Paul and the Vision of Isaiah

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
Post Reply
rgprice
Posts: 2037
Joined: Sun Sep 16, 2018 11:57 pm

Paul and the Vision of Isaiah

Post by rgprice »

This is a takeoff on Rogers work on Paul/Simon and the Ascension of Isaiah posted on Vridar, and called out again recently here by Neil.

It seems clearly that there is some relationship between the Vision of Isaiah and statements made in the Pauline letters. I don't claim to understand the relationship. It seems to me, however, that Vision of Isaiah is a better expression of the account of Jesus that Paul knew. If we ask, "Who was the Jesus that Paul was preaching?" It seems that we find a figure much closer to the one that Paul was preaching in Vision of Isaiah than what we find in any of the canonical Gospels.

Key passages that indicate Paul's concept of Jesus, taken from BeDuhn's reconstruction of Marcion's Pauline letters:

1 Cor 2:
6 Now we speak wisdom among those who are
perfect, [but not the wisdom of this aeon nor that] of the
rulers of this aeon, who are being nullified. 7 [But] we
speak God’s hidden wisdom in an initiation, which God
premeditated before the aeons for our glory, 8 which none
of the rulers of this aeon knew; for if they had known,
they would never have staked the glorious Master
. . . .
16 For “who knew (the) Master’s mind, and who became
its counselor?”

(Note that 1 Cor 2:16 cites Isaiah 40:13)

1 Cor 15:
1 Now I remind you, (my) colleagues, the proclamation
that I proclaimed to you. . . . 3. . . that Christos
died . . . 4 and [that he] was entombed, and [that he] has
been awoken on the third day
. . . 11. . . so we declare and
so you believed. 12 [Now . . . how is it that] some among
you say there is no awakening of (the) dead? 13 If (the) dead
are not awoken, neither has Christos been awoken. 14 And
if Christos has not been awoken, our declaration (is) useless.
. . . 21 [For] since death is through a human being,
awakening [of the dead] is also through a human being.
22 [For] just as in Adam all die, so also in the Christos all
will be made alive. . . . 25 For it is necessary that he rule
until he has put (his) enemies under his feet, 26 [death
(being) the last enemy to be abolished.
. . . 29 Otherwise,]
what will they do who are being washed as surrogates for
the dead?

“The first human being, Adam, became a living
soul.” The last Master (became) a life-giving spirit. 46 The
spiritual is not first, [but that which is animate (is first), afterward
(comes) that which is spiritual.] 47 The first human
being is from the earth, soily; the second is the Master from
(the) celestial sphere.
48 As the soily one is, so also (are) the
soily ones; and as the supercelestial one is, so also (are)
the supercelestial ones. 49 Just as we have borne the image
of the soily one, we should bear also the image of the
supercelestial one.


Phil 2:
. . . 5 [Think this about yourselves (what you think)
also about] Christos Jesus, 6who, although he existed in
God’s form
, did not consider a seizure of equality to God,
7 but emptied himself, taking a slave’s form, becoming in
the likeness of a human being; 8 and being found in an appearance
as a human being
, [he humbled himself and became]
obedient as far as death, even a death by staking

Using BeDuhn is not ideal, but I do have concern about proto-orthodox corruption of the letters in ways that obscure our understanding of what "Paul" was preaching, so using BeDuhn is just a relatively convenient (and admittedly flawed) way to to work around that. It's not perfect, but I think it helps.

We can compare these statements from Paul to what we find in Vision of Isaiah:

And I questioned the angel, saying, 'Why have they received robes, and why have they not received thrones and crowns of glory?' And he said to me, Now they receive them not, until the Son first brings here those thrones and crowns, when He shall be in your likeness.' And the prince of that world will stretch forth his hand upon the Son of God and will kill Him and hang Him on a tree, and he will kill Him not knowing who He is. And He will descend into hell and will lay it waste, with all the phantoms of hell. And He will seize the prince of death and despoil him, and crush all his powers, and will rise again on the third day; having with him certain of the righteous. And He will send His preachers into the whole world, and will ascend into heaven. Then these will receive their thrones and crowns.'


And after that, I heard the voice of the Eternal saying to the Lord [His] Son: 'Go forth and descend from all the heavens and be in the world, and go even to the angel who is in hell; transfiguring thyself into their form. And neither the angels nor the princes of that world shall know thee. And thou shalt judge the prince of that world and his angels, and the rulers of the world, because they have denied me and said, "We are and without us there is no one." Thereafter, thou shalt not transfigure thyself as thou ascendest through the heavens in great glory, and thou wilt sit at my right hand. Then the princes and the virtues and all the angels and all the principalities of the heavens and of earth and of the lower regions will adore thee.'


And I saw one like the Son of Man dwelling with men and in the world. And they did not recognize Him. And I saw Him ascending into the firmament and He was not transfigured into [their] form. And all the angels who were above the firmament were struck with fear at the sight and, adoring, they said, 'How didst Thou descend into our midst, Lord, and we did not recognize the King of Glory?'

So, the Pauline letters tell us that:

1) The rulers of the world did not recognize Christ and they would not have crucified him if they had recognized him.
2) He was buried and rose after three days.
3) His mission was to defeat death.*
4) He came from heaven.
5) He was transfigured into the appearance of a human being.

* We can note that the statement about abolishing death in 1 Cor 15 implies that death will be abolished during his rule in heaven, not that he abolished it when he descended into the underworld.

Likewise the Vision of Isaiah says that:

1) Christ will be crucified by the price of this world while he does not recognize him.
2) Having been killed, he will descend into "hell" where he will defeat the prince of death.
3) He will rise after three days.
4) Christ will descend from heaven...
5) Being transfigured into the form of the inhabitants of each level of heaven, until finally reaching the earth and taking on the form of a man.

It seems to me that we cannot find the Jesus of the Gospels in the Pauline letters, but we can find the Christ of of Vision of Isaiah there. This would seem to support the view that at least some layer of Vision of Isaiah predates any canonical Gospel, and constitutes a version of the Jesus narrative that would have been familiar to perhaps the original writer of the Pauline letters.

So... now what???
rgprice
Posts: 2037
Joined: Sun Sep 16, 2018 11:57 pm

Re: Paul and the Vision of Isaiah

Post by rgprice »

And is the "messianic secret" in Mark related to the hidden agenda in Vision of Isaiah?

Mark 1:
23 Just then there was a man in their synagogue with an unclean spirit; and he cried out, 24 saying, “What business do you have with us, Jesus of Nazareth? Have You come to destroy us? I know who You are: the Holy One of God!” 25 And Jesus rebuked him, saying, “Be quiet, and come out of him!”
...
34 And He healed many who were ill with various diseases, and cast out many demons; and He would not permit the demons to speak, because they knew who He was.


Mark 5:
6 Seeing Jesus from a distance, he ran up and bowed down before Him; 7 and shouting with a loud voice, he said, “What business do You have with me, Jesus, Son of the Most High God? I implore You by God, do not torment me!”

However in Mark we read:
Mark 5:
19 And He did not let him, but He said to him, “Go home to your people and report to them what great things the Lord has done for you, and how He had mercy on you.” 20 And he went away and began to proclaim in Decapolis what great things Jesus had done for him; and everyone was amazed.

But shortly after we read:
Mark 5:
42 And immediately the girl got up and began to walk, for she was twelve years old. And immediately they were completely astonished. 43 And He gave them strict orders that no one was to know about this, and He told them to have something given her to eat.

Then we have this odd business:
Mark 8:
27 Jesus went out, along with His disciples, to the villages of Caesarea Philippi; and on the way He questioned His disciples, saying to them, “Who do people say that I am?” 28 They told Him, saying, “John the Baptist; and others say Elijah; and others, one of the prophets.” 29 And He continued questioning them: “But who do you say that I am?” Peter answered and said to Him, “You are the Christ.” 30 And He warned them to tell no one about Him.

31 And He began to teach them that the Son of Man must suffer many things and be rejected by the elders and the chief priests and the scribes, and be killed, and after three days rise from the dead. 32 And He was stating the matter plainly. And Peter took Him aside and began to rebuke Him. 33 But turning around and seeing His disciples, He rebuked Peter and said, “Get behind Me, Satan; for you are not setting your mind on God’s purposes, but on man’s.”

Something interesting I noticed is that that Mark 5:19 is the only place that Jesus refers to himself as the Lord, or says that his actions are the actions of the Lord. Whereas in most of Mark, Jesus is trying to keep his identity a secret, here in Mark 5:19 he tells this person to report his actions to everyone. Seems very suspicious, like the work of a different writer.

The statements in 8:29-30, "You are the Christ" sounds very much like they relate to the Vision of Isaiah. "You are the Christ"? As in, the Christ who descended from heaven and is in a disguised form? And following this we have a teaching that complies with the Vision of Isaiah regarding rising from the dad after three days.

But then we have the identification of Peter with Satan. And Peter knows who Jesus is. I've always regarded this as being derived from Galatians, where Paul rebukes Peter, but I'm not sure how it relates to the messianic secret. Is the implication that Peter was telling Jesus not to reveal the secret, even to the other disciples?

At any rate, it seems that Mark is somehow working with an existing narrative in which Christ's mission on earth was performed in disguise.
User avatar
neilgodfrey
Posts: 6161
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 4:08 pm

Re: Paul and the Vision of Isaiah

Post by neilgodfrey »

rgprice wrote: Fri Dec 03, 2021 6:30 am
Something interesting I noticed is that that Mark 5:19 is the only place that Jesus refers to himself as the Lord, or says that his actions are the actions of the Lord. Whereas in most of Mark, Jesus is trying to keep his identity a secret, here in Mark 5:19 he tells this person to report his actions to everyone. Seems very suspicious, like the work of a different writer.
When Wrede wrote Messianic Secret he explained that the command in 5.19 only seems like an exception to the rule: Jesus forbids the demoniac from accompanying him on the road/the way (presumably his presence would attract too much hullabaloo and risk revealing "the secret") but sends him back to his home, his house, to tell his family what had happened. Throughout Mark we see miracles performed before others in houses where they are "kept secret" or at least not broadcast as evidence that "The Messiah Was Here" to all and sundry. Notice when the demoniac does break the command and tells everybody else instead, he does not tell them what "the Lord" had done but what "Jesus" had done.
Mark 5:19 Jesus did not let him, but said, “Go home to your own people and tell them how much the Lord has done for you, and how he has had mercy on you.” 20 So the man went away and began to tell in the Decapolis how much Jesus had done for him. And all the people were amazed.
The secret is maintained. Jesus acts like the messiah, does all the things a messiah must do, and the people are awed by him but cannot see that he is, for all of that, the messiah.
User avatar
Thomas R
Posts: 41
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2021 4:32 pm

Re: Paul and the Vision of Isaiah

Post by Thomas R »

rgprice wrote: Fri Dec 03, 2021 3:24 am
So, the Pauline letters tell us that:

1) The rulers of the world did not recognize Christ and they would not have crucified him if they had recognized him.
This seems to conflict with the many demons in the Gospels who seem to know exactly who Christ is and fear him:
Moreover, demons came out of many people, shouting, “You are the Son of God!” But he rebuked them and would not allow them to speak, because they knew he was the Messiah.
Luke 4:41
rgprice
Posts: 2037
Joined: Sun Sep 16, 2018 11:57 pm

Re: Paul and the Vision of Isaiah

Post by rgprice »

Thomas R wrote: Fri Dec 03, 2021 4:32 pm This seems to conflict with the many demons in the Gospels who seem to know exactly who Christ is and fear him:
Agreed. There seems to be some relationship here though. The thing I have learned about reading the Gospels is that they contain many reactionary statements. Often without context the statements seem random or perhaps irrelevant. But, when you know that some other group or document made a certain claim, then you see that the statement is a reaction to that claim.

The statement that the demons recognized Christ seems like it must be a response to the claim that Christ came into the world disguised and unknown to the rulers of this world. Interestingly, while I would say that Mark agrees with Paul on so many points, this seems to be an instance of disagreement. So the question is why?
User avatar
GakuseiDon
Posts: 2263
Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2013 5:10 pm

Re: Paul and the Vision of Isaiah

Post by GakuseiDon »

rgprice wrote: Sat Dec 04, 2021 5:47 amThe statement that the demons recognized Christ seems like it must be a response to the claim that Christ came into the world disguised and unknown to the rulers of this world. Interestingly, while I would say that Mark agrees with Paul on so many points, this seems to be an instance of disagreement. So the question is why?
Because it isn't. The centurions recognised that Jesus was the Son of God. Pilate didn't. Pilate had Jesus killed, not recognising his significance to God's plan. Demons recognised Christ as the Son of God. Satan didn't. Satan had Jesus killed, not recognising his significance to God's plan. Some Jewish people recognised Christ as the Son of God. The Jewish leaders didn't, and had Jesus killed, not recognising his significance to God's plan.
User avatar
neilgodfrey
Posts: 6161
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 4:08 pm

Re: Paul and the Vision of Isaiah

Post by neilgodfrey »

rgprice wrote: Sat Dec 04, 2021 5:47 am
Thomas R wrote: Fri Dec 03, 2021 4:32 pm This seems to conflict with the many demons in the Gospels who seem to know exactly who Christ is and fear him:
Agreed. There seems to be some relationship here though. The thing I have learned about reading the Gospels is that they contain many reactionary statements. Often without context the statements seem random or perhaps irrelevant. But, when you know that some other group or document made a certain claim, then you see that the statement is a reaction to that claim.

The statement that the demons recognized Christ seems like it must be a response to the claim that Christ came into the world disguised and unknown to the rulers of this world. Interestingly, while I would say that Mark agrees with Paul on so many points, this seems to be an instance of disagreement. So the question is why?
Mark's presentation of the demons is indeed the opposite of their role in other accounts where they are ignorant. It is not the demons who stir up the Jews against Jesus in Mark, but the religious authorities. Judas enters as the go-between. (There had been no Judas in the story till Mark.)

So the Jews become primarily responsible for the crucifixion, not the demons. (Later gospels try to reconcile the two accounts by having Satan enter Judas.)

I don't know at this stage if this development should be related to a time of betrayals and handing over to authorities among the Christians themselves, and/or with the view of Jesus being an atoning blood sacrifice for the sins of the Jews and others.
perseusomega9
Posts: 1030
Joined: Tue Feb 04, 2014 7:19 am

Re: Paul and the Vision of Isaiah

Post by perseusomega9 »

Thomas R wrote: Fri Dec 03, 2021 4:32 pm
rgprice wrote: Fri Dec 03, 2021 3:24 am
So, the Pauline letters tell us that:

1) The rulers of the world did not recognize Christ and they would not have crucified him if they had recognized him.
This seems to conflict with the many demons in the Gospels who seem to know exactly who Christ is and fear him:
The guardian demon/angel/power/aeon was deceived at the gate to the next checkpoint. The demons at the lowest manifestation level, not the rulers/gatekeepers, who recognize the 'Christ' are immediately silenced.
rgprice
Posts: 2037
Joined: Sun Sep 16, 2018 11:57 pm

Re: Paul and the Vision of Isaiah

Post by rgprice »

I think the point is that Vision of Isaiah represents an earlier narrative than the Gospel of Mark, and Mark is reacting to narrative claims that we also see in Vision of Isaiah. That doesn't mean that Mark knew VoI, but he did know elements of the story that we find in VoI. One of those elements was that Christ came into the world unrecognized. I don't fully understand the way that Mark addresses this, but it is clear that Mark is interacting with the preexisting narrative claim that Christ was unrecognized by "Belair and his forces", which includes demons.

I had never really fully considered that the Christian elements in Martyrdom of Isaiah predated the Gospels before, but seeing how the statements of Paul align so much better with VoI than anything else, it now seems to me that VoI, or at least some narrative that is reflected in VoI, predated Mark. I had long considered Mark a wholesale invention, which had no preceding story at all. It would seem to me now that that is not the case. VoI precedes Mark and Mark interacts with some VoI style narrative.

I think that explains the Transfiguration and the demons in Mark. To me, I see Mark's Transfiguration as some means of taking over what was previously the entry point of Christ into the world. Mark totally revisions it. But it always struck me as an odd scene. It seems rather superfluous in Mark and I never found a really good link between it and the Jewish scriptures. It is also interesting that in Mark Moses is involved in the transfiguration, whereas Paul and many other early elements seem to be against Moses.

I don't see Vision of Isaiah as truly Gnostic in the sense that it doesn't seem to be casting the Creator as teh enemy, but rathe Belair/Satan. So a question for me is whether VoI is reacting to a preexisting Gnostic narrative in a way that is the first attempt to appropriate the Gnostic story and make Christ an agent of the Creator, or if a VoI type story came first, with the Gnostics reacting to it. But I do think that the dispute between "Gnostic" types claims to Jesus and "Jewish" ones occurred before the development of narratives that derive from Mark.
User avatar
neilgodfrey
Posts: 6161
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 4:08 pm

Re: Paul and the Vision of Isaiah

Post by neilgodfrey »

rgprice wrote: Sun Dec 05, 2021 6:47 am I think the point is that Vision of Isaiah represents an earlier narrative than the Gospel of Mark,
The Commentary by Norelli argues that the Vision contains elements (virgin Mary and miraculous birth, Bethlehem, Nazareth, Joseph a carpenter) that most likely derived from a knowledge of the narrative we read in the Gospel of Matthew.
rgprice wrote: Sun Dec 05, 2021 6:47 am One of those elements was that Christ came into the world unrecognized. I don't fully understand the way that Mark addresses this. . .
Have you read The Messianic Secret?
rgprice wrote: Sun Dec 05, 2021 6:47 am I had long considered Mark a wholesale invention, which had no preceding story at all. It would seem to me now that that is not the case. . . . Mark interacts with some VoI style narrative.
The Asc Isa with its vision most likely, for several reasons, was a product of a Syrian church. If Mark was in Rome, might they never have met?
rgprice wrote: Sun Dec 05, 2021 6:47 am. . . the Transfiguration . . . I never found a really good link between it and the Jewish scriptures. It is also interesting that in Mark Moses is involved in the transfiguration, whereas Paul and many other early elements seem to be against Moses.
Is not Mark's narrative predominantly a midrashic-type of rewriting of the OT? As such, I think we see many allusions to both Moses and Elijah. Recall Jesus leading a multitude to the sea and then ascending the mountain to appoint the twelve -- that's all an evocation of Moses. We know of the Elijah-Elisha links. The mountain transfiguration is a reminder of Moses's own transfiguration on the mountain. From the mountain the edict is given: "listen to these words". That's what happens at Jesus' transfiguration, too: "listen to him -- a greater than Moses and Elijah is here".
rgprice wrote: Sun Dec 05, 2021 6:47 amI don't see Vision of Isaiah as truly Gnostic in the sense that it doesn't seem to be casting the Creator as teh enemy, but rathe Belair/Satan.
Agreed. It is not gnostic. There is no gnostic creator demiurge. Jesus does not come to rescue lost spirits trapped in humans. His only job is to die and rise again in order to show he is bigger than death itself and can resurrect his chosen accordingly.
rgprice wrote: Sun Dec 05, 2021 6:47 amSo a question for me is whether VoI is reacting to a preexisting Gnostic narrative in a way that is the first attempt to appropriate the Gnostic story and make Christ an agent of the Creator, or if a VoI type story came first, with the Gnostics reacting to it. But I do think that the dispute between "Gnostic" types claims to Jesus and "Jewish" ones occurred before the development of narratives that derive from Mark.
Norelli's Commentary, again, posits that the AscIsa derives from a world that appears influenced in varying degrees by Qumranic dualism, Jewish mysticism, Didache, Ignatius's Docetic opponents, Revelation, Matthew, Odes of Solomon, the Christianity we associate with Antioch.
Post Reply