No, we don't know that because it isn't true. At least, not in the extant texts. Maybe in Droge's reconstruction, but not in the extant texts. The Ethiopic has the Beloved descending to "the firmament and the world" [in mundo]. It then writes how the angel appeared in the "world" to Joseph. The L2 and Slavonic texts also have the Beloved descending "in mundo":Giuseppe wrote: ↑Mon May 17, 2021 10:00 pmIt is not true. We know that the Firmament is the terminus ante quem of the Son's descent from the prophecy the Angel gives to Isaiah.GakuseiDon wrote: ↑Mon May 17, 2021 9:50 pmAgain: please state things correctly rather than give misleading statements. Droge's reconstruction of the earliest text might have the crucifixion being predicted in the firmament, but no actual extant text has that. I have no problems with speculation, but label facts as facts and speculation as speculation please.
From L2: 10.8 Exi et descende de omnibus coelis et sis in mundo et vade usque ad angelum, qui est in infernum
It's not Droge's words you should be quoting here, but the AoI's. That's what I've done. Would you like to give the actual words of the AoI and then compare it with Droge's version of what it says?
It's more than that. In the presumed earlier texts S/L2, the Beloved descends lower than the firmament and into the air. It's not just that the crucifixion isn't mentioned, it's that there is no room for it to happen in the firmament. Any reconstruction needs to remove what is already there in order to work.
It's easy enough to prove: give me the actual words from any extant text to show that. Quoting Droge when he's wrong is a waste of time.
If you want to quote Droge's words, please check to make sure that he is correctly using the extant texts. If his words are based on his own reconstruction, then call it like that. Don't call it the "original" text. It's misleading. Present your sources honestly as the author's speculation and I promise I'll leave you alone. Nothing wrong with speculation as long as it is presented as that.