Page 15 of 25
Re: Where is the more strong evidence in Paul pointing to an outer space Jesus
Posted: Thu Jan 04, 2018 7:58 am
by Ben C. Smith
Giuseppe wrote: ↑Thu Jan 04, 2018 7:27 am
Question to Ben: what do you think about my recognition of
three wisdoms in 1 Cor 2:6, with relative crescendo in terms of number of alternative wisdoms that don't compete with that divine?
Howbeit we speak wisdom [1] among them that are perfect: yet not the wisdom of this world [2], nor [implicit: another wisdom[3]] of the princes of this world, that come to nought
Honestly, I prefer to read #2 and #3 as the same basic wisdom. Humans of this age are under the sway of the ruler(s) of this age, and therefore participate in their wisdom. Paul is contrasting two kinds of wisdom: that of this age and that of the age to come (implied). The wisdom of the age to come is the same as the wisdom of God; the wisdom of this age is the same as the wisdom of humans (and as the wisdom of the rulers of this age).
But I could be wrong. It is a dense passage and, as I said, more than one interpretation is possible.
Re: Where is the more strong evidence in Paul pointing to an outer space Jesus
Posted: Thu Jan 04, 2018 8:32 am
by Giuseppe
Ben C. Smith wrote: ↑Thu Jan 04, 2018 7:58 am
Honestly, I prefer to read #2 and #3 as the same basic wisdom. Humans of this age are under the sway of the ruler(s) of this age, and therefore participate in their wisdom. Paul is contrasting two kinds of wisdom: that of this age and that of the age to come (implied). The wisdom of the age to come is the same as the wisdom of God; the wisdom of this age is the same as the wisdom of humans (and as the wisdom of the rulers of this age).
But I could be wrong. It is a dense passage and, as I said, more than one interpretation is possible.
I have thought that it would make a lot of sense, to embellish Paul's own wisdom, contrast it with
not one but two alternative wisdoms (in turn distinct between them). The ''archons of this age'' know something that is
not known by the men of this world (the reason is clear: the demons are
more powerful then men).
But even they - the archons - are not aware of the divine wisdom of Paul. Therefore the wisdom of Paul is
of well two degrees bigger than the ''wisdom of this world''.
Re: Where is the more strong evidence in Paul pointing to an outer space Jesus
Posted: Thu Jan 04, 2018 8:41 am
by Giuseppe
I would see, more than a rigid dualism between two wisdoms, an opposition by pure and simple
size of the three wisdoms (meant as ''the set of the known facts'').
Re: Where is the more strong evidence in Paul pointing to an outer space Jesus
Posted: Thu Jan 04, 2018 8:48 am
by Giuseppe
Paul is saying that the perfects like him know things that the men don't know, and that even the demons don't know. But this doesn't exclude that the perfects know also what the men know and even what the demons know.
This is implied from the content of the divine wisdom: the perfects know what the demons know about the Son: that he is not the Son.
If there was a dualism without possibility of intersections between only two wisdoms, then the perfects may not know what the demons know about the Son: that he is not the Son. But this is clearly excluded from what Paul says: that the divine wisdom is also about what the demons know.
Re: Where is the more strong evidence in Paul pointing to an outer space Jesus
Posted: Fri Jan 05, 2018 1:54 am
by archibald
Giuseppe wrote: ↑Thu Jan 04, 2018 8:41 am
I would see, more than a rigid dualism between two wisdoms, an opposition by pure and simple
size of the three wisdoms (meant as ''the set of the known facts'').
Look, you could be right, but there is nothing, other than the one phrase 'rulers of this age' to hint at possible incorporation of upper realm entities in the longer passage. It is merely your interpretation of that short phrase. Now, elsewhere in the epistles, Paul appears to refer to rulers as earthly rulers (Romans 13:3) and he refers to this age/world as the one of men (Romans 12 1-2). Why should 'rulers of this age/world' not just be referring to those? It'd be like me using the word 'captains' to refer to officers in the navy and 'ships' to refer to their vessels and then saying 'captains of the ships' at some point. The combination does not necessarily refer to something new and different just because it's a combination. It may do, but it's not flagged up. Plus, I think it unnecessarily overcomplicates.
It is, at best, merely ambiguous.
Re: Where is the more strong evidence in Paul pointing to an outer space Jesus
Posted: Fri Jan 05, 2018 2:54 am
by Giuseppe
The point is that it is even controversial,
pace our Bernard, that in Rom 13:3 ''archons'' refers to Romans and not to demons, too.
viewtopic.php?f=3&t=3770
Re: Where is the more strong evidence in Paul pointing to an outer space Jesus
Posted: Fri Jan 05, 2018 2:57 am
by archibald
Giuseppe wrote: ↑Fri Jan 05, 2018 2:54 am
The point is that it is even controversial,
pace our Bernard, that in Rom 13:3 ''archons'' refers to Romans and not to demons, too.
viewtopic.php?f=3&t=3770
I don't see how those rulers could reasonably be taken to be describing demons. I think it is scraping the barrel.
This, to me, is what is unconvincing about upper realm Jesus theories. Every single item supposedly in favour of the case is at best, ambiguous, and the number is large, and they are often explained in different ways, sometimes by appealing to ideas from outside the texts in question. Ditto for the counterfactuals (the items which appear to work against the case for upper realm Jesus) of which there are many in the texts. Added to which there is no evidence of anyone having believed in Paul's upper realm Jesus and the fact that there would have had to be a 180-degree turnaround not long after in Pauline Christianity (which as we know is the version that won out) to get him down to earth instead.
Re: Where is the more strong evidence in Paul pointing to an outer space Jesus
Posted: Fri Jan 05, 2018 3:20 am
by Giuseppe
Who thinks that the Romans are meant in
archontes of Rom 13, is making the game of Irenaeus:
In any case, it is an established fact that Irenaeus himself, the opponent of the Gnostics, only rejected the interpretation of " authorities " as angelic powers because he took into consideration merely this false dualistic understanding, and on this view to interpret the " authorities " to mean the invisible powers that stand behind the State would make of this State itself an institution hostile to God. The New Testament conception of " authorities," however, is definitely not dualistic in this sense. By their subjection under Christ the invisible powers have rather lost their evil character, and they also now stand under and within the Lordship of Christ, as long as they are subject to him and do not seek to become emancipated from their place in his service. Since Irenaeus probably, like his Gnostic opponents, reckons only with a false dualistic conception of the angelic powers, he must reject as heretical the connection with them of the " authorities " of Rom. 13:1.
(Oscar Cullman,
"Christ and Time", 196)
Re: Where is the more strong evidence in Paul pointing to an outer space Jesus
Posted: Fri Jan 05, 2018 3:28 am
by Giuseppe
Look, you could be right, but there is nothing, other than the one phrase 'rulers of this age' to hint at possible incorporation of upper realm entities in the longer passage.
I disagree. Assuming that we know only the epistles (assuming, if you like, that the Gospels were not survived),
If ''rulers of this age'' are demons, then, in absence of Gospels, we can infer that
ONLY the demons killed Jesus.
And if
only the demons killed Jesus, then they did so
more probably in the archontic territory,
not on the earth.
Re: Where is the more strong evidence in Paul pointing to an outer space Jesus
Posted: Fri Jan 05, 2018 3:33 am
by MrMacSon
Giuseppe wrote: ↑Fri Jan 05, 2018 2:54 am
The point is that it is even controversial,
pace our Bernard, that in Rom 13:3 ''archons'' refers to Romans and not to demons, too.
viewtopic.php?f=3&t=3770
archibald wrote: ↑Fri Jan 05, 2018 2:57 am
I don't see how those rulers could reasonably be taken to be describing demons. I think it is scraping the barrel.
This, to me, is what is unconvincing about upper realm Jesus theories. Every single item supposedly in favour of the case is at best, ambiguous, and the number is large
1, and they are often explained in different ways, sometimes by appealing to ideas from outside the texts in question. Ditto for the 'counterfactuals'
2 (the items which appear to work against the case for upper realm Jesus), of which there are many in the texts.
1 The number of what is large? the number of passages or pericopes that could be about 'upper realm Jesus theories'?
2 Do you mind elaborating on these counterfacutuals? (contrary items(?))
archibald wrote: ↑Fri Jan 05, 2018 2:57 am
Added to which there is no evidence of anyone having believed in Paul's upper realm Jesus
3, and the fact that there would have had to be a 180-degree turnaround not long after in Pauline Christianity (which as we know is the version that won out) to get him down to earth instead
4.
3 Isn't Paul's Jesus just a 'resurrected, pre-ascension Jesus'? or a promise of a second (third(?)) coming? or both?
4 I'm pretty sure Carrier has proposed that's what Mark and the other synoptic gospels do / did ...