The Revelation of the Mystery Hidden for Ages

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
User avatar
Irish1975
Posts: 1057
Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2017 8:01 am

Re: The Revelation of the Mystery Hidden for Ages

Post by Irish1975 »

neilgodfrey wrote: Sat Oct 23, 2021 7:28 am
Irish1975 wrote: Sat Oct 23, 2021 7:16 am
Romans 16:25-27
25 Τῷ δὲ δυναμένῳ ὑμᾶς στηρίξαι κατὰ τὸ εὐαγγέλιόν μου καὶ τὸ κήρυγμα Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ, κατὰ ἀποκάλυψιν μυστηρίου χρόνοις αἰωνίοις σεσιγημένου,
26 φανερωθέντος δὲ νῦν διά τε γραφῶν προφητικῶν κατ’ ἐπιταγὴν τοῦ αἰωνίου θεοῦ εἰς ὑπακοὴν πίστεως εἰς πάντα τὰ ἔθνη γνωρισθέντος,
27 μόνῳ σοφῷ θεῷ, διὰ Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ, ᾧ ἡ δόξα εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας, ἀμήν.

The passage does not say that the mystery is concealed in the prophetic writings, but that it is revealed through them.
What is the difference? If it is revealed through the Scriptures the implication is that the prophecies within the Scriptures were closed until that revelation.
The text says that the mystery was made known and revealed "through the prophetic writings." It does not say that "the prophecies within the scriptures were closed." I don't understand why one should appeal to an "implication," much less one as dubious as the notion that there is no difference between a revelation and a concealment.

Turmel:
If the mystery had been prophesied by the OT, how had it been "hidden" until "now"? And how to explain that it has been revealed only now? The problem is insoluble. No reconciliation is possible between the mystery "made known" "by [par, διά] the prophetic scriptures" and the mystery "now revealed" after having been "hidden for everlasting ages." The mystery made known--that is to say 'prophesied,' for such is the meaning of the word--by the OT has not been revealed "now," i.e. in the age of Christ. The mystery revealed "now" has not been prophesied in the books of the OT. The two thoughts contradict one another, and the text in which they are juxtaposed is incoherent. (On Romans, p. 91)
mbuckley3
Posts: 151
Joined: Sat Oct 28, 2017 6:47 am

Re: The Revelation of the Mystery Hidden for Ages

Post by mbuckley3 »

Irish1975 summarising Turmel on Romans 16.25-27 : "The mystery cannot be hidden for long ages and only now revealed, on the one hand, but also witnessed in the centuries-old writings of the Hebrew prophets." An analogy to clarify matters, at least for myself.

The position criticised is not of itself incoherent. Take the example of Galen. While he operates at a technical and intellectual level far higher than anything in the NT, structurally his work has much in common with various C2/C3 Christian projects. For Galen, the works of Hippocrates contain the entirety of medical knowledge, a 'Torah' so to speak, supplemented by a few major (Plato, Aristotle) and minor (Diocles, Praxagoras, Philotimus) 'prophets'. After proving which works are authentic, then he has to evaluate variant readings to establish a reliable text; only then can he begin to explicate. This he does largely by extensively quoting and refuting every other writer on the subject, past and present (at a length which makes the heresiologists seem concise ). What Galen is attempting is to recover the original meaning of Hippocrates, which has been fundamentally misunderstood throughout the intervening period. Thus what Galen, "as if inspired"/'ωσπερ 'ενθουσιωντα, is providing is effectively a new revelation. The 'scripture' has been in the public domain for centuries yet 'hidden', so the revelation is new.

But.....Galen's project is entirely textual, it seeks to provide comprehensive, accurate knowledge via dialogue with privileged texts.

As was so starkly demonstrated in Irish1975's excellent original post, there is a consistent core thread in 'Paulinism' which insists on direct revelation without reference to texts. The thread of 'scriptural' exegesis/eisegesis is supplementary and separate. So in the Pauline context, Turmel was quite right to see incoherence in Romans 16.25-27, and likely correct in isolating an interpolation.
User avatar
GakuseiDon
Posts: 2294
Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2013 5:10 pm

Re: The Revelation of the Mystery Hidden for Ages

Post by GakuseiDon »

mbuckley3 wrote: Sun Oct 24, 2021 4:33 pm Irish1975 summarising Turmel on Romans 16.25-27 : "The mystery cannot be hidden for long ages and only now revealed, on the one hand, but also witnessed in the centuries-old writings of the Hebrew prophets." An analogy to clarify matters, at least for myself.
For me, an example is the so-called predictions of Nostradamus. Conveniently. they can only be 'understood' as predicting the future after the events happen. Similarly, even today, the Old Testament is used as a wonderful source for 'predicting' the future. If the passages are tortured enough, they will admit to anything.

Second Century apologists Ignatius and Justin Martyr both appealed to the Hebrew Scriptures as predicting the advent of Christ against criticisms of that idea. Ignatius, Epistle to the Philidelphians, Ch 8:

"And I exhort you to do nothing out of strife, but according to the doctrine of Christ. When I heard some saying, If I do not find it in the ancient Scriptures, I will not believe the Gospel; on my saying to them, It is written, they answered me, That remains to be proved."

Justin Martyr, First Apology, Ch 53

"For with what reason should we believe of a crucified man that He is the first-born of the unbegotten God, and Himself will pass judgment on the whole human race, unless we had found testimonies concerning Him published before He came and was born as man"
User avatar
neilgodfrey
Posts: 6161
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 4:08 pm

Re: The Revelation of the Mystery Hidden for Ages

Post by neilgodfrey »

Irish1975 wrote: Sat Oct 23, 2021 8:58 am
neilgodfrey wrote: Sat Oct 23, 2021 7:28 am
Irish1975 wrote: Sat Oct 23, 2021 7:16 am
Romans 16:25-27
25 Τῷ δὲ δυναμένῳ ὑμᾶς στηρίξαι κατὰ τὸ εὐαγγέλιόν μου καὶ τὸ κήρυγμα Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ, κατὰ ἀποκάλυψιν μυστηρίου χρόνοις αἰωνίοις σεσιγημένου,
26 φανερωθέντος δὲ νῦν διά τε γραφῶν προφητικῶν κατ’ ἐπιταγὴν τοῦ αἰωνίου θεοῦ εἰς ὑπακοὴν πίστεως εἰς πάντα τὰ ἔθνη γνωρισθέντος,
27 μόνῳ σοφῷ θεῷ, διὰ Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ, ᾧ ἡ δόξα εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας, ἀμήν.

The passage does not say that the mystery is concealed in the prophetic writings, but that it is revealed through them.
What is the difference? If it is revealed through the Scriptures the implication is that the prophecies within the Scriptures were closed until that revelation.
The text says that the mystery was made known and revealed "through the prophetic writings." It does not say that "the prophecies within the scriptures were closed." I don't understand why one should appeal to an "implication," much less one as dubious as the notion that there is no difference between a revelation and a concealment.

Turmel:
If the mystery had been prophesied by the OT, how had it been "hidden" until "now"? And how to explain that it has been revealed only now? The problem is insoluble. No reconciliation is possible between the mystery "made known" "by [par, διά] the prophetic scriptures" and the mystery "now revealed" after having been "hidden for everlasting ages." The mystery made known--that is to say 'prophesied,' for such is the meaning of the word--by the OT has not been revealed "now," i.e. in the age of Christ. The mystery revealed "now" has not been prophesied in the books of the OT. The two thoughts contradict one another, and the text in which they are juxtaposed is incoherent. (On Romans, p. 91)
I must be missing something. Here is how I understand Romans -- without any contradiction here:

Jewish Scriptures contained stories that on a surface reading are stories about the past events: e.g. Abraham's offering of Isaac. At the same time or at least in Second Temple times those Scriptures were compared with a well, words with deeper spiritual meanings and understandings that were to be drawn out by the wise. So one day someone was inspired to read the story of Abraham offering Isaac and saw in the story what had been a hidden prophecy of the saving act of God through the messiah: even the detail of Isaac carrying the wood on which he was to be offered was seen as revelation that the son of God would carry his cross.

For the prophecies of Christ to be revealed "in these last days" they had to be closed before then. They were written in the Scriptures but closed to their prophetic meaning. Compare in Daniel where the prophet is told to write the words but that they are to be "sealed" from understanding till the time is right for them to be revealed as to their true meaning.

In this way, I don't see any contradiction in Romans. The prophecies were revealed through the OT writings at a certain time because they had long been hidden in those writings. Had they not been hidden in the writings there would never have been a need to "reveal" them -- they would have been understood by the readers from the outset.
Giuseppe
Posts: 13732
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: The Revelation of the Mystery Hidden for Ages

Post by Giuseppe »

neilgodfrey wrote: Sun Oct 24, 2021 7:19 pmeven the detail of Isaac carrying the wood on which he was to be offered was seen as revelation that the son of God would carry his cross.
do you assume that already Paul saw Jesus as bearer of the cross (as different from being merely crucified on the cross)?
Isn't this an assumption that Paul knew already the Cyrenaic episode?
User avatar
neilgodfrey
Posts: 6161
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 4:08 pm

Re: The Revelation of the Mystery Hidden for Ages

Post by neilgodfrey »

Giuseppe wrote: Sun Oct 24, 2021 9:07 pm
neilgodfrey wrote: Sun Oct 24, 2021 7:19 pmeven the detail of Isaac carrying the wood on which he was to be offered was seen as revelation that the son of God would carry his cross.
do you assume that already Paul saw Jesus as bearer of the cross (as different from being merely crucified on the cross)?
Isn't this an assumption that Paul knew already the Cyrenaic episode?
That was only an example of the process of interpretation that was happening at the time of Paul. Paul, it has been argued, did derive the crucifixion itself from Isaac and the wood.

How Paul Found Christ Crucified – “on a Tree” – In the Scriptures
User avatar
Irish1975
Posts: 1057
Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2017 8:01 am

Re: The Revelation of the Mystery Hidden for Ages

Post by Irish1975 »

mbuckley3 wrote: Sun Oct 24, 2021 4:33 pm there is a consistent core thread in 'Paulinism' which insists on direct revelation without reference to texts. The thread of 'scriptural' exegesis/eisegesis is supplementary and separate.
Yes, that's the idea I'm trying to get at. Thanks mbuckley.

Once we begin to break down the different "Pauls" in the epistles, not all of them are midrashing Jews. Pierson convinced me that there must have been at least two images of "the apostle" that the author of Galatians was trying to capture and synthesize: the recipient of mystical revelations that confer their own authority, the one who goes to Jerusalem lest he has run in vain, and perhaps third the one in the rest of the letter who allegorizes scripture.
User avatar
Irish1975
Posts: 1057
Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2017 8:01 am

Re: The Revelation of the Mystery Hidden for Ages

Post by Irish1975 »

neilgodfrey wrote: Sun Oct 24, 2021 7:19 pm I must be missing something. Here is how I understand Romans -- without any contradiction here:

Jewish Scriptures contained stories that on a surface reading are stories about the past events: e.g. Abraham's offering of Isaac. At the same time or at least in Second Temple times those Scriptures were compared with a well, words with deeper spiritual meanings and understandings that were to be drawn out by the wise. So one day someone was inspired to read the story of Abraham offering Isaac and saw in the story what had been a hidden prophecy of the saving act of God through the messiah: even the detail of Isaac carrying the wood on which he was to be offered was seen as revelation that the son of God would carry his cross.

For the prophecies of Christ to be revealed "in these last days" they had to be closed before then. They were written in the Scriptures but closed to their prophetic meaning. Compare in Daniel where the prophet is told to write the words but that they are to be "sealed" from understanding till the time is right for them to be revealed as to their true meaning.

In this way, I don't see any contradiction in Romans. The prophecies were revealed through the OT writings at a certain time because they had long been hidden in those writings. Had they not been hidden in the writings there would never have been a need to "reveal" them -- they would have been understood by the readers from the outset.
Ok now I have a better sense where you are coming from. I am familiar with your interest in Charbonnel and other proponents of the "midrash" model of NT origins. I find that illuminating for the gospels but not for certain layers of Paul. I also think that such a model may have been in the mind of the catholic editor of Romans 16:26 that I am postulating, but need not have been in the mind of the original author of 16:25. The passages from 1 Corinthians 2, Ephesians 3, and Colossians 1 do not give any hint of the mystery being revealed through the prophetic books. I am saying that Romans 16:25 belongs with them, contains the same language, concepts, and Pauline proprietary claim ("my gospel"). At any rate, I don't see any hint of there being a "sealed prophecy" as in Daniel. It's one thing when a specific story or prophetic text is referenced, but here we just have a vague assertion of "the prophetic books." It seems to me that you are working with the assumption that "the mystery hidden for ages but now revealed" can only make sense on a prophecy/fulfillment model, and I don't think that's right.

I also have an independent reason for suspecting a catholic interpretation in 16:26, as noted previously: the phrase "for the obedience of faith" εἰς ὑπακοὴν πίστεως, joined to the theme of the gentile mission εἰς πάντα τὰ ἔθνη, is an exact repetition of the line in the very Catholic prologue at Romans 1:5, εἰς ὑπακοὴν πίστεως ἐν πᾶσιν τοῖς ἔθνεσιν -- and nowhere else does Paul use this peculiar expression "the obedience of faith."
User avatar
Irish1975
Posts: 1057
Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2017 8:01 am

Re: The Revelation of the Mystery Hidden for Ages

Post by Irish1975 »

Why do some fail to understand the mystery in 1 Cor 2:6-16? Because they are "immature." Because they are "of this age." Because God has not revealed things to them "through the spirit." Because they do not discern spiritual things with spiritual thoughts, and do no have the mind of Christ.

Failing to understand the scriptures has nothing to do with it.

In Ephesians 3:3-4 Paul refers the readers to his own writings, not those of the prophets, because it is the mystery vouchsafed to Paul that must be understood.

In Eph 3:9 he says that the mystery had been hidden "in God" (Marcionite: "from God"), not in the scriptures.

It's certainly possible that, in the unknown history behind these texts, all these ideas arose from some Jewish midrash on Genesis or Isaiah or Enoch. But there is little evidence for that. And just because some Pauline texts and ideas are based in the OT doesn't mean that all of them are.
User avatar
neilgodfrey
Posts: 6161
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 4:08 pm

Re: The Revelation of the Mystery Hidden for Ages

Post by neilgodfrey »

Irish1975 wrote: Mon Oct 25, 2021 6:36 am
Ok now I have a better sense where you are coming from. I am familiar with your interest in Charbonnel and other proponents of the "midrash" model of NT origins. I find that illuminating for the gospels but not for certain layers of Paul.
Charbonnel, as you point out, is addressing the gospels and not the epistles. I was drawing upon the practice of midrashic interpretations of Jewish Scriptures in Paul -- see the link to evidence of Paul's derivation of the crucifixion from his reading of Genesis -- and more recently we have been discussing Turmel whose "core epistle" of Paul himself for Romans and Galatians is reduced to his reading of the promises to Abraham as being fulfilled in Jesus.

Many works have further been written on the influence of the OT on Paul's letters. His entire mission, it is arguable, derives from his reading of Isaiah's prophecy of the good news going out to the "isles". His self-portrayal is arguably based on the Isaianic "prophecy" of the Suffering Servant.

OT scriptures are not always read as "prophecy" in our sense of the word (as explicit announcements of a future event) thought they sometimes are read that way. More often, they are simply stories that have no apparent relevance to the future but a midrashic reading "digs out" futuristic meanings and applicaions.

If Galatians tells us of Paul's original source for the gospel then he is saying it comes from his reading of Abraham and Isaac along with other connections to other passages -- and this is the conclusion that comes from Turmel's reduction of Paul's epistles of Romans and Galatians to their "original layer".

I am not, by the way, committed to Turmel's arguments in all their aspects -- only exploring aspects of the ideas.
Post Reply