sorry, Prof Droge claims precisely the contrary, and in this thread his views are more relevant than your view (afterall, Irish75 has mentioned Droge in the OP).GakuseiDon wrote: ↑Sun May 16, 2021 10:23 pmPlease, not that again. What "original AoI"? If you mean the presumed earlier versions of the Slavonic/Latin2, then the Beloved is NOT said to be crucified in the firmament.Giuseppe wrote: ↑Sun May 16, 2021 9:10 pmDrpge claims that it is not ambiguous. The place where the Lord of Glory is crucified by the Archons is the same place where the Son is crucified in the original Ascension of Isaiah: Firmament.Peter Kirby wrote: ↑Sun May 16, 2021 5:18 pm I believe you're correct in affirming that the phrase in 1 Corinthians is ambiguous.
I quote from here the following words of prof Arthur Droge:
Next, Isaiah’s angel-guide tells him to watch as Christ begins to transform himself and descend through the seven heavens and finally into the Firmament. Now it is Isaiah who reports what he sees:
of this world dwells … and his form (was) like theirs, and they did not
praise him there; but in evil and envying they were fighting one another, for
there is there a power of evil and envying…. And … they were plundering
and doing violence to one another.
It is just at this point that we should expect Isaiah to go on and describe the crucifixion of Christ by the “Archon of this world” and his minions, in fulfillment of what had been previously foreshadowed at Ascen. Isa. 9:14–15. Instead, this report has been removed and several paragraphs have been interpolated in its place that give a brief summary of Christ’s painless birth, his miracles, and his equally painless crucifixion. Yet, if Christ’s true identity was hidden from the “Archon of this world,” how did he know who Christ was in order to lay hands on him? The interpolated material implies that it was the many “signs and wonders” performed by Christ that caused the hostile powers of the Firmament to envy him, though still not comprehending who he truly was: “The Adversary envied him, and roused the Children of Israel against him, not knowing who he was. And they handed him to the Ruler [Pilate?] and crucified him.” Isaiah then adds, “In Jerusalem, indeed, I saw how they crucified him on a tree, and likewise (how) after the third day he rose and remained (many) days.” Christ then ascends in glory (i.e., no longer in disguise) through the cosmos to the seventh heaven, where he is enthroned at the right hand of God.
It is not entirely clear in the interpolated material who was responsible for the actual crucifixion. The “Adversary”? The “Children of Israel”? The “Ruler”? Or did they all conspire together? In any event, the interpolation looks like a later attempt to historicize, and thus render orthodox, what had once been a cosmic or gnostic version of the crucifixion, one in which the hostile powers of the lower world had crucified Christ “in the Firmament,” not “in Jerusalem.”
(my bold)
if you are intellectually honest, then you should add at least: "and in Droge's head", but evidently your apologist's reaction (or your notorious hostility against Carrier?) is irrational when the reality appears to be too much irrational for you.GakuseiDon wrote: ↑Sun May 16, 2021 10:23 pm If you mean Dr Carrier's reconstruction, that version only exists in his head.
I give you a notice:
An academic called Arthur Droge is claiming that both the original AoI and 1 Cor 2:6-11 is very probably evidence of a belief in an outer space crucifixion.
If you deny also this FACT, then I am done with you, GakuseiDon (=synonymous of crypto-Christian apologist).