Carrier v. Litwa: What Did the “Ascension of Isaiah” Originally Say?

[Giuseppe]

What need of disguising himself as a newborn when the previous descents have proved again and again that it was sufficient an entry as an adult?

Yes it should be obvious, can someone email Norelli and get his opinion on why it is not?

his answer should be rather obvious: Jesus existed, therefore the myth has to be adapted to him, not vice versa.

[dbz]

• 10.29-31 appears to garbled, perhaps a scribal error?

[10.29]
29 And again He descended into the firmament where dwells the ruler of this world, and He gave the password to those on the left, and His form was like theirs, and they did not praise Him there ; but they were envying one another and fighting; for here there is a power of evil and envying about trifles.
30 And I saw when He descended and made Himself like unto the angels of the air, and He was like one of them.
31 And He gave no password; for one was plundering and doing violence to another.

[10.29]

29. Descendit autem in firmamentum et ibi dedit signa,
    et forma erat ejus sicut illorum, et non glorifieaverunt eum, l'et non eantaverunt ei.
30. Et descendit ad angelos, qui erant in hoc aére, sieut unus ex eis.
31. Et non dedit "eis" signum [etnon cantaverunt].

(p. 132 & p. 133)

Charles, Robert Henry (1900). The Ascension of Isaiah: Translated from the Ethiopic Version, Which, Together with the New Greek Fragment, the Latin Versions and the Latin Translation of the Slavonic, is Here Published in Full. A. & C. Black.

[neilgodfrey]

What need of disguising himself as a newborn when the previous descents have proved again and again that it was sufficient an entry as an adult?

Yes it should be obvious, can someone email Norelli and get his opinion on why it is not?

No need to email him. Norelli has made his explanation available to us online:

Les plus anciennes traditions sur la naissance de Jésus et leur rapport avec les testimonia

I have for some time been thinking that Justin Martyr is also evidence of "testimonia" -- a list of various notions about the messiah on the basis of a range of interpretations of biblical passages. Norelli sees further reasons to postulate the existence of such testimonia on the basis of the various birth narratives from as early as the second -- even first -- century. The "prophecies", e.g. Isaiah 7, 53, Hosea 11, etc. required it in the eyes of some. If there had been a single tradition (from, say, historical events) then it would be difficult to explain the diversity in the earliest birth narratives.

[dbz]

What need of disguising himself as a newborn when the previous descents have proved again and again that it was sufficient an entry as an adult?

Per "disguising himself as a newborn".

"...stories about the birth of Jesus are born of testimonia, As is clearly shown by the Ascension of Isaiah, independent (at least on this point) of the Gospels that have become canonical, but also the Protevangelium of James, which nevertheless knows Mt and Lc." (p. 65 Norelli)

"...the Ascension of Isaiah shows that—before the end of the 1st century—the idea that Jesus was indeed born of a virgin was fully deployed and testimonia documents had already been constituted to support it and interpret it in a theologically very profiled sense (oriented towards Docetism, finally represented by the Ascension of Isaiah), and this independently of Mt and Lc and practically at the same time as the writing of these Gospels." (p. 52 Norelli)

• Norelli, Enrico (2011). "Les plus anciennes traditions sur la naissance de Jésus et leur rapport avec les testimonia". Infancy gospels . pp. 47-66.

[dbz]

[If] we can accept that the bare alternative verse of the Latin/Slavonic version is closer to the original, we can hardly believe that this represented a knowledge on the part of that writer or editor about an earthly Jesus and a Gospel-like story attached to him. What would have prompted him to deal with it in such a perfunctory fashion? He has gone into such minute detail about the descent of the Son through the heavens and his dealings with the spirit entities which inhabit the non-material spheres. When he gets to the climax of the Son's descent involving an incarnation on earth, if he knows an entire story containing a wealth of tradition (from the Gospels or otherwise) he is hardly likely to reduce it to a single anti-climactic phrase "he dwelt with men" which tells us nothing. A writer composing a work about Isaiah's vision of the Son's descent could not fail to include something about his life on earth. The only context in which the extant state of the Latin/Slavonic text is understandable is if the writer knew virtually nothing about a life on earth, but only the bare concept itself, in its most primitive stage (more "primitive" than Knibb's evaluation of chapter 11); perhaps he is an early editor introducing the idea into the text, though without benefit of having had contact with a written Gospel. On the other hand, we can tell nothing about the envisioned nature of this 'dwelling with men in the world,' for it is substantially the equivalent of the declaration that personified Wisdom came to earth and dwelt among men—and where Wisdom was concerned, no material incarnation was envisioned. (p. 124)

Doherty, Earl (2009). Jesus: Neither God Nor Man—The Case for a Mythical Jesus. (New, Revised and Expanded ed.). Ottawa: Age of Reason Publications. ISBN 978-0-9689259-2-8.

N.B. Per "et vidi similem filii hominis et cum hominibus habitare et in mundo, et non cognoverunt eum". It may be an anachronism to translate "et in mundo" as and in the world. Given the commentary of Vitruvius on cosmology "unum a terra inmane in summo mundo ac post ipsas stellas septentrionum" in reference to the firmament.
see previous post

[MrMacSon]

Norelli has made his explanation available to us online:

• Les plus anciennes traditions sur la naissance de Jésus et leur rapport avec les testimonia

I have for some time been thinking that Justin Martyr is also evidence of "testimonia" -- a list of various notions about the messiah on the basis of a range of interpretations of biblical passages. Norelli sees further reasons to postulate the existence of such testimonia on the basis of the various birth narratives from as early as the second -- even first -- century. The "prophecies", e.g. Isaiah 7, 53, Hosea 11, etc. required it in the eyes of some. If there had been a single tradition (from, say, historical events) then it would be difficult to explain the diversity in the earliest birth narratives.

"...the Ascension of Isaiah shows that—before the end of the 1st century—the idea that Jesus was indeed born of a virgin was fully deployed and testimonia documents had already been constituted to support it and interpret it in a theologically very profiled sense (oriented towards Docetism, finally represented by the Ascension of Isaiah), and this independently of Mt and Lc and practically at the same time as the writing of these Gospels." (p. 52 Norelli)

• Norelli, Enrico (2011) Les plus anciennes traditions sur la naissance de Jésus et leur rapport avec les testimonia". Infancy gospels, pp.47-66.

Is there a copy-able or even an English version of that article available?

[neilgodfrey]

Norelli has made his explanation available to us online:

• Les plus anciennes traditions sur la naissance de Jésus et leur rapport avec les testimonia

I have for some time been thinking that Justin Martyr is also evidence of "testimonia" -- a list of various notions about the messiah on the basis of a range of interpretations of biblical passages. Norelli sees further reasons to postulate the existence of such testimonia on the basis of the various birth narratives from as early as the second -- even first -- century. The "prophecies", e.g. Isaiah 7, 53, Hosea 11, etc. required it in the eyes of some. If there had been a single tradition (from, say, historical events) then it would be difficult to explain the diversity in the earliest birth narratives.

"...the Ascension of Isaiah shows that—before the end of the 1st century—the idea that Jesus was indeed born of a virgin was fully deployed and testimonia documents had already been constituted to support it and interpret it in a theologically very profiled sense (oriented towards Docetism, finally represented by the Ascension of Isaiah), and this independently of Mt and Lc and practically at the same time as the writing of these Gospels." (p. 52 Norelli)

• Norelli, Enrico (2011) Les plus anciennes traditions sur la naissance de Jésus et leur rapport avec les testimonia". Infancy gospels, pp.47-66.

Is there a copy-able or even an English version of that article available?

Google for a free online OCR editor and that will give you many versions of what you need.

[MrMacSon]

Google for a free online OCR editor and that will give you many versions of what you need.

Thnx, Neil. Ironically, Microsoft Word did it pretty well (though I need to read it fully, I'm not sure Norelli is doing more than speculating and perhaps special-pleading)

[schillingklaus]

This proves that there is more appropriate stuff about AoI in a few passages of Jean Magne's LOGIQUE DES DOGMES than in the collected works of Norelli.

[dbz]

[10.29]

29. Descendit autem in firmamentum et ibi dedit signa,
    et forma erat ejus sicut illorum, et non glorifieaverunt eum, l'et non eantaverunt ei.
30. Et descendit ad angelos, qui erant in hoc aére, sieut unus ex eis.
31. Et non dedit "eis" signum [et non cantaverunt].

(p. 132 & p. 133)

Charles, Robert Henry (1900). The Ascension of Isaiah: Translated from the Ethiopic Version, Which, Together with the New Greek Fragment, the Latin Versions and the Latin Translation of the Slavonic, is Here Published in Full. A. & C. Black.

More intelligible perhaps:

29. Descendit autem in firmamentum.
30. Et ad angelos qui erat in hoc aére sieut unus ex eis.
31. Et non dedit eis signum et non cantaverunt.

29. And he descended into the firmament.
30. And to the angels who were in this air, he was one of them.
31. And he gave them no sign, and they did not sing.

25-28. Et in secundum et in primum transfigurans se in singulos eorum. Ideo non cantabant ei, nec adorabant, apparebat enim illis similis eorum, ostendebat enim characterem per singulos coelos custodibus portarum.