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

[Ben C. Smith]

(Part 1 of 3.)

I guess it was inevitable that 1 Corinthians 2.9 would come up again on this forum. Several of us have spent quite a few pixels speculating about it and its many parallels, especially with regard to the matter of which writing is being quoted ("as it is written"). Roger Parvus (RParvus) has, both on this forum and elsewhere online in a somewhat more thoroughgoing fashion, suggested that Paul was quoting the Ascension of Isaiah. Robert J. (robert j) has suggested on this forum that Paul himself is the one who devised this composite of two or three verses from Isaiah, and that his "it is written" simply points to that prophet. I myself have conjecturally argued for Alan Garrow's thesis that the line Paul had in mind came from the lost ending of the Didache. Until recently, I had seen the idea that Paul is quoting either the gospel of Thomas or a saying which looks most like the Thomasine version only in other venues or in books, but now Martijn Linssen has brought that idea to the forum for us.

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 [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].”

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.” / 34 qui dixit mihi, «Sufficit tibi, Ysaia. vidisti enim quod nemo alius vidit carnis filius, quod nec oculus vidit nec auris audivit, nec in cor hominis ascendit, quanta preparavit Deus omnibus diligentibus se.»

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.”

Didache

Pseudo-Boniface, Renunciation 5: 5 Believe in the advent of Christ, the resurrection of the body, and the judgment of all men. For then the impious shall be separated from the just, the one for the everlasting fire, the others for the eternal life. Then begins a life with God without death, a light without shadows, a health without sickness, a plenty without hunger, a happiness without fear, a joy with no misgivings. Then comes the eternal glory, in which the just shall shine like suns, for no eye has ever seen, no ear has ever heard, no heart has ever dreamed, of all that which God has prepared for those who love him. / 5 Venturum Christum credite, et carnis resurrectionem, et iudicium omnium hominum. ibi discernuntur impii in ignem aeternum, iusti autem in vitam aeternam. ibi est vita cum Deo sine morte, lux sine tenebris, salus sine aegritudine, satietas sine fame, felicitas sine timore, gaudium sine tristitia. ibi aeterna gloria, ibi fulgebunt iusti sicut sol, quoniam oculus non vidit, nec auris audivit, nec in cor hominis ascendit quantum praeparavit Deus diligentibus se.

Codex Palatinus Latinus 485: Venturum Christum credite, et carnis resurrectionem, et iudicium omnium hominum. Ibi discernuntur impii a sorte iustorum et mittuntur in ignem aeternum, iusti autem in vitam aeternam. Ibi est vita cum Deo sine morte, ibi aeterna gloria sine fine, ibi fulgebunt iusti sicut sol, ibi omnia bona quae oculus non vidit, nec auris audivit, nec in cor hominis ascendit quantum praeparavit Deus diligentibus se, quod ipse praestare dignetur qui in trinitate perfecta vivit et regnat Deus in saecula saeculorum. Amen. [Link.]

Apostolic Constitutions 7.32: 32 For in the last days false prophets shall be multiplied (= Matthew 24.11; Didache 16.3), and such as corrupt the word; and the sheep shall be changed into wolves (= Matthew 10.16; Didache 16.3), and love into hatred (= Didache 16.3), for through the abounding of iniquity the love of many shall wax cold (= Matthew 24.12). For men shall hate, and persecute, and betray one another (= Matthew 24.9-10; Didache 16.4). And then shall appear the deceiver of the world (= Didache 16.4), the enemy of the truth, the prince of lies (= 2 Thessalonians 2.3), whom the Lord Jesus shall destroy with the spirit of His mouth (= 2 Thessalonians 2.8; Isaiah 11.4), who takes away the wicked with His lips; and many shall be offended at Him. But they that endure to the end, the same shall be saved (= Matthew 24.13; Didache 16.5). And then shall appear the sign of the Son of Man in heaven (= Matthew 24.30; Didache 16.6); and afterwards shall be the voice of a trumpet by the archangel (= Matthew 24.31; 1 Thessalonians 4.16; Didache 16.6); and in that interval shall be the revival of those that were asleep (= Didache 16.6); and then shall the Lord come, and all His saints with Him (= Didache 16.7; Zechariah 14.5), with a great concussion above the clouds (= Matthew 24.30; Didache 16.6), with the angels of His power (= Matthew 16.27), in the throne of His kingdom, to condemn the devil, the deceiver of the world, and to render to every one according to his deeds. Then shall the wicked go away into everlasting punishment, but the righteous shall go into life eternal (= Matthew 25.46) to inherit those things which eye has not seen and ear has not heard, nor have entered into the heart of man, which things God has prepared for those who love Him [κληρονομοῦντες ἐκεῖνα ἃ ὀφθαλμὸς οὐκ εἶδεν καὶ οὖς οὐκ ἤκουσεν καὶ ἐπὶ καρδίαν ἀνθρώπου οὐκ ἀνέβη, ἃ ἡτοίμασεν ὁ Θεὸς τοῖς ἀγαπῶσιν αὐτόν] (= 1 Corinthians 2.9) and they shall rejoice in the kingdom of God, which is in Christ Jesus.

(Those last three I list, of course, as the main sources from which Garrow reconstructs the lost ending of the Didache. I will not be specifically arguing for his option here and now, and it is speculative regardless.)

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].

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].

The implicit context of that first Isaian quotation and the explicit context of that second Isaian quotation — the new heaven and new earth promised for a future time — form the background for many of the parallels I will be adducing; another common motif is that "what eye has not seen, nor ear heard, nor has it arisen in the heart of man," is what is currently being kept in heaven, which either no human or only a privileged human like Isaiah is permitted to view. In truth, there is no real or necessary conflict between these two perspectives, since many Jews and many Christians alike (regardless of how you decide to draw the line between them) agreed in antiquity that the eschaton, the new heaven and new earth, was all about bringing what is in heaven down to earth, whether figuratively or literally. In other words, to glimpse something in heaven in the present is also to glimpse what the future holds for earth.

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, so that you too may have fellowship with us; and indeed our fellowship is with the Father, and with His Son Jesus Christ. 4 These things we write, so that our joy may be made complete.

Muratorian Canon, lines 26b-31: 26b-31 What marvel, therefore, is it if John so constantly also in his epistles profers single points, saying about himself, “What we saw with our eyes and heard with our ears and our hands handled, these things we wrote to you” (= 1 John 1.1, 4)? / 26b-31 quid ergo mirum si Iohannes tam constanter singula etiam in epistulis suis proferat, dicens in semetipso, «Quae vidimus oculis nostris et auribus audivimus et manus nostrae palpaverunt, haec scripsimus vobis.»

The context here is obviously one of eyewitness or earwitness testimony (to what, exactly, might remain an open matter). I am not sure how close this is to Thomas.

And, of course, the putative lost ending of the Didache, in Garrow's reconstruction, is definitely in keeping with the original context in Isaiah.

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?

Plutarch, How the Young Person Should Study Poetry 17e: 17e And let these [words] of Empedocles be at hand: “Thus these things are not to be seen by men, nor heard, nor comprehended with the mind.” / 17e Καὶ τὰ Ἐμπεδοκλέους ἔστω πρόχειρα ταυτί· Οὕτως οὔτ' ἐπιδερκτὰ τάδ' ἀνδράσιν οὔτ' ἐπακουστὰ οὔτε νόῳ περιληπτά.

Empedocles, On Nature 2 (translation slightly formatted from that of William Ellery Leonard):

For narrow through their members scattered ways
Of knowing lie. And many a vile surprise
Blunts soul and keen desire. And having viewed
Their little share of life, with briefest fates,
Like smoke they are lifted up and flit away,
Believing only what each chances on,
Hither and thither driven; yet they boast
The larger vision of the whole and all.
But thuswise never shall these things be seen,
Never be heard by men, nor seized by mind;
And thou, since hither now withdrawn apart,
Shalt learn — no more than mortal ken may span.

[Underlined portion: οὕτως οὔτ' ἐπιδερκτὰ τάδ' ἀνδράσιν οὔδ' ἐπακουστὰ οὔτε νόῳ περιληπτά. Link.]

How much does it matter that only the senses are mentioned, but not the eyes or ears themselves? At any rate, the addition of human reasoning or imagination to seeing and hearing is something Empedocles does, just like that composite quotation of Isaiah.

Or consider:

Acts of Peter 7.21a: 21a .... But Peter said to them, “If there be in you the faith that is in Christ, if it be firm in you, then perceive in your mind that which you see not with your eyes, and though your ears are closed, yet let them be open in your mind within you.” ....

Clementine Recognitions 2.44b: 44b Then Peter, “You have answered rightly, O Clement; for as no one can see without eyes, nor hear without ears, nor smell without nostrils, nor taste without a tongue, nor handle anything without hands, so it is impossible, without the true Prophet, to know what is pleasing to God.” And I answered, “I have already learned from your instruction that this true prophet is the Christ, but I should wish to learn what the Christ means, or why He is so called, that a matter of so great importance may not be vague and uncertain to me.”

Both of these have been suggested as parallels in the literature, but I am not sure they are.

[Ben C. Smith]

(Part 2 of 3.)

Historically speaking, the gospel of Thomas, the Ascension of Isaiah, original Isaiah, and the lost ending of the Didache are not the most common suggestions as the source for 1 Corinthians 2.9. That distinction would probably have to go to the Apocalypse of Elijah:

Origen, Commentary on Matthew 27.3-10 (Vetus Interpretatio): Si autem haec dicens aliquis existimat se offendere, videat ne alicubi in secretis Ieremiae hoc prophetatur, sciens quoniam et Apostolus scripturas quasdam secretorum profert, sicut dicit alicubi, «Quod oculus non vidit, nec auris audivit.» in nullo enim regulari libro hoc positum invenitur, nisi in secretis Eliae prophetae. / If therefore someone supposes to offend himself in saying these things [namely, that Jeremiah is a mistake for Zechariah in Matthew 27.9], let him see lest this be prophesied somewhere in secret works of Jeremiah, knowing how even the Apostle offers certain scriptures from secret works, just as he says somewhere, “What eye has not seen, nor has ear heard.” This is indeed not found to be located in any canonical book, but rather in the secret works of Elijah the Prophet. [Link; a different Origenic perspective may be found on page 42 of volume 5 of Cramer's Catenae.]

Ambrosiaster, Commentary on the Pauline Epistles 26 (translation from Paul Hartog, “1 Corinthians 2:9 in the Apostolic Fathers,” in Intertextuality in the Second Century, page 103): 26 .... These words were expressed somewhat differently by Isaiah, and they are also found in the apocryphal Apocalypse of Elijah.” ....

Jerome, Epistle 57.9: 9 .... Let us pass on now to the apostle Paul who writes thus to the Corinthians: “For had they known it, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory. But, as it is written, ‘Eye has not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man the things which God has prepared for those who love Him’” (= 1 Corinthians 2.8-9). Some writers on this passage betake themselves to the ravings of the apocryphal books and assert that the quotation comes from the Revelation of Elijah, whereas the truth is that it is found in Isaiah according to the Hebrew text: “Since the beginning of the world men have not heard nor perceived by the ear, neither has the eye seen, O God, beside you what you have prepared for those who wait for you.” The Septuagint has rendered the words quite differently: “Since the beginning of the world we have not heard, neither have our eyes seen any God beside you and your true works, and you will show mercy to those who wait for you.” We see then from what place the quotation is taken and yet the apostle has not rendered his original word for word, but, using a paraphrase, he has given the sense in different terms. ....

Jerome, Commentary on Isaiah 64.4 (translation slightly modified from that of Algernon Herbert, Nimrod: A Discourse on Certain Passages of History and Fable): Saint Paul, as a Hebrew of Hebrews, has taken a paraphrase of this text in the canonical scriptures into his epistle to the Corinthians, not rendering word for word, which he did not condescend to do, but expressing the truth of that sense which he makes use of to corroborate his argument, wherefore, let the madness of the apocryphae be silent which are intruded into the churches of Christ upon pretense of this text.... For the Ascension of Isaiah and the Apocalypse of Elijah both contain this testimony [Ascensio Isaiae et Apocalypsis Eliae hoc habent testimonium]. [Link.]

Apostolic Constitutions 6.16: 16 .... And also among the ancients some have written apocryphal books of Moses, and of Enoch, and of Adam, of both Isaiah and David, and of Elijah, and of the three patriarchs, corrupting of and inimical to the truth. .... / 16 .... καὶ ἐν τοῖς παλαιούς δὲ τινες συνεγράψαντο βιβλία απόκρυφα Μωσέως, καὶ Ενώχ, Αδάμ, Ησαΐου τε καὶ Δαβίδ καὶ Ήλιου καὶ τῶν τριών πατριαρχών φθοροποιά καὶ τῆς αληθείας εχθρά. ....

Stichometry of (pseudo-)Nicephorus: Ελία προφήτου, στίχοι ͵γιςʹ. / Of Elijah the prophet, 3016 verses.

It is important to note that we do possess (most of) an Apocalypse of Elijah, but it does not contain anything like 1 Corinthians 2.9. Nor does it contain anything like Ephesians 5.14, which Epiphanius claims, in Panarion 42.12.3 (Elenchus 37), is to be found in an Apocalypse of Elijah. This fact, by itself, is no impediment to the quotation having belonged to some apocryphon attributed to Elijah; after all, we possess multiple Apocalypses of Enoch, two Apocalypses of James, both an Assumption and a Testament of Moses, both Psalms and Odes of Solomon, and so on. Also, it seems that one of the Alexandrian fathers may have actually known of two such apocryphal texts:

Didymus the Blind, Commentary on Ecclesiastes 8.4b-5a (235.25-28; translation slightly formatted from that of David Frankfurter, Elijah in Upper Egypt, page 24): It is true that nobody says of the truth of God, “What will you do?” as also of the shameless and impudent king. And this shameless one perhaps can take the countenance of the Antichrist [τοῦ Ἀντιχρίστου]. For in this regard, in the prophecy of Elijah [προφητείᾳ τοῦ Ἠλίου], a certain girl, having risen up and accused him, called him “shameless” (= Apocalypse of Elijah 4.1-6).

David Frankfurter, Elijah in Upper Egypt, page 43: Didymus the Blind, presently the earliest witness to the text, is quite enigmatic as to its title. In his Ecclesiastes commentary he cites the extant Apocalypse of Elijah as the “Prophecy of Elijah” but refers to another apocryphon, which apparently disclosed secrets of the underworld, as “the Apocalypse of Elijah.” .... Didymus therefore probably knew both a Prophecy of Elijah and an Apocalypse of Elijah, and the text that he calls the “Prophecy of Elijah” is what we now call the Apocalypse of Elijah, whereas his “Apocalypse of Elijah” is now lost.

Scholars are divided on how much to trust these notices, and I get the impression that many or even most think it is a dead end. Nor is it impossible that the lost Apocalypse of Elijah, if such it is, was actually written later than at least some of the Christian writings. We know next to nothing about it. Nevertheless, it is not impossible that 1 Corinthians 2.9 is a quotation of some such apocryphal work.

There is one parallel to the passage at issue which is not considered nearly as often as it ought to be on this forum. Only John2, I think, has picked up on my previous mentions of it and tried to account for it. I am speaking of pseudo-Philo (so called; the work is actually anonymous, not pseudonymous):

Pseudo-Philo, Biblical Antiquities 26.13: 13 And it shall be when the sins of my people are filled up, and their enemies have the mastery over their house, that I will take these stones and the former together with the tables, and lay them up in the place whence they were brought forth in the beginning, and they shall be there until I remember the world, and visit the dwellers upon earth. And then will I take them and many other better than they from that place which eye has not seen nor ear heard, and has not come up into the heart of man, until such like should come to pass in the age [quod oculus non vidit nec auris audivit, et in cor hominis non ascendit, quousque tale aliquid fieret in seculum], and the just shall have no need for the light of the sun nor of the shining of the moon, for the light of the precious stones shall be their light.

Joseph A. Fitzmyer, Commentary on 1 Corinthians (Anchor Bible), 178-179: 178-179 Noteworthy, however, is the parallel found in Pseudo-Philo (LAB, 26.13): quod oculus non vidit nec auris audivit, et in cor hominis non ascendit, quousque tale aliquid fieret in seculum, “What eye has not seen and ear has not heard and has not surged in a human heart.” Paul has not derived his form of the composite quotation from Pseudo-Philo, since LAB comes from a slightly later date, and Pseudo-Philo is, practically speaking, unaware of Christianity and specifically of the Pauline letters. Hence perhaps both Paul and Pseudo-Philo have derived it from a common Jewish source known in the first Christian century....

The date of this text is not known for certain. I once presented a very conjectural argument for it dating to after 70 but before 135 or so. But other researchers have dated it to before 70. Its main importance is that it presents a combination of Isaiah 64.3 and 65.16-17 which is, as far as can be determined, independent of any early Christian text. Any trajectory of this conflated quotation of Isaiah must take this passage into account. To my way of thinking, it seems to back up what David posted recently to some extent:

That quote from Isaiah is likely to have been a popular quotable phrase and/or paraphrase back then, a common currency
The fact one person said it or Jesus or whoever really doesn't seem to have much value because it must have been very common
If it wasn't ultimately derived from Isaiah I'd agree there's something meaningful here

The quote probably does predate any single parallel we have in our possession, in order to account for its presence in pseudo-Philo. It being just "a quotable phrase," while doubtless true, probably does not quite explain the "it is written" that we find in 1 Corinthians 2.9, but it does open up the possibility that there may have been other texts out there which quoted it, and which Paul himself quoted, while attributing it, however, to its original source, Isaiah, since Isaiah provides almost all of the raw materials employed to create the combined quotation. (Isaiah, though, has "those who wait on him," whereas Paul has "those who love him." This difference is the only one of any substance.)

At any rate, the instance in pseudo-Philo is a model of retaining the original context of the quotations from Isaiah, both in the sense that what cannot be seen or heard is in heaven at present and in the sense that what cannot be seen or heard will be made manifest in the future.

There are other parallels from putatively Jewish sources:

Testament of Jacob 8.8: 8 And he showed me all the resting places and all the good things prepared for the righteous, and the things that eye has not seen nor ear heard, and have not come into the heart of men, that God has prepared for those who love him and do his will on earth (for, if they end well, they do his will).

Theodore A. Bergren, "Christian Influence on the Transmission History of 4, 5, and 6 Ezra," in Jewish Apocalyptic Heritage in Early Christianity, edited by James C. Vanderkam & William Adler, pages 110-111: In 7:96, the phrase “and they will see what no eye has seen” is inserted into a description of the joys of the elect. This statement is close to a passage quoted by Paul in 1 Cor 2:9-10 (probably derived from Isa 64:4) and has numerous other parallels in ancient Jewish, Christian and Islamic literature. Although it is not certain that the phrase in Arabic 1 derives directly from 1 Corinthians, such an origin is possible. .... In [4 Ezra] 5:40, the expanded Armenian text includes an element similar to that noted above in the Arabic 1 version of 7:96: “...the good things from him which eye has not seen and ear has not heard and have not occurred to man and man has never considered, which God has prepared for his beloved ones.” The literal approximation of this text to 1 Cor 2:9, which is much closer and more extensive than was the case in Arabic 1, makes it almost certain that the Armenian refers to the Pauline passage.

Talmud, Sanhedrin 99a: 99a .... Rabbi Hiyya ben Abba said in Rabbi Johanan’s name, “All the prophets prophesied only in respect of the Messianic era, but as for the world to come, ‘The eye has not seen, O Lord, beside you, what he has prepared for him who waits for him’ (= Isaiah 64.3).” Now, he disagrees with Samuel, who said, “This world differs from the days of the Messiah only in respect of servitude to powers.” ....

Talmud, Berachoth 34b: 34b .... R. Hiyya b. Abba also said in the name of R. Johanan, “All the prophets prophesied only for the days of the Messiah, but as for the world to come, ‘Eye has not seen, oh God, beside You’ (= Isaiah 64.3). These Rabbis differ from Samuel; for Samuel said, ‘There is no difference between this world and the days of the Messiah except bondage to foreign powers, as it says, “For the poor shall never cease out of the land” (= Deuteronomy 15.11).’” ....

Some of the rabbis, as one can see above, eventually settled on the notion that "eyes have not seen, nor ears heard" what lies in wait for the faithful after the Messianic Era. All the prophecies of peace and prosperity were of the Days of the Messiah, whereas what comes after those days, in the Age to Come, is beyond even the prophetic ken.

There are many, many putatively Christian parallels, and I know I do not even have them all yet:

1 Clement 34.8: 8 For the Scripture says, “Eye has not seen and ear has not heard, neither have entered into the heart of man the things which He has prepared for those who wait for Him.” / 8 λέγει γάρ, Ὀφθαλμὸς οὐκ εἶδεν καὶ οὖς οὐκ ἤκουσεν καὶ ἐπὶ καρδίαν ἀνθρώπου οὐκ ἀνέβη ὅσα ἠτοίμασεν κύριος τοῖς ὑπομένουσιν αὐτόν.

2 Clement 11.7: 7 If, therefore, we shall do righteousness in the sight of God, we shall enter into His kingdom, and shall receive the promises, “which ear has not heard, nor eye seen, neither have entered into the heart of man.” / 7 ἐὰν οὗν ποιήσωμεν τὴν δικαιοσύνην ἐναντίον τοῦ θεοῦ εἰσήξομεν εἰς τὴν βασιλείαν αὐτοῦ καὶ ληψόμεθα τὰς ἐπαγγελίας ἃς οὖς οὐκ ἤκουσεν, οὐδὲ ὀφθαλμὸς εἶδεν, οὐδὲ ἐπὶ καρδίαν ἀνθρώπου ἀνέβη.

Martyrdom of Polycarp 2.3: 3 And, looking to the grace of Christ, they despised all the torments of this world, redeeming themselves from eternal punishment by the suffering of a single hour. For this reason the fire of their savage executioners appeared cool to them. For they kept before their view escape from that fire which is eternal and never shall be quenched, and looked forward with the eyes of their heart to those good things which are laid up for such as endure; things “which ear has not heard, nor eye seen, neither have entered into the heart of man,” but were revealed by the Lord to them, inasmuch as they were no longer men, but had already become angels. / 3 καὶ προσέχοντες τῇ τοῦ Χριστοῦ χάριτι τῶν κοσμικῶν κατεφρόνουν βασάνων διὰ μιᾶς ὥρας τὴν αἰώνιον ζωὴν ἐξαγοραζόμενοι καὶ τὸ πῦρ ἦν αὐτοῖς ψυχρὸν τὸ τῶν ἀπανθρώπων βασανιστῶν πρὸ ὀφθαλμῶν γὰρ εἶχον φυγεῖν τὸ αἰώνιον καὶ μηδέποτε σβεννύμενον καὶ τοῖς τῆς καρδίας ὀφθαλμοῖς ἀνέβλεπον τὰ τηρούμενα οὔτε ὀφθαλμὸς εἶδεν οὔτε ἐπὶ καρδίαν ἀνθρώπου ἀνέβη, ἐκείνοις δὲ ὑπεδείκνυτο ὑπὸ τοῦ κυρίου οἵπερ μηκέτι ἄνθρωποι ἀλλ᾽ ἤδη ἄγγελοι ἦσαν.

Apocalypse of Peter 6-7: 6 And as we prayed, suddenly there appeared two men standing before the Lord towards the east, on whom we were not able to look; 7 for there came forth from their countenance a ray as of the sun, and their raiment was shining, such as eye of man never saw, for no mouth is able to express or heart to conceive the glory with which they were endued, and the beauty of their appearance.

Acts of Peter 10.39b: 39b Unto him therefore flee, brethren, and if you learn that in him alone you exist, you shall obtain those things whereof he says to you, “which neither eye has seen nor ear heard, neither have they entered into the heart of man [ἃ οὔτε ὀφθαλμὸς εἶδεν, οὔτε οὖς ἤκουσεν, οὔτε ἐπὶ καρδίαν ἀνθρώπου οὐκ ἀνέβη].” We ask, therefore, for that which you have promised to give unto us, O undefiled Jesus. We praise you, we give you thanks, and confess to you, glorifying you, even we men who are yet without strength, for you are God alone, and none other, to whom be glory now and unto all ages. Amen.

Acts of Thomas 36: 36 .... But we speak of the world which is above, of God and angels, of watchers and holy ones of the immortal food and the drink of the true vine, of raiment that endures and grows not old, of things which eye has not seen, nor ear heard, neither have they entered into the heart of sinful men, the things which God has prepared for those who love him. ....

Dialogue of the Savior 56–57: 56-57 [Matthew] said, “Tell me, Lord, how the dead die [and] how the living live. The [Lord] said, ‘[You have] asked me about a saying [...] which eye has not seen, [nor] have I heard it except from you.”

Prayer of the Apostle Paul 26-35: 26-35 Grant what no angel eye has seen and no archon ear heard, and what has not entered into the human heart, to inherit those things “which eye has not seen, nor ear heard, nor have entered into the heart of man, such things as God has prepared for those who love him.”

Manichean Turfan fragment M 789: “...that I may redeem you from death and annihilation. I will give you what you have not seen with the eye, nor heard with the ears, nor grasped with the hand. He who... on the sinners....”

Epistle of Titus 1: 1 Great and honorable is the divine promise which the Lord has made with his own mouth to those who are holy and pure. He will bestow upon them what eyes have not seen, nor ears heard, nor has it entered into any human heart. And from eternity there will be a race incomparable and incomprehensible. / Pollicitatio quam ore suo dominus promisit sanctis et inmaculatis. daturum se eis quod non viderunt oculis, nec aures audierunt, nec in cor hominis ascendit. et erit in aeternis aeternorum genus inconparabilis et [in]conspicibilis.

Epiphanius, Panarion 64.69.10: How can a thing be anything but “honored,” when it is raised, abides forever, and obtains a kingdom in heaven by its hope in God’s lovingkindness — where “the righteous” shall shine “as the sun,” where they shall be “equal to the angels,” where they shall dance with the bridegroom, where Peter and the apostles “shall sit on twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel,” where the righteous shall receive “what eye has not seen and ear has not heard, neither has entered into the heart of man, the things which God has prepared for them that love him” [ὅπου λήψονται οἱ δίκαιοι «ἃ ὀφθαλμὸς οὐκ εἶδε καὶ οὖς οὐκ ἤκουσε καὶ ἐπὶ καρδίαν ἀνθρώπου οὐκ ἀνέβη, ἃ ἡτοίμασεν ὁ θεὸς τοῖς ἀγαπῶσιν αὐτόν»]?

Epiphanius, Panarion 66.38.1-4: 1 For if there were no resurrection of bodies, how could there be “gnashing of teeth?” And don’t anyone make that halfwitted remark again, “Teeth are made for us to chew with; what food will we eat after the resurrection of the dead?” 2 If Jesus ate again after his resurrection, and [took] “a piece of a broiled fish and an honeycomb,” and lived with his disciples for forty days, will there be no food? 3 And as to food, it is plain that “Blessed is he who shall eat bread in the kingdom of heaven.” And it is the Lord’s own promise that “You shall be seated at my Father’s table eating and drinking.” 4 And what this eating and drinking is, is known to him alone, for “eye has not seen nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God has prepared for them that love him” [ἃ ὀφθαλμὸς οὐκ εἶδε καὶ οὖς οὐκ ἤκουσεν, οὔτε ἐπὶ καρδίαν ἀνθρώπου ἀνέβη, ὅσα ἡτοίμασεν ὁ θεὸς τοῖς ἀγαπῶσιν αὐτόν].

Epiphanius, Panarion 66.61.8-9: 8 But when these prophets prophesy, they prophesy in part and know in part but with hope await what is perfect in the ages to come, “when the corruptible is changed to incorruption and the mortal to immortality.” For “ then shall we see face to face.” 9 For now these things are shown to us “darkly,” but there “what eye has not seen here is prepared” [ἑτοιμάζεται ἃ ὀφθαλμὸς ὧδε οὐκ εἶδεν]. There perfection is revealed, those things that “ear has not heard” here [ἃ οὖς ἐνταῦθα οὐκ ἤκουσεν]. There is the greatest gift to the saints, that which “has not entered into the heart of man” here [ὃ ἐπὶ καρδίαν ἀνθρώπου οὐκ ἀνέβη ἐνταῦθα].

Epiphanius, Panarion 77.37.57; 77.38.1: 37.5 What becomes of the words of the apostle, “If you be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing,” and, “All you who are justified by the Law are fallen from grace?” What about the Lord’s words, “For in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are equal unto the angels?” 6 On the other hand, “You shall sit at the table of my Father eating and drinking,” and, “when I drink it new with you in the kingdom of heaven,” with the additional word, “new,” and the phrase, “at the table of the kingdom,” mean something different. 7 I myself agree with this, since I have learned from the sacred scriptures that there is a partaking of immortal food and drink. Of these it is said, “Eye has not seen and ear has not heard, neither have entered into the heart of man what things God has prepared for them that love him.” 38.1 Apollinarius, though, says that we partake of the material pleasures first, in the millennium, without labor and grief, but that after the millennium we partake of the things of which “[/u]eye has not seen and ear has not heard[/u]” was said.

Gregory of Nyssa, Catechetical Oration 40: 40 Ἀναγκαῖον ἂν εἴη τούτοις προσθεῖναι καὶ τὸ λειπόμενον, ὅτι οὔτε τὰ ἀγαθὰ τὰ ἐν ἐπαγγελίαις τοῖς εὖ βεβιωκόσι προκείμενα τοιαῦτά ἐστιν ὡς εἰς ὑπογραφὴν λόγου ἐλθεῖν. πῶς γὰρ ἃ οὔτε ὀφθαλμὸς εἶδεν, οὔτε οὖς ἤκουσεν, οὔτε ἐπὶ καρδίαν ἀνθρώπου ἀνέβη; οὔτε μὴν ἡ ἀλγεινὴ τῶν πεπλημμεληκότων ζωὴ πρός τι τῶν τῇδε λυπούντων τὴν αἴσθησιν ὁμοτίμως ἔχει. ἀλλὰ κἂν ἐπονομασθῇ τι τῶν ἐκεῖ κολαστηρίων τοῖς ὧδε γνωριζομένοις ὀνόμασιν, οὐκ ἐν ὀλίγῳ τὴν παραλλαγὴν ἔχει. πῦρ γὰρ ἀκούων ἄλλο τι παρὰ τοῦτο νοεῖν ἐδιδάχθης ἐκ τοῦ προσκεῖσθαί τι τῷ πυρὶ ἐκείνῳ ὃ ἐν τούτῳ οὐκ ἔστι· τὸ μὲν γὰρ οὐ σβέννυται, τούτου δὲ πολλὰ παρὰ τῆς πείρας ἐξεύρηται τὰ σβεστήρια, πολλὴ δὲ τοῦ σβεννυμένου πρὸς τὸ μὴ παραδεχόμενον σβέσιν ἡ διαφορά. οὐκοῦν ἄλλο τι, καὶ οὐχὶ τοῦτό ἐστι. πάλιν σκώληκά τις ἀκούσας μὴ διὰ τῆς ὁμωνυμίας πρὸς τὸ ἐπίγειον τοῦτο θηρίον ἀποφερέσθω τῇ διανοίᾳ· ἡ γὰρ προσθήκη τοῦ ἀτελεύτητον εἶναι ἄλλην τινὰ φύσιν παρὰ τὴν γινωσκομένην νοεῖν ὑποτίθεται. ἐπεὶ οὖν ταῦτα πρόκειται τῇ ἐλπίδι τοῦ μετὰ ταῦτα βίου, καταλλήλως ἐκ τῆς ἑκάστου προαιρέσεως κατὰ τὴν δικαίαν τοῦ θεοῦ κρίσιν ἀναφυόμενα τῷ βίῳ, σωφρονούντων ἂν εἴη μὴ πρὸς τὸ παρὸν ἀλλὰ πρὸς τὸ μετὰ τοῦτο βλέπειν, καὶ τῆς ἀφράστου μακαριότητος ἐν τῇ ὀλίγῃ ταύτῃ καὶ προσκαίρῳ ζωῇ τὰς ἀφορμὰς καταβάλλεσθαι καὶ τῆς τῶν κακῶν πείρας δι' ἀγαθῆς προαιρέσεως ἀλλοτριοῦσθαι, νῦν μὲν κατὰ τὸν βίον, μετὰ ταῦτα δὲ κατὰ τὴν αἰωνίαν ἀντίδοσιν. / It will be necessary to add to what has been said this remaining statement also; viz. that those good things which are held out in the Gospels to those who have led a godly life, are not such as can be precisely described. For how is that possible with things which “eye has not seen, neither ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man?” Indeed, the sinner’s life of torment presents no equivalent to anything that pains the sense here. Even if some one of the punishments in that other world be named in terms that are well known here, the distinction is still not small. When you hear the word fire, you have been taught to think of a fire other than the fire we see, owing to something being added to that fire which in this there is not; for that fire is never quenched, whereas experience has discovered many ways of quenching this; and there is a great difference between a fire which can be extinguished, and one that does not admit of extinction. That fire, therefore, is something other than this. If, gain, a person hears the word “worm,” let not his thoughts, from the similarity of the term, be carried to the creature here that crawls upon the ground; for the addition that it “dies not” suggests the thought of another reptile than that known here. Since, then, these things are set before us as to be expected in the life that follows this, being the natural outgrowth according to the righteous judgment of God, in the life of each, of his particular disposition, it must be the part of the wise not to regard the present, but that which follows after, and to lay down the foundations for that unspeakable blessedness during this short and fleeting life, and by a good choice to wean themselves from all experience of evil, now in their lifetime here, hereafter in their eternal recompense.

Pseudo-Athanasius, On Virginity 18: 18 .... καὶ ὥσπερ τις ἀπὸ φυλακῆς ἐξέλθοι, οὕτως καὶ οἱ ἅγιοι ἐξέρχονται ἀπὸ τοῦ μοχθηροῦ βίου τούτου εἰς τὰ ἀγαθὰ τὰ ἡτοιμασμένα αὐτοῖς· «ἃ ὀφθαλμὸς οὐκ εἶδε καὶ οὖς οὐκ ἤκουσε, καὶ ἐπὶ καρδίαν ἀνθρώπου οὐκ ἀνέβη, ἃ ἡτοίμασεν ὁ Θεὸς τοῖς ἀγαπῶσιν αὐτόν.» οἱ δὲ ἁμαρτωλοὶ καὶ ὧδε κακῶς μοχθοῦσι καὶ ἐκεῖ πάλιν τὸ πῦρ αὐτοὺς μένει· καὶ τοὺς τοιούτους διπλῶς δεῖ κλαῦσαι, ὅτι καὶ ὧδε ἐν στενο χωρίᾳ εἰσὶ καὶ ἐκεῖ τὴν εὐρυχωρίαν οὐκ ἀπολαμβάνουσι. .... [Link.]

Testamentum Domini 28: 28 .... Cum igitur et nos ad ipsum confugientes didicimus ipsi soli proprium esse dare, petamus ab eo ea quae ipse dixit se daturum esse nobis, quae neque oculus vidit, neque auris audivit, neque in cor hominis ascendit, quae paravit diligentibus se, uti Moyses aliique sancti homines dixerunt. cum itaque in ipsum speravimus, ei tribuamus gloriam, cui honor et imperium in saeculum saeculorum. .... [Link.]

Again, this list is not exhaustive.

The Turfan fragment has a "hand" in it, just like the Thomasine version, but then, few would have disputed that the Manicheans were influenced by the gospel of Thomas, anyway.

Most of the rest retain the original sense of Isaiah, applying the saying in one way or another to what God has in store for the righteous at the end of days.

ETA: Thanks, David:

Gospel of Judas apud codex Tchacos, page 47: 47 .... Jesus said, “[Come], and I will teach you about [..] which no man will see. For a great, limitless aeon exists, whose measure no generation of angels has seen. In it is [the] Great and Invisible Spirit, ‘whom no angel’s eye has seen, nor has the thought of a mind received it; nor has it been called by any name.’” ....

[Ben C. Smith]

(Part 3 of 3.)

I once on this forum presented an idea that I still rather like. Basically, I had already presented William O. Walker's case for 1 Corinthians 2.6-16, the entire passage containing our mysterious Isaian quotation, being an interpolation into the text of 1 Corinthians. I had also already read, but not yet discussed, Peter Kirby's idea that the entirety of 1 Clement 22.1b-41.2 is an interpolation into the text of 1 Clement. This passage certainly does seem to intrude into the line of thought!

21.1a Beware, beloved, lest his many blessings come to be a condemnation to all of us, unless, walking worthily of him, we do what is honorable and well pleasing before him with oneness of mind. 2 For he says in a certain place, "The Spirit of the Lord is a candle, searching out the secret places of the heart." 3 Let us see how near he is at hand, and how none of our thoughts and reasonings do escape him. 4 It is right, therefore, that we should not desert from his will. 5 Let us offend against men who are foolish, and senseless, and puffed up in the pride of their own speech, rather than against God. 6 Let us have respect to our Lord Jesus Christ, whose blood was given for us. Let us reverence them that are over us. Let us honor our elders. Let us instruct the young in the discipline of the fear of God. Let us direct our wives to that which is good; 7 let them show forth the lovely habit of chastity, and exhibit the pure disposition of meekness. Let them make manifest by their conversation the government of their tongues; let them show love, not according to partiality, but equally to all that fear the Lord in holiness. 8 Let your children be partakers of the discipline of Christ; let them learn how much humility avails before God; what power a pure love hath with God; how his fear is honorable and great, preserving all who, with a pure mind, walk in holiness before him. 9 For he is a searcher out of thoughts and counsels, his breath is in us, and when he wills he will take it away.

~

22.1b Come, children, hearken unto me; I will teach you the fear of the Lord. 2 What man is he that wishes for life and would fain see good days? 3 Keep thy tongue from evil, and thy lips that they speak no guile. 4 Turn away from evil and do good; 5 seek peace and pursue it.

[The rest of the proposed interpolation.]

41.1 Let each of you, brethren, in his own order, give thanks unto God, continuing in a good conscience, not transgressing the fixed rule of his ministry, with all gravity. 2 Not in every place, brethren, are sacrifices offered continually, either in answer to prayer, or concerning sin and neglect, but in Jerusalem only; and even there the offering is not made in every place, but before the temple in the court of the altar, after that which is offered has been diligently examined by the high priest and the appointed ministers.

~

41.3 They, therefore, who do anything contrary to that which is according to his will have for their punishment death. 4 You see, brethren, by as much as we have been thought worthy of greater knowledge, by so much the more are we exposed to danger.

The warning consists of the danger of death (pink) for those who have experienced the blessings and the knowledge of God (green) by ignoring God's will (yellow). The proposed interpolation, while generically exhorting the reader to fear God or face the consequences, does not specifically continue the same line of thought; rather, it is a digression marked out by the address to the readers as "children." Furthermore, this is actually the second digression, the first being the very brief instructions by way of illustration (respecting the Lord Jesus Christ, honoring elders, and so on). The author has already digressed once to let the reader know what kinds of things he is talking about, and has wrapped up that brief digression in 21.9: do these things or else. The "therefore" statement in 41.3 spells out altogether clearly what God taking his breath away from a person means, and then reemphasizes how high the stakes are for those "in the know."

At any rate, these two ideas (of there being one interpolation into 1 Corinthians and another into 1 Clement) were at first, of course, completely independent vectors in my consciousness, and I was not sure what to do with either of them. But then another problem I had been working on, one with which John2 will be familiar, drew both of these concepts together, because both of these proposed interpolations contain our Isaian quotation:

1 Corinthians 2.9: 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].”

1 Clement 34.8: 8 For the Scripture says, “Eye has not seen and ear has not heard, neither have entered into the heart of man the things which He has prepared for those who wait for Him.” / 8 λέγει γάρ, Ὀφθαλμὸς οὐκ εἶδεν καὶ οὖς οὐκ ἤκουσεν καὶ ἐπὶ καρδίαν ἀνθρώπου οὐκ ἀνέβη ὅσα ἠτοίμασεν κύριος τοῖς ὑπομένουσιν αὐτόν.

This is hardly an issue by itself, naturally, since 1 Clement quotes 1 Corinthians:

1 Clement 47.1-2: 1 Take into your hands the epistle of the blessed Apostle Paul. 2 What did he first write unto you in the beginning of his gospel?

It is perhaps interesting that, instead of just quoting from Paul, Clement happens to restore the original Isaian line, "those who wait on him," instead of replicating what we find in Paul, "those who love him."

More importantly, however, Hegesippus apparently knew and quoted from 1 Clement:

Eusebius, History of the Church 3.16[.1]: 1 There is extant one epistle of this Clement which is confessed to be genuine, both great [in length] and marvellous, which he formed as from the church of the Romans to that of the Corinthians, when a tumult had come up in Corinth. And we know that this epistle also has been publicized in the common in a great many churches both in the former era and in our own. And Hegesippus is a trustworthy witness that a tumult did take place in that of the Corinthians at the time referred to.

Eusebius, History of the Church 4.22.1-3a: 1 Hegesippus in the five books of memoirs which have come down to us has left a most complete record of his own views. In them he states that on a journey to Rome he met a great many bishops, and that he received the same doctrine from all. It is fitting to hear what he says after making some remarks about the epistle of Clement to the Corinthians. 2 His words are as follows: “And the church of Corinth continued in the true faith until Primus was bishop in Corinth. I conversed with them on my way to Rome, and abode with the Corinthians many days, during which we were mutually refreshed in the true doctrine. 3a And when I had come to Rome I remained there until Anicetus....”

And yet Stephen Gobar accuses Hegesippus of calling "those who say" the words of the combined quotation liars!

Photius, Bibliotheca 232 (Miscellany, by Stephen Gobar): 232 .... Ὅτι τὰ ἡτοιμασμένα τοῖς δικαίοις ἀγαθὰ οὔτε ὀφθαλμὸς εἶδεν οὔτε οὖς ἤκουσεν οὔτε ἐπὶ καρδίαν ἀνθρώπου ἀνέβη. Ἡγήσιππος μέντοι, ἀρχαῖός τε ἀνὴρ καὶ ἀποστολικός, ἐν τῷ πέμπτῳ τῶν ὑπομνημάτων, οὐκ οἶδ' ὅ τι καὶ παθών, μάτην μὲν εἰρῆσθαι ταῦτα λέγει, καὶ καταψεύδεσθαι τοὺς ταῦτα φαμένους τῶν τε θειῶν γραφῶν καὶ τοῦ Κυρίου λέγοντος· «Μακάριοι οἱ ὀφθαλμοὶ ὑμῶν οἱ βλέποντες καὶ τὰ ὦτα ὑμῶν τὰ ἀκούοντα» καὶ ἑξῆς. .... / 232 .... “The good things prepared for the just the eye has not seen, the ears have not heard, and they are not found in the heart of man.” However, Hegesippus, one of the ancients, a contemporary of the apostles, in the fifth book of his Commentaries, in I do not know what context, says that these are empty words and that those who say them are liars since the Holy Scriptures say, “Blessed are your eyes because they see and happy your ears because they hear,” and the rest. ....

Now, of course it is possible that both 1 Corinthians and 1 Clement, which quotes from 1 Corinthians, bore this quotation, and that Hegesippus disagreed with it (pretty vehemently, apparently), and yet tried to "keep the peace" with the Corinthian church despite this disagreement. Given, however, those two disparate arguments for interpolations (by Walker and by Kirby), it occurred to me that perhaps Hegesippus did not possess these two epistles in their interpolated form; he knew that quotation from Isaiah as "things people were saying" (τοὺς ταῦτα φαμένους), and he disagreed with those people. What I think is at stake in this context is exactly which point on the eschatological timetable one thinks one is inhabiting. Is one still looking forward to wonders beyond human imagination, or has that part of the timeline already been achieved through Christ? It is futurist (or expected) eschatology versus preterist (or realized) eschatology. This same game is played elsewhere in the extant record with different playing pieces. Is the resurrection still future, for example, or is it past, as Hymenaeus and Philetus taught (2 Timothy 2.16-18)? The Pauline epistles themselves appear to proceed from a generally futurist orientation in what are often considered the genuine letters to a generally preterist orientation in the pseudo-Paulines.

I am not going to pretend that this idea of mine involving two separate and independent interpolations is a sure thing. Obviously there is speculation involved. I think that there is speculation involved no matter how we attempt to trace the trajectory of this saying of ours. I do like how easily this solution handles the problem of how to interpret Stephen Gobar's use of Hegesippus to find yet another contradiction in Christianity.

And, once again, my main goal in laying all of this out is to get more of the evidence on the table, especially that passage from pseudo-Philo. If our reconstruction, yours or mine, cannot account for that passage in a satisfying manner, then it probably needs more work.

Ben.

[mlinssen]

Ben... that is giant-like.
A quickie first: many many thanks, and I knew not even a handful of everything you just put on the table! I'll consider your own theory as well, will respond tomorrow

One question: where did you get the Greek from, Nestlé Aland? Or is it really almost all so extremely utterly verbatim?

[Ben C. Smith]

One question: where did you get the Greek from, Nestlé Aland? Or is it really almost all so extremely utterly verbatim?

Most of my NT passages are from NA-28, yes, because that is what BibleWorks uses (and that is the program I use the most, even after the company's demise); most of my Apostolic Fathers passages are from the eclectic version supplied in Bibleworks, as well, which is close both to Lake and to Lightfoot. If I know that the passage in question has important variants which affect my main contention one way or another, I will usually offer those variants in brackets within the text.

A quickie first: many many thanks....

No problem.

[John2]

And yet Stephen Gobar accuses Hegesippus of calling "those who say" the words of the combined quotation liars!

Ben, Ben, Ben ... When you are on you are on. Wow.

I'm very rusty on this subject, but one thing I recall from the last time I looked into it pertains to what you wrote above, as I stated in another thread:

Thanks, Neil. That was helpful. The only problem left for me would be why Hegesippus thinks the saying is a corruption of the NT and not the OT (or something OT-related), but geez, can you blame him? We can't even figure out where it came from. But maybe he isn't saying that the passage is a corruption of the OT but rather he is using the NT to refute what Gnostics were saying about that passage, i.e., that Jesus wasn't a phantom because he had said, "your eyes … see."

I think your second notion is the correct one: Hegesippus does not regard the saying as a corruption of Jesus' words; rather, he regards Jesus' words as refuting the saying.

Yes, I'm positive it's door number two now.

And it's Gobar who has been the problem all along and led us on this wild goose chase. He's just being the dumb ass Photius says he is ("The work seems to have involved a lot of work without procuring a profit proportional to the great pain expended; it exhibits in fact more futile vanity than utility … And these opinions are not advanced either by logic or from the holy scriptures but uniquely, according to the author, from the citation of various Fathers of whom some advance the point of view of the church and others who reject it").

All Gobar saw (or understood) is that Paul (or whoever) said one thing and Hegesippus said the "opposite," all the while, as he himself says, "Hegesippus … in I do not know what context, says …" The context, then, is refuting Gnostics who were using the no eye/no ear passage to argue that Jesus was a phantom. So neither the no eye/no ear passage nor Hegesippus is the problem, it's Gobar, and I'm glad I don't have to think about him anymore (and props to Hegesippus for, in my view, kicking ass like he always does).

[Ben C. Smith]

And yet Stephen Gobar accuses Hegesippus of calling "those who say" the words of the combined quotation liars!

Ben, Ben, Ben ... When you are on you are on. Wow.

I'm very rusty on this subject, but one thing I recall from the last time I looked into it pertains to what you wrote above, as I stated in another thread:

Thanks, Neil. That was helpful. The only problem left for me would be why Hegesippus thinks the saying is a corruption of the NT and not the OT (or something OT-related), but geez, can you blame him? We can't even figure out where it came from. But maybe he isn't saying that the passage is a corruption of the OT but rather he is using the NT to refute what Gnostics were saying about that passage, i.e., that Jesus wasn't a phantom because he had said, "your eyes … see."

I think your second notion is the correct one: Hegesippus does not regard the saying as a corruption of Jesus' words; rather, he regards Jesus' words as refuting the saying.

Yes, I'm positive it's door number two now.

And it's Gobar who has been the problem all along and led us on this wild goose chase. He's just being the dumb ass Photius says he is ("The work seems to have involved a lot of work without procuring a profit proportional to the great pain expended; it exhibits in fact more futile vanity than utility … And these opinions are not advanced either by logic or from the holy scriptures but uniquely, according to the author, from the citation of various Fathers of whom some advance the point of view of the church and others who reject it").

All Gobar saw (or understood) is that Paul (or whoever) said one thing and Hegesippus said the "opposite," all the while, as he himself says, "Hegesippus … in I do not know what context, says …" The context, then, is refuting Gnostics who were using the no eye/no ear passage to argue that Jesus was a phantom. So neither the no eye/no ear passage nor Hegesippus is the problem, it's Gobar, and I'm glad I don't have to think about him anymore (and props to Hegesippus for, in my view, kicking ass like he always does).

I do remember that. You may be right.

But... I still prefer my reconstruction by a margin.

[Ben C. Smith]

Ben, Ben, Ben ... When you are on you are on. Wow.

And when I am off? Nobody even wants to admit they know me.

[John2]

As for the rest of what you wrote, I was not aware (or if I was I've forgotten) that the "no eye" verse is in the Testament of Jacob, and that is standing out to me now as something Paul might have thought of as being Scripture ("as it is written"), even if it was ultimately still derived from Isaiah (in ToJ). That and Pseudo-Philo/a variant OT would be my top two options now, though I need to take a fresh look at this subject.

And again, what an amazing thread!

[davidmartin]

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

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

I haven't got my head around all these variants to be honest. They seems to be legion and i'm doubtful any convincing pattern will emerge to shed light on it, but i hope i'm wrong. I don't think i have anything worth saying at this point i'll just see what people say and throw some maverick thoughts in if any occur