On the different people's reactions before the Paul's belief that only demons crucified Jesus (1 Corinthians 2:8)

[GakuseiDon]

...Ignoring John_T who ignores the meaning of a mere enumeration...

Giuseppe, I know English is your second language, but surely you understand the significance of the word "and"?

do you think really that the Romans (!) "also with them derided him, saying, He saved others; let him save himself, if he be Christ, the chosen of God" ?

I don't think it was coincidence that Luke, like Paul, wrote that archons crucified Christ. As I wrote earlier where I quoted Justin Martyr and Tertullian, I'd argue that both get it from Psalms 2. In the Septuagint, we have:

Psa 2:1 Why do the heathen rage, and the people imagine a vain thing?
2 The kings of the earth set themselves, and the archons take counsel together, against the LORD, and against his Christ...

Who are the rulers, according to Luke? The elders and captains, with their advisers the scribes:

Luke 9.22 Saying, The Son of man must suffer many things, and be rejected of the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be slain, and be raised the third day...
...
19.47 And he taught daily in the temple. But the chief priests and the scribes and the chief of the people sought to destroy him...
...
20.1 And it came to pass, that on one of those days, as he taught the people in the temple, and preached the gospel, the chief priests and the scribes came upon him with the elders...
20.19 And the chief priests and the scribes the same hour sought to lay hands on him...
...
22.2 And the chief priests and scribes sought how they might kill him; for they feared the people.
3 Then entered Satan into Judas surnamed Iscariot, being of the number of the twelve.
4 And he went his way, and communed with the chief priests and captains, how he might betray him unto them...
...
22.52 Then Jesus said unto the chief priests, and captains of the temple, and the elders, which were come to him...
66 And as soon as it was day, the elders of the people and the chief priests and the scribes came together
...
23.13 And Pilate, when he had called together the chief priests and the rulers...
...
24.20 And how the chief priests and our rulers delivered him to be condemned to death, and have crucified him.

It's clear Luke associates "rulers" with a ruling class: elders, captains, with their advisers being scribes. There has always been a ruling class, since the beginning of the age! Whether Paul has the same idea in mind, I won't argue here. This is just to note what Luke appears to think "archons" meant in context.

[Giuseppe]

• About Paul: From Psalm 2, sure, and also from Psalm 24:7–10 (Septuagint), where also princes == ἂρχοντες, and where the context sounds more transcendent ("open the gates, you princes": the gates of the heaven?).

• About proto-Luke (current Luke being obviously a corruption of Mcn): it is clear to me that the use of ἂρχοντες in a Gospel is a paulinism, i.e. a mere debt to 1 Corinthians 2:6-8. This is true beyond the question historicity versus mythicism.
  
  Mythicists would add only that something moved the author of the first gospel to replace demonic ἂρχοντες with human ἂρχοντες. But that is another story...

[schillingklaus]

Apologist right-wing extremists like Gakusi and John T are obstinately unable to relize that the human abuse of archontes is an excessively late euhemerizing development, caused by the needs of Judaization of pre-Christian gnosticism. When Adonai Sabaoth was illogically identified with The Father, the previous role of the former had to be filled by a human agent announced by Scripture, such as the messiah.

[Giuseppe]

When Adonai Sabaoth was illogically identified with The Father, the previous role of the former had to be filled by a human agent announced by Scripture, such as the messiah.

that scenario requires that the transformation of demonic ἂρχοντες in human ἂρχοντες was deliberate and totally intra-Christian. But I think that there would be a subtle link between the outsiders calling increasingly the Christians with the name of Christiani (even if one doesn't believe that Tacitus or Suetonius or Pliny is genuine), and the insiders' need of "christifying"(=judaizing) everything about the Son of Father.

[John T]

...Ignoring John_T who ignores the meaning of a mere enumeration...

Giuseppe, I know English is your second language, but surely you understand the significance of the word "and"?

"When I use a word," Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, "it means just what I choose it to mean -- neither more nor less."

"The question is," said Alice, "whether you can make words mean so many different things."

"The question is," said Humpty Dumpty, "which is to be master - - that's all."

(Through the Looking Glass, Chapter 6)

[Giuseppe]

...Continuing to ignore the Catholic troll called John Stauros...

I have updated my enumeration (see the first post of this thread) by adding the category n. 4: acceptance of the premise, but appeal to the interpolation card.

Quoting prof. Droge was imperative, afterall.

[John T]

...Continuing to ignore the Catholic troll called John Stauros...

I have updated my enumeration (see the first post of this thread) by adding the category n. 4: acceptance of the premise, but appeal to the interpolation card.

Quoting prof. Droge was imperative, afterall.

Thank you for admitting that indeed you failed to enumerate all the possible reactions of the people before the Paul's claim (1 Corinthians 2:8) i.e. only demons crucified Jesus.

Your error is what is commonly known by scholars as the Inductive Fallacy of Limited Choices.

With that out of the way let's now focus on your informal fallacy of ambiguity.

Because words have meaning and the meaning of words can get lost in translation. This type of ambiguity does not imply evil intent just improper use of terms. Let's review the key words in Greek and the standard translation of those words in to English.

Archonton = Rulers

Aionos = Age of the Jewish Messianic Period.

I do not see how you can logically use 1 Corinthians 2:8 to come up with demons in outer space. Not even close.

Of course you are free to ignore the fallacies of your own premise as well as throw more ad hominem attacks at me, but don't expect real scholars to take you seriously.

Just saying.

[neilgodfrey]

Hi Giuseppe -- you have probably read these posts but fwiw here is a link to a small series addressing something of the history of scholarly views on whether archons in 1 Cor 2:6-8 are demons or human agents or .... addressing the same argument GDon has once again trotted out, whether the passage refers to demons working through human proxies.

The posts may happen to have a detail that adds to your enumeration.

Further older arguments for Paul’s “rulers of this age” being spirit powers

[Giuseppe]

I don't see how the enumeration above can be expanded by news list items. One can deny that the rulers are demons (1), one can accept that the rulers are demons but yet assuming their use of human agents (2), one can accept that the rulers are demons but yet assuming that the "demons" were the same priests of the cult performing the ritual act of the "crucifixion" here on the earth (3), and one can accept that the rulers are demons but only considering the entire passage as a late Gnostic interpolation (4).

The series on Vridar enumerates the various reasons for identifying demons or humans or both, but the emphasis of the my list is on the final importance to be accorded to 1 Corinthians 2:6-8.
Surely the passage assumes more importance for a Carrier than for a Ellegard, for example.