Eye has not seen, ear has not heard, nor has it arisen in the heart.

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

Re: Eye has not seen, ear has not heard, nor has it arisen in the heart.

Post by Giuseppe »

Note that Thomas has:

and what hand has not touched

This is docetism. Isn't it?

Accordingly, a possibility is that Thomas would have corrected the verse of Paul in conformity to his need of docetism. But then this says us something of new: that the verse was interpreted by Thomas as alluding to the Jesus's mission on this earth. If he cares to say that no hand has touched Jesus, then this is possible only if humans couldn't touch him, and humans are notoriously on earth.

Paul didn't have the necessity of specifying it, since for him Jesus was crucified in outer space.
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: Eye has not seen, ear has not heard, nor has it arisen in the heart.

Post by Giuseppe »

Pseudo-Hyppolytus, 5.8.14 reports also the Naassene claim:

We have heard his voice, but we have not seen his form.

Having heard his voice, then the Naassenes considere themselves as the privileged "perfects" addressed by Paul in 1 Cor 2:6-8.

But they insist that they, even so, didn't see "his form".
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.
User avatar
Ben C. Smith
Posts: 8994
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Eye has not seen, ear has not heard, nor has it arisen in the heart.

Post by Ben C. Smith »

davidmartin wrote: Thu Sep 03, 2020 11:25 pm Ben,
you missed some, worthy of inclusion?

Gospel of Judas:
For there exists a great and boundless realm, whose extent no generation of angels has seen,
[in which] there is [a] great invisible [Spirit],
which no eye of an angel has ever seen,
no thought of the heart has ever comprehended,
and it was never called by any name
You are right. I missed that one. I even recall reading it, and about it, and I just never got it on my list for some reason. I have now added it to the end of my part 2.
Prayer of Apostle Paul:
Grant what no angel eye has seen and no archon ear (has) heard, and what has not entered into the human heart which came to be angelic and (modelled) after the image of the psychic God when it was formed in the beginning, since I have faith and hope

I've seen different translations of the latter this might not be the best one. I have a better one somewhere in a book i think
This one I already had. :) It is a long list, though, so I blame no one for missing one of the items. (And you are right; the translation I have is considerably different from yours.)

:cheers:
ΤΙ ΕΣΤΙΝ ΑΛΗΘΕΙΑ
Giuseppe
Posts: 13732
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: Eye has not seen, ear has not heard, nor has it arisen in the heart.

Post by Giuseppe »

Giuseppe wrote: Thu Sep 03, 2020 11:48 pm But then this says us something of new: that the verse was interpreted by Thomas as alluding to the Jesus's mission on this earth. If he cares to say that no hand has touched Jesus, then this is possible only if humans couldn't touch him, and humans are notoriously on earth.
this is sufficient to prove that the verse was found in a source where the secret mission of Jesus in the world was described.
The best candidate is the Ascension of Isaiah, docet James Barlow:

I no longer remember when I began this project— sometime between eighteen months and two years ago. But it all began while coming across what Mr Doherty had to say about Asc. Is. back in 2010 when I was a Cathedral Dean in British Columbia. When I read Mr Parvus’ suspicion that this work was a kind of Urgospel I felt vindicated in feeling intuitively that it is indeed what is behind Paul (and not JUST Paul!). For not only is it quoted by Paul at I Cor.2:9 (a solemn fact no one wants to delve into the consequences of, for whatever reason), but it is also referred to (I believe) by Paul in I Cor. 15, there too as Scripture as well. Throw in the impossibility of xi. 2-22 being germane to the original text of the Vision, which is dateable (if quoted by Paul) to before c. 50 c.e. and voila, the case for an ahistorical Jesus being the subject of Paul’s letters is undeniable—once the language of the Vision is scrutinized side by side with that of Paul.

https://vridar.org/2020/06/08/the-ascen ... es-barlow/

Addenda: Barlow adds:
The upshot is that if Paul regarded the Ascension of Isaiah as sacred Scripture (which he did), then he probably did not believe in an historical Jesus either, thus rendering certain Pauline passages (e.g. Gal. 4:4) interpolations.

Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.
User avatar
mlinssen
Posts: 3431
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2019 11:01 am
Location: The Netherlands
Contact:

Re: Eye has not seen, ear has not heard, nor has it arisen in the heart < interpretation of Paul

Post by mlinssen »

Copied verbatim from Ben:
Paul

1 Corinthians 2.6-9: 6 Yet we do speak wisdom among those who are mature, a wisdom, however, not of this age nor of the rulers of this age [οὐ τοῦ αἰῶνος τούτου οὐδὲ τῶν ἀρχόντων τοῦ αἰῶνος τούτου], who are passing away, 7 but we speak God’s wisdom in a mystery, the hidden wisdom which God predestined before the ages [πρὸ τῶν αἰώνων] to our glory, 8 the wisdom which none of the rulers of this age [οὐδεὶς τῶν ἀρχόντων τοῦ αἰῶνος τούτου] has understood; for if they had understood it they would not have crucified the Lord of glory; 9 but, just as it is written, 9 “Things which eye has not seen and ear has not heard, and which have not come into the heart of man, which things God has prepared for those who love him [ἃ ὀφθαλμὸς οὐκ εἶδεν καὶ οὗς οὐκ ἤκουσεν καὶ ἐπὶ καρδίαν ἀνθρώπου οὐκ ἀνέβη, ἃ ἡτοίμασεν ὁ θεὸς τοῖς ἀγαπῶσιν αὐτόν].”
I am going to break it all down, and then let's accept and / or reject, or we can just refer to items while responding. This is going to quickly become quicksand if we don't

What is the mission here?
  1. Coming up with plausible arguments for similarity and then
  2. making an educated guess at who copied whom
There are two variables there (I am desperatel trying to minimise all branches to this humongous tree, really):
  1. There is always content,
  2. and then there is context
The content here consists of three main elements, I think:
  1. eye
  2. ear
  3. heart
The context of Paul is as follows, and I will break that down as well, as it is very important what Paul says and denies here. I will very slightly rephrase / condense his mumbojumbo in an attempt to diminish the back-and-forth that he throws at us:
We do speak wisdom
  • among those who are mature;
A wisdom
  • not of this age
  • nor of the rulers of this age
  •     - who are passing away
The hidden wisdom
  • which God predestined before the ages to our glory
A written wisdom;
  1. Things which eye has not seen
  2. and ear has not heard,
  3. and which have not come into the heart of man,
  • which things God has prepared for those who love him
And we see the secret of Paul unfold: double denial and confirmation, superfluousness, and basically overwhelming by obfuscation.
The slim version of all this is:
We do speak the hidden, written wisdom - which God predestined before the ages to our glory, and which is not of this age - among those who are mature.
  1. Things which eye has not seen
  2. and ear has not heard,
  3. and which have not come into the heart of man,
  • which things God has prepared for those who love him
The refutation of said wisdom to and by the rules of this age, and the addition that they are passing away, is what I have left out, and I have even left in the superflous "not of this age"

Doable? Or is this not the way to go? Because we now end up with a rather clean and clear context:

hidden, written wisdom
which God predestined
among those who are mature.
  1. Things which eye has not seen
  2. and ear has not heard,
  3. and which have not come into the heart of man,
which God has prepared for those who love him[/quote]

And then the very concise version becomes:
  1. God predestined
  2. hidden, written wisdom
  3. for those who love him
    and we speak it among
  4. those who are mature:
  1. Things which eye has not seen
  2. and ear has not heard,
  3. and which have not come into the heart of man
Right?
robert j
Posts: 1007
Joined: Tue Jan 28, 2014 5:01 pm

Re: Eye has not seen, ear has not heard, nor has it arisen in the heart.

Post by robert j »

An ancient esoteric concept developing into a common doctrinal platitude?

The many examples of this general concept demonstrate the wide use. Here are just a few (but not all) from Ben’s OP ---
Ben C. Smith wrote: Thu Sep 03, 2020 12:01 pm (Part 1 of 3.)

...

I get the impression sometimes, however, that opinions are formed without having considered the full scope of the available parallels, and the main goal of this thread is to lay as many of them as possible out for consideration.

Let us start with the texts mentioned above, just to get them on the table:

Paul

1 Corinthians 2.6-9: 6 Yet we do speak wisdom among those who are mature, a wisdom, however, not of this age nor of the rulers of this age ... 9 but, just as it is written, 9 “Things which eye has not seen and ear has not heard, and which have not come into the heart of man, which things God has prepared for those who love him [ἃ ὀφθαλμὸς οὐκ εἶδεν καὶ οὗς οὐκ ἤκουσεν καὶ ἐπὶ καρδίαν ἀνθρώπου οὐκ ἀνέβη, ἃ ἡτοίμασεν ὁ θεὸς τοῖς ἀγαπῶσιν αὐτόν].”

Ascension of Isaiah

Ascension of Isaiah 11.34 (Latin & Slavonic): 34 He said to me, “It is enough for you, Isaiah. For you have seen that which no other son of flesh has seen, which neither eye has seen nor ear has heard, nor has ascended into the heart of man, as many things as God has prepared for all those who love him.” ...

Thomas

Thomas 17[.1]: 1 Jesus said, “I will give you what eye has not seen, and what ear has not heard, and what hand has not touched, nor has it ascended to the heart of man.”

...

So far so good. One thing that is universally acknowledged is that the version in 1 Corinthians 2.9, at least, is a conflation of two or three verses from Isaiah:

Isaiah 64.3 OG: 3 From the age [ἀπὸ τοῦ αἰῶνος] we have not heard, nor have our eyes seen [οὐκ ἠκούσαμεν, οὐδὲ οἱ ὀφθαλμοὶ ἡμῶν εἶδον] a God besides you, and your works which you will do [καὶ τὰ ἔργα σου ἃ ποιήσεις] for those who wait on you [τοῖς ὑπομένουσιν ἔλεον]. [rj note -- this is verse 64:4 in the LXX]

Isaiah 65.16-17 OG: 16 He shall be blessed on the earth, for they shall bless the true God, and those who swear upon the earth shall swear by the true God, for they shall forget the former affliction, and it shall not come into their heart [καὶ οὐκ ἀναβήσεται αὐτῶν ἐπὶ τὴν καρδίαν]. 17 For there shall be a new heaven and a new earth, and they shall not at all remember the former things, neither shall they at all come up into their heart [οὐδ᾽ οὐ μὴ ἐπέλθῃ αὐτῶν ἐπὶ τὴν καρδίαν].

...

This heavenly perspective is at least part of the background for the version of this saying in the Ascension of Isaiah. Another notion lurking behind the Ascension of Isaiah is the ancient controversy over Moses versus Isaiah. Moses said that no one can see God and live (Exodus 33.20), whereas Isaiah claims to have seen God (and, by implication, lived to tell us about it; Isaiah 6.1).

The Thomasine version adds hands not touching, which some scholars have likened to the following:

1 John 1.1-4: 1 What was from the beginning, what we have heard, what we have seen with our eyes, what we have looked at and touched with our hands, concerning the Word of Life — 2 and the life was manifested, and we have seen and testify and proclaim to you the eternal life, which was with the Father and was manifested to us — 3 what we have seen and heard we proclaim to you also ...

...

It is not always easy to figure out whether a parallel is truly a parallel or not. Do the following passages count?

Matthew 13.16-17: 16 “But blessed are your eyes, because they see; and your ears, because they hear. 17 For truly I say to you that many prophets and righteous men desired to see what you see, and did not see it, and to hear what you hear, and did not hear it.”

Luke 10.23-24: 23 Turning to the disciples, He said privately, “Blessed are the eyes which see the things you see, 24 for I say to you, that many prophets and kings wished to see the things which you see, and did not see them, and to hear the things which you hear, and did not hear them.”

In this case, though, the idea is that the ancients could imagine what was to come, and they longed for it; they were just born into the wrong generation.

Pairing eyes with ears is hardly enough for a parallel; ancient literature of all kinds does this relentlessly. So indeed does modern literature.

But what about adding the mind or the heart of man to eyes and ears? Is that enough?

...


All the examples have the concept of the eyes and ears, with a few adding the touching and/or the heart/mind. Both the Greek and the Coptic terms generally translated as “heart” in these passages also encompass the concept of “mind”.

Thomas 17 is the only example provided in this thread to include all four --- seeing, hearing, touching, and the heart/mind. However, the Tao Te Ching, an ancient text of esoteric wisdom, does as well ---

Tao Te Ching 14 [1/]

Look, and it can’t be seen. Listen, and it can’t be heard. Reach, and it can’t be grasped … You can’t know it but you can be it …

The Tao Te Ching is typically dated, in broad strokes, to about the same general time period to which the relevant portions of Isaiah are dated. However, unlike Isaiah, there are extant manuscripts of the Tao Te Ching dated to as early as the late 4th century BCE.

In the Tao Te Ching 14 we mere mortal humans can’t see, hear, grasp, or know the all-encompassing existence, or whatever one might call it "but you can be it". "It is always present within you" (Tao Te Ching 6). Other texts cited above imply, or are explicit, that such knowledge can be attained or has been attained by means of an outside agent ---

In 1 Corinthians, Paul directly follows verse 2:9 with “For God has revealed to us through the Spirit. For the Spirit searches all things, even the depths of God.” (1 Corinthians 2:10)

In Isaiah 64:4, the author implies that human eyes and ears have perceived God, “From the age we have not heard, nor have our eyes seen a God besides you …”

And in 1 John 1.1-2, “What was from the beginning, what we have heard, what we have seen with our eyes, what we have looked at and touched with our hands, concerning the Word of Life — and the life was manifested, and we have seen and testify and proclaim to you the eternal life, which was with the Father and was manifested to us …”

In Thomas 17, the narrator Jesus/IS claims to provide the secrets, “Jesus said, “I will give you what no eye has seen, what no ear has heard, what no hand has touched, what has not arisen in the human heart (heart/mind).”

The passage in Thomas 17 seems the closest parallel to the relevant portions of Tao Te Ching 14, except for the intermediary agent Jesus/IS. In similar fashion to the Tao Te Ching, GThomas expresses esoteric knowledge as originating within ourselves (Logion 3), but the concepts are personified, as in "the living Father".

In the Tao Te Ching, intermediaries and personifications are eschewed ---

The tao that can be told is not the eternal Tao. The name that can be named is not the eternal name. (Tao Te Ching, 1)

Since before time and space were, the Tao is. It is beyond is and is not. How do I know this is true? I look inside myself and see. (Tao Te Ching, 21)




1/ The translations of the Tao Te Ching here are by Stephen Mitchell. Translation is notoriously difficult from the ancient Chinese characters for a variety of reasons, but most that I’ve seen have all these elements but perhaps using different wording.
Post Reply