Evidence of crucifixion in outer space in Acta Archelai

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
User avatar
John T
Posts: 1567
Joined: Thu May 15, 2014 8:57 am

Re: Evidence of crucifixion in outer space in Acta Archelai

Post by John T »

maryhelena wrote: Wed May 18, 2022 10:27 pm
Mythicists really need to up their game - time to move away from stories of angels and demons - and rather look to the ideas within our own world that need to be 'crucified'. Prime among them being the nonsense idea of a historical gospel Jesus - an idea that continues to stifle research into what became early christianity - hence hinders our understanding of our western cultural heritage - and what ails it today.
Up their game to what? gnosticism and the demiurge?
Is that what you meant by early Christianity?

Please explain what we don't know about our western cultural heritage-and what ails it today.
Why is it that I feel this is all about selling books of fiction and not biblical criticism and history?

This idiot would like to know. :goodmorning:
Secret Alias
Posts: 18362
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: Evidence of crucifixion in outer space in Acta Archelai

Post by Secret Alias »

We all know that the gospel never described an "outer space" event the way Nazis know the Protocols of Zion is bullshit. It's time to abandon this fake news approach to Biblical scholarship. Just getting a book published doesn't mean you're on to something. Getting an advance or a large advance on the other hand ... (just kidding).
Giuseppe
Posts: 13732
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: Evidence of crucifixion in outer space in Acta Archelai

Post by Giuseppe »

Secret Alias wrote: Thu May 19, 2022 6:47 am We all know that the gospel never described an "outer space" event
About the gospels, I have only two different kind of 'evidence' (or something of similar to an evidence, decide you) justifying that their authors knew about an "outer space" event:
  • A) the gospels describe a simple, stupid story. The earthly archons replace simply the stellar archons. The same simplicity of this banal replacement would support the existence of a previous myth where the actors were only stellar demons versus Jesus. Period.
  • B) the Transfiguration episode was the original "outer space" event, or, which is the same, the mere prelude to one (Jesus talking from that moment about an ascent to a Jerusalem, and in the original story the celestial Jerusalem and the path towards it — where the archons were lurking — being meant).
andrewcriddle
Posts: 2817
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 12:36 am

Re: Acta Archelai (Archelaus' Acts of the Disputation with the Heresiarch Manes)

Post by andrewcriddle »

MrMacSon wrote: Wed May 18, 2022 6:19 pm
Giuseppe wrote: Wed May 18, 2022 6:28 am
Thanks to Neil for the info about Acta Archelai.

I have written in the comments:

Tunc vivens spiritus creavit mundum, et indutus alias tres virtutes, descendens eduxit principes et crucifixit eos in firmamento, quod est eius corpus sphera.

Τότε τò ζῶν πνεῦμα ἔκτισε τὸν κόσμον, καὶ αὐτò φορέσαν ἑτέρας τρεῖς δυνάμεις, κατελθòν ἁνήνεγκε τοὺς ἄρχοντας καὶ ἐσταύρωσεν ἐν τῷ στερεώματι, ὅ ἐστιν αὐτῶν σῶμα ἡ σφαῖρα.

Curiously, the English translation has not “crucified” but “settled”, despite of the fact that the original Greek is ἐσταύρωσεν :

Then the living Spirit created the world; and bearing in himself three other powers, he came down and brought off the princes, and settled them in the firmament, which is their body, (though it is called) the sphere.

The function of the crucifixion here is clearly “to fix” forever the archontes in the sky. As fixed stars. Hence: the crucifixion as symbol of the attachment to vile matter (cfr Philo, On the Posterity of Cain and His Exile 17.61, where he compares souls being attached to bodies to men being attached to crosses via crucifixion).

The next webpage has


8. But when the living Father perceived that the soul was in tribulation in the body, being full of mercy and compassion, He sent His own beloved Son for the salvation of the soul ... And the Son came and transformed Himself into the likeness of man, and manifested Himself to men as a man, while yet He was not a man, and men supposed that He was begotten. Thus He came and prepared the work which was to effect the salvation of the souls ... And the greater luminary receives these souls, and purifies them with its rays, and then passes them over to the moon; and in this manner the moon’s disc, as it is designated by us, is filled up ... if the moon becomes full, it ferries its passengers across toward the east wind, and thereby effects its own waning ...

.. every living creature that moves, partakes of the substance of the good Father. And accordingly, when the moon delivers over its freight of souls to the æons of the Father, they abide there in that pillar of glory, which is called the perfect air. And this air is a pillar of light, for it is filled with the souls that are being purified. Such, moreover, is the agency by which the souls are saved.


But the following, again, is the cause of men’s dying: A certain virgin, fair in person, and beautiful in attire, and of most persuasive address, aims at making spoil of the princes that have been borne up and crucified on the firmament by the living Spirit; and she appears as a comely female to the princes, but as a handsome and attractive young man to the princesses ...

https://ccel.org/ccel/archelaus/manes_d ... i.vii.html


( the last line says the virgin is a shape-shifter, changing gender in response to who they're responding to )

( It's intriguing how 'gnostic' some of that is eg. " the moon delivers over its freight of souls to the æons of the Father " )

-------------
<SNIP>
As your post went on to say, this is a Christian/Manichaean disputation. Manichaeanism is a 3rd century CE form of full blown gnosticism. Manichaean ideas are a dubious basis for understanding 1st century CE texts and ideas.

Andrew Criddle
Secret Alias
Posts: 18362
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: Evidence of crucifixion in outer space in Acta Archelai

Post by Secret Alias »

If the point is to say that crucifixion in outer space might have been invented by someone before Earl fine. That crucifixion in outer space tells us anything about earliest Christianity. No.
Giuseppe
Posts: 13732
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: Evidence of crucifixion in outer space in Acta Archelai

Post by Giuseppe »

If all that had been preserved of "earliest Christianity" would be only 1 Corinthians 2:6-8, then I don't think you would say the same.
User avatar
John T
Posts: 1567
Joined: Thu May 15, 2014 8:57 am

Re: Acta Archelai (Archelaus' Acts of the Disputation with the Heresiarch Manes)

Post by John T »

Giuseppe wrote: Wed May 18, 2022 6:28 am
The function of the crucifixion here is clearly “to fix” forever the archontes in the sky. As fixed stars. Hence: the crucifixion as symbol of the attachment to vile matter (cfr Philo, On the Posterity of Cain and His Exile 17.61, where he compares souls being attached to bodies to men being attached to crosses via crucifixion).
You would have a point if that is what Philo was talking about, but he wasn't.

Philo was trying to explain the meaning behind the name of cities that came about after the exile of Cain. In this case Chebron.

"Chebron, being interpreted, means compunction, and this is of two kinds; one with reference to the soul being joined to the body, the other with reference to its being adapted to virtue." The Posterity and Exile of Cain. 17.60.
Philo goes on to say: (62) "But the soul that is united to virtue has for its inhabitants those persons who are preeminent for virtue, persons whom the double cavern has received in pairs, Abraham and Sarah, Isaac and Rebeckah," etc,.

This is clearly his way of comparing Plato (Timaeus) against Enoch Judaism (Genesis). There is no outer space crucifixion going on here.
Giuseppe
Posts: 13732
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: Acta Archelai (Archelaus' Acts of the Disputation with the Heresiarch Manes)

Post by Giuseppe »

John T wrote: Thu May 19, 2022 9:56 amThere is no outer space crucifixion going on here.
my point is not at all that Philo was talking about a crucifixion in outer space, in the quoted passage.

My point is that the idea of 'crucifixing' demons in outer space, an idea alluded clearly in the quote from Acta Archelai, finds its more obvious interpretation in the idea (shared by Philo) that a spiritual being is said usually to be 'nailed' to body, to the vile passions of the body. A mere way to describe the degrading feature of a body in relation to the soul.

  • In the Greek myths, usually it is a hero who is 'fixed' (='crucified') forever in the heaven, under form of a star. It is seen as a positive reward for his action on the earth.
    The slightly negative note is that the hero can't more move himself/herself: he/she is condamned to be 'fixed' forever in the sky.
  • In the Manichean myth quoted above, obviously, being fixed/crucified in firmament is seen as a punition by the supreme god, therefore as a negative fact.

CONCLUSION

  • Now, since Paul is enemy of ta stoicheia tou kosmou ("the elementary principles of the world") in Galatians 4:3,9
  • ...and since the stoicheia are for Paul probably the "stellar spirits associated with the heavenly bodies called stars"

...then the conclusion imposes itself, that also for Paul the stoicheia [=evil spirits, i.e. Archontes] are 'fixed' in the sky, hence, in a particular sense: 'crucified' in their own right.
User avatar
John T
Posts: 1567
Joined: Thu May 15, 2014 8:57 am

Re: Acta Archelai (Archelaus' Acts of the Disputation with the Heresiarch Manes)

Post by John T »

Giuseppe wrote: Thu May 19, 2022 10:19 am
CONCLUSION[/size][/b]
  • Now, since Paul is enemy of ta stoicheia tou kosmou ("the elementary principles of the world") in Galatians 4:3,9
  • ...and since the stoicheia are for Paul probably the "stellar spirits associated with the heavenly bodies called stars"

...then the conclusion imposes itself, that also for Paul the stoicheia [=evil spirits, i.e. Archontes] are 'fixed' in the sky, hence, in a particular sense: 'crucified' in their own right.
Once again you would have a point but that is not what Paul is saying. Darn you for making me pull out my Greek dictionary to fact check, once again.
stoicheia (4747): Noun, Accusative, Plural, Neut.

The rudimentary A, B, C's of the revelation of God as found in the Old Testament. Stoicheia does not mean evil spirits or stars in the sky.

Stop conflating.
Then again, maybe you are just testing it out for Carrier to see what blow back he would get. :consternation:
User avatar
mlinssen
Posts: 3431
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2019 11:01 am
Location: The Netherlands
Contact:

Re: Acta Archelai (Archelaus' Acts of the Disputation with the Heresiarch Manes)

Post by mlinssen »

John T wrote: Thu May 19, 2022 11:31 am
Giuseppe wrote: Thu May 19, 2022 10:19 am
CONCLUSION[/size][/b]
  • Now, since Paul is enemy of ta stoicheia tou kosmou ("the elementary principles of the world") in Galatians 4:3,9
  • ...and since the stoicheia are for Paul probably the "stellar spirits associated with the heavenly bodies called stars"

...then the conclusion imposes itself, that also for Paul the stoicheia [=evil spirits, i.e. Archontes] are 'fixed' in the sky, hence, in a particular sense: 'crucified' in their own right.
Once again you would have a point but that is not what Paul is saying. Darn you for making me pull out my Greek dictionary to fact check, once again.
stoicheia (4747): Noun, Accusative, Plural, Neut.

The rudimentary A, B, C's of the revelation of God as found in the Old Testament. Stoicheia does not mean evil spirits or stars in the sky.

Stop conflating.
Then again, maybe you are just testing it out for Carrier to see what blow back he would get. :consternation:
στοιχεῖον - http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/tex ... oixei%3Don

I. in a form of sun-dial, the shadow of the gnomon, the length of which in feet indicated the time of day, ὅταν ᾖ δεκάπουν τὸ ς. when the shadow is ten feet long, Ar.Ec.652, v. Sch.; “ὁπηνίκ᾽ ἂν εἴκοσι ποδῶν . . τὸ ς. ᾖ” Eub.119.7, cf. Philem.83.
II. element,
1. a simple sound of speech, as the first component of the syllable, Pl.Cra.424d; τὸ ῥῶ τὸ ς. ib.426d; “γραμμάτων ς. καὶ συλλαβάς” Id.Tht.202e; “ς. ἐστι φωνὴ ἀδιαίρετος” Arist.Po.1456b22; “φωνῆς ς. καὶ ἀρχαὶ δοκοῦσιν εἶναι ταῦτ᾽ ἐξ ὧν σύγκεινται αἱ φωναὶ πρώτων” Id.Metaph.998a23, cf.Gal.15.6:—στοιχεῖα therefore, strictly, were different from letters (γράμματα), Diog.Bab.Stoic.3.213, Sch.D.T.p.32, al., but are freq. not clearly distd. from them, as by Pl.Tht.l.c., Cra.426d; “τὰ ς. τῶν γραμμάτων τὰ τέτταρα καὶ εἴκοσι” Aen.Tact.31.21; ς. ε_ letter ε (in a filing-system), BGU959.2 (ii A.D.); ἀκουόμενα ς. letters which are pronounced, A.D.Adv.165.17; γράμματα and ς. are expressly identified by D.T.630.32; the ς. and its name are confused by A.D. Synt.29.1, but distd. by Hdn.Gr. ap. Choerob.in Theod.1.340, Sch.D.T. l.c.:—“κατὰ στοιχεῖον” in the order of the letters, alphabetically, AP11.15 (Ammian.); dub.sens.in Plu.2.422e.
2. in Physics, στοιχεῖα were the components into which matter is ultimately divisible, elements, reduced to four by Empedocles, who called them ῥιζὤματα, the word στοιχεῖα being first used (acc. to Eudem. ap. Simp.in Ph.7.13) by Pl., τὰ πρῶτα οἱονπερεὶ ς, ἐξ ὧν ἡμεῖς τε συγκείμεθα καὶ τἄλλα Tht.201e; τὰ τῶν πάντων ς. Plt.278d; “αὐτὰ τιθέμενοι ς. τοῦ παντός” Ti.48b, cf. Arist.GC314a29, Metaph.998a28, Thphr.Sens.3, al., D.L.3.24; “ς. σωματικά” Arist.Mete.338a22, Thphr.Fr.46; ἄτομα ς. Epicur.Ep.2p.36U.; equivalent to ἀρχαί, Thales ap.Plu.2.875c, Anaximand. ap. D.L.2.1, Anon. ap. Arist.Ph.188b28, Metaph.1059b23, al.; but Arist. also distinguishes ς. from ἀρχή as less comprehensive, ib.1070b23; τὰ ς. ὕλη τῆς οὐσίας ib.1088b27; τρία τὰ ς. Id.Ph.189b16; distd. from ἀρχή on other grounds by Stoic.2.111; ς. used in three senses by Chrysipp., ib.136, cf. Zeno ib.1.24, al.; in Medicine, Gal.6.3, 420, al., 15.7, al.; “Αἰθέρ, κόσμου ς. ἄριστον” Orph.H.5.4; ἀνηλεὲς ς., of the sea, Babr.71.4; τὸ ς., of the sea, Polem.Cyn.44; ἄμφω τὰ ς., i.e. land and sea, ib.11, cf. Hdn.3.1.5, Him.Ecl.2.18.
3. the elements of proof, e.g. in general reasoning the πρῶτοι συλλογισμοί, Arist.Metaph.1014b1; in Geometry, the propositions whose proof is involved in the proof of other propositions, ib.998a26, 1014a36; title of geometrical works by Hippocrates of Chios, Leon, Theudios, and Euclid, Procl. in Euc.pp.66,67,68F.: hence applied to whatever is one, small, and capable of many uses, Arist.Metaph.1014b3; to whatever is most universal, e.g. the unit and the point, ib.6; the line and the circle, Id.Top.158b35; the τόπος (argument applicable to a variety of subjects), ib.120b13, al., Rh.1358a35, al.; “στοιχεῖα τὰ γένη λέγουσί τινες” Id.Metaph.1014b10; τὸ νόμισμα ς. καὶ πέρας τῆς ἀλλαγῆς coin is the unit . . of exchange, Id.Pol.1257b23; in Grammar, ς. τῆς λέξεως parts of speech, D.H.Comp.2; but also, the letters composing a word, A.D.Synt.313.7; letters of the alphabet, Diog. Bab.Stoic.3.213; ς. τοῦ λόγου the elements of speech, viz. words, or the kinds of words, parts of speech, Thphr. ap. Simp. in Cat.10.24, Chrysipp.Stoic.2.45, A.D.Synt.7.1, 313.6.
4. generally, elementary or fundamental principle, ἀρξάμενοι ἀπὸ τῶν ς. X.Mem.2.1.1; “ς. χρηστῆς πολιτείας” Isoc.2.16; τὸ πολλάκις εἰρημένον μέγιστον ς. Arist.Pol.1309b16; “ς. τῆς ὅλης τέχνης” Nicol.Com.1.30, cf. Epicur. Ep.1p.10U., Ep.3p.59U., Phld.Rh.1.127S., Gal.6.306.
5. ἄστρων στοιχεῖα the stars, Man.4.624; “ς. καυσούμενα λυθήσεται” 2 Ep.Pet.3.10, cf. 12; esp. planets, “στοιχείῳ Διός” PLond.1.130.60 (i/ii A.D.); so perh. in Ep.Gal.4.3, Ep.Col.2.8; esp. a sign of the Zodiac, D.L.6.102; of the Great Bear, PMag.Par.1.1303.
6. ς. = ἀριθμός, as etym. of Στοιχαδεύς, Sch.D.T.p.192 H.

The only thing that comes close (yet is entirely different) is one single word in the LXX:

Ecclesiastes 11:6 εν πρωια σπειρον το σπερµα σου και εισ εσπεραν µη αφετω η χειρ σου οτι ου γινωσκεισ ποιον στοιχησει η τουτο η τουτο και εαν τα δυο επι το αυτο αγαθα

And στοιχεῖα is either nominative or accusative plural. Is all you have Strong's?
Post Reply