἰσραὴλ βασιλεύων ἐπ' αὐτοὺς ἐν ταπεινώσει καὶ ἐν πτωχείᾳ

ἐσκήνωσεν

καταβαλεῖ ἐκ τοῦ στερεώματος τούτου

ΤΙ ΕΣΤΙΝ ΑΛΗΘΕΙΑ

User avatar
Ben C. Smith
Posts: 8246
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Ascension of Isaiah and the Nativity passage

Post by Ben C. Smith » Fri Jun 24, 2016 2:34 pm

So here is the same text as above (English only) with the Greek inserted; footnotes are in red:

Excursus X :The original character of AI 11.2-22

All this is true of course if one accepts the original status of the verses 2-22 . But already the structure of the passage moves to admit it . In fact, the solemn declaration of the angel, found both in in E and in SL2, according to which just in virtue of this reason he was sent by God , doesn't fit in the situation of SL2, where it [the declaration] appears between the descensus and the ascensus of the Beloved , and introduces only two discolored phrases concerning the residence of the Beloved into the world in a human form, followed by the news of his ascension into the firmament, without that the reader can know neither where nor how he has arrived there. The literary form of 11,1 , so poignant in its reference to a special revelation, appears thus disproportionate to what follows in SL2•

We examine now the sentences that in SL2 are in place of v. 2-22 E. "In fact Neither before you anyone saw, nor after you anyone can see what you have seen and heard ~~ repeats - like CHARLES, p. XXIV, had seen- 8.11, where, however, this form fits much better in both the immediate context and in the large context. ''I saw one like a son of man'' ~ according to CHARLES, p. XXVI and XXVII and p. L, would be been original; the editor of G1 (lost founder of the review of AI 6-11 stored in ELI) would have eliminated it as, from the end of the first century, it was avoided the use of it as a messianic title because it led to assume the exclusive humanity of Christ, where the editor of G1 shows, on the contrary, traces of Docetism. The original text of 6-11 would have had, according to CHARLES, p. XXVI, also the subsequent expression cum hominibus habitare (I quote L2), located in Leg 2:11 ὁ μέλλων καταβαίνειν ἐκ τῶν οὐρανῶν καὶ τοῖς ἀνθρώποις συναναστρέφεσθαι κατὰ τὰς ἡμετέρας εἰδέας (1). The next sentence et not cognoverunt eum (I quote L2) is put by Charles in parallel with the verse 19 E (''not knowing who he was'' ~); he recalls 9,14 that would contain the same idea (p. xxiv). This sentence does seem indeed to sum up the cause of the human ignorance about the Beloved in the world, so widely orchestrated in 11.2-22 and, in continuation of the angelic ignorance manifested into the descensus through the five lower heavens.

(I) recall that , according to Charles, Leg would depend on the review of 6-11 prior to the differentiation between G1 , sub-archetype of ELI , and G2 , sub-arrchetype of SL2.

Now , it seems to me that the whole paragraph et vidi similem filii hominis et cum hominibus habitare et in mundo, et non cognoverunt eum (as L2 ; we can ignore the variants of S) depends actually from three New Testament verses: Rev 1,12-13 εἶδον ἑπτὰ λυχνίας χρυσᾶς καὶ ἐν μέσῳ τῶν λυχνιῶν ὅμοιον υἱὸν ἀνθρώπου (cfr Rev 14,14 ; the motif comes from Dn 7.13 ; Ez 1:26) ; Jn l ,14 ) καὶ ὁ λόγος σὰρξ ἐγένετο καὶ ἐσκήνωσεν ἐν ἡμῖν ( Vulg. et habitavit in nobis) ; Jn 1,10 ἐν τῷ κόσμῳ ἦν ... καὶ ὡ κόσμος αὐτὸν οὐκ ἔγνω (Vulg. in mundo erat ... el mundus eum non cognovit) .

How to συναναστρέφεσθαι suggested by Charles, on the basis of Leg 2.11 as correspondent of habilare, the term appears in the NT only in a western variant of Al l0,41 (about the disciples who live with Jesus 40 days after his resurrection). From the end of the II CE.- start of III CE becomes a technical term to indicate: (1) the life of Christ with the apostles, or the life of the apostles with Christ after his resurrection; and especially (2) Christ's life on earth as a man among men, as here in Al-Leg (') .But the fundamental text is Bar 3,38 LXX μετὰ τοῦτο ἐπὲ τῆς γῆς ὤφθη καὶ ἐν τοῖς ἀνθρώποις συνανεστράφη, reported originally about the wisdom and that is probably the basis of a presumed Christian interpolation in Test. Dan 5:13 κύριος ἔσται ἐν μέσῳ αὐτῆς (= Jerusalem), τοῖς ἀνθρώποις συναναστρεφόμενος, καὶ ἅγιος Ἰσραὴλ βασιλεύων ἐπ' αὐτοὺς ἐν ταπεινώσει καὶ ἐν πτωχείᾳ. Leg may have taken again this use, became current, while in Al the resulting clearly Johannine derivation of the context makes it preferable to link <<abitare•> with Gv 1:14 ἐσκήνωσεν; Leg 2.11, which does not correspond to any episode of AI e), is an intervention largely editorial that while seems to repeat the vocabulary and patterns of AI e), actually uses a phraseology rather alien to the New Testament and teologumeni alien to καταβαλεῖ ἐκ τοῦ στερεώματος τούτου Belial, as opposed to AI 4,2.14; cf. Le instead 10,18; Gu 12:31; Rev 12: 7-9). the theme of the non-recognition of Jesus, important in 11.2,22, may have catalyzed these texts pro [meaning: in support of]- John's logo.

(1) For references cf. LAMPE s . v . ( P . 1301 ) ; I would note also Irenaeus , Dem . 44 : ~ the Fils de Dieu s'approcha d ' Abraham pour l' entretenir * ; ibid .: " The Fils de Dieu dans une forms s'entretiendrait humaine avec les hommes ' ' ; 45 : " toutes les visions de ce genre signifient the Fils de Dieu conversant avec les hommes et présent parmi eux * ; 46 : • c'est him here , dans le buisson , s'entretint avec Molse * ; trad . L. M. Froidevaux , lrénée de / , yon . Démons- lralion de la Prédication apostolique . Nouvel / and lraduction de l' arménien auec introduction and notes ( SC 62 ) , Paris , 1959, p . 102-105 ; here " to spend time with* the men seem to form just the thread that links the testimonia.

(2) Cfr. the indications in margin given by CHARLES , p . t4 : l .


Ultimately, the sentences that are in SL2 in the place of 11,2-22 appear the work of an editor who, by removing a text judged unsustainable for both the suspect nature of his sources (apocryphal testimonia), and above all the strong docetism, has fabricated the allusion to the heartly story of the Beloved (necessary between descent and ascent) by a few sentences inspired by New Testament passages and at any case henough badly sutured with what precedes and what follows .

A surprising confirmation of the original character of 11,2-22 comes from the strong probability - in my opinion, virtually the certainty - that this piece, although not included in the version of AI 6-11 used by the Cathars, however, was known by them, as shown in a sermon of the ''perfect•'' Guillaume Belibaste reported by Arnaud Sicre in the register of inquisition of Jacques Fournier C). Cfr. the demonstration in Norelli, Studi, c. 15. This episode, however, was not to be known by Belibaste in the context of AI, but in the more general teaching of the Cathar tradition. The primitive text of AI , with 11,2-22 , must therefore be known among the authors of the Bogomile doctrines in the East, and this in both cases, that the review represented by Bogomil SL2 is a Bomomile work , or that it is an Orthodox work).

(1) Ed. J. DuvERNOY, Le regislre d'inquisilion de Jacques Fournier éveque de Pamiers (1318-1325) (Bibliolhèque méridionale, 2. sér. 41), 3 vol., Toulouse 1965, II, p. 46.
(2) Cf. la nostra I nlroduzione, § 2, p. 19-21.

ΤΙ ΕΣΤΙΝ ΑΛΗΘΕΙΑ

User avatar
neilgodfrey
Posts: 3608
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 4:08 pm

Re: Ascension of Isaiah and the Nativity passage

Post by neilgodfrey » Fri Jun 24, 2016 5:05 pm

Brilliant. Thanks so much to both of you. I'll take another look and see if I can smooth out the translation a bit more and then repost.
vridar.org Musings on biblical studies, politics, religion, ethics, human nature, tidbits from science

User avatar
neilgodfrey
Posts: 3608
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 4:08 pm

Re: Ascension of Isaiah and the Nativity passage

Post by neilgodfrey » Fri Jun 24, 2016 6:59 pm

Paragraph 1 by Norelli, page 535 of his Commentary:
All this is true of course if one accepts the original status of the verses 2-22 . But already the structure of the passage indicates this. In fact, the solemn declaration of the angel, found both in E and in SL2, according to which for this reason he was sent by God, doesn't fit in the situation of SL2, where it [the declaration] appears between the descent and the ascent of the Beloved, and introduces only two discolored [=scolorite] phrases concerning the residence of the Beloved in the world in a human form, followed by the news of his ascension into the firmament, without which the reader can know neither where nor how he has arrived there. The literary form of 11.1, so pregnant [=pregnante; expectant] in its reference to a special revelation, appears thus disproportionate to what follows in SL2.
So pausing here to examine the Slavonic and Latin manuscripts he is addressing:

His Volume 1, the Text, page 231 for the relevant Latin text:
11 1 Et post hec dixit mihi angelus : 'Intellige, Ysaias fili Amos. In hoc missus sum a Deo: omnia tibi ostendere. Nec enim ante te quis uidit nec post te poterit uidere, que tu uidisti et audisti.' 2 Et uidi similem filii hominis, et cum hominibus habitare, et lin mundo, et non cognouerunt eum. 23 Et uidi ascendentem in firmamentum, qui non erat secundum formam transfigurans se. Et uidentes omnes angeli, qui erant super firmamento, expauerunt et adorantes 24 dicebant: 'Quomodo descendisti in medio nostri, Domine? et non cognouimus regem glorie?'
Which my lazy reliance upon Google translator tells me means:
11 1 And after these things the angel said unto me : ' Understand, O Isaiah , son of Amoz did see. In this I have been sent by God, to show you all . For neither is there any man hath seen, nor after you will be able to see in front of you , which you have seen and heard. ' 2 And I saw one like a son of man, and with men to dwell , et lin the world, and they knew him not . 23 And I saw coming up on the support , which is not according to the form , transforming himself. And when they saw all the angels, who were above the firmament, and those who worship expauerunt 24 , said, " How is it you came down in the midst of us, O Lord? and hast not known the king of glory? '
(What does expauerunt mean?)

If you want to compare the Slavic text ... yeh, right ...
Screen Shot 2016-06-25 at 12.03.37 pm.png
Slavonic 11:1-23
Screen Shot 2016-06-25 at 12.03.37 pm.png (96.52 KiB) Viewed 6690 times

I need to check again what the phrase in verse 19 translates as.
vridar.org Musings on biblical studies, politics, religion, ethics, human nature, tidbits from science

User avatar
neilgodfrey
Posts: 3608
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 4:08 pm

Re: Ascension of Isaiah and the Nativity passage

Post by neilgodfrey » Fri Jun 24, 2016 7:05 pm

So far it appears Norelli's judgement of the originality of the nativity scene is hangs on what the preceding text leads one to expect. My question is that if only the nativity episode fits the bill, then that would lessen the significance of the descent and ascent. I would have thought the detail with which the descent in particular is described tells us that in the author's mind that is indeed a most powerful event, bridging the gap between the lost and God and ending the power of the demons to bind the lost.

Is Norelli letting his Catholicism intrude upon the author's interest? But more to read and think through yet....
vridar.org Musings on biblical studies, politics, religion, ethics, human nature, tidbits from science

Post Reply