Biblical Criticism & History Forum - earlywritings.com

A CONSPIRACY OF SILENCE BY CHRISTIAN APOLOGISTS?

Not every burst of flatulence is accompanied by a response from those who smell it.

Thank you Ben,
(bolding mine)

Thayer's lexicon is built atop one compiled by Carl Grimm, which in turn took off from one compiled by Christian Wilke. The original lexical entry (which starts toward the bottom of column 2) is by Grimm. The brackets (which digital versions unhelpfully tend to turn into parentheses for some reason) enclose additional comments by Thayer himself, in this case correcting Grimm's comment. Thayer's correction ("there appears to be some mistake here") is correct and necessary; Grimm's comment ("οὐδέ places side by side things that are equal and mutually exclude each other") is incorrect. The real distinction is that οὔτε coordinates an item as parallel in some way to the next item in order whereas οὐδέ merely adds an item to the list.

Cordially, Bernard

Giuseppe wrote: ↑Tue Nov 03, 2020 3:06 amWhat can the reader think that I think about GakuseiDon, after his answer that human rulers wanted to know about Jesus by consulting astrologers and prophets?

Not about Jesus, but about the future. Human rulers, since the age began, have wanted to know the future. What will harvests do? What will enemies do? What do the gods have in mind? To do that they consulted astrologers, priests, readers of entrails, whoever. Those people were intermediaries of supernatural forces, i.e. gods, demons, powers, ancestor spirits, heroes, and so on.

"Wisdom of this age" seems to be man's wisdom. I think we agree there.

"Wisdom of the rulers of this age" seems to me to be the knowledge of the future that rulers were obsessed about, who sought knowledge from supernatural sources, usually via intermediaries.

Paul wants to share "God's wisdom" which is the correct information about what God plans for the future for Christians of Paul's time.

I'm working from trying to understand what the 'wisdoms' were that Paul is referring to. I don't know if I'm right, but the above makes sense of what is in 1 Cor 2. I'll repeat what I wrote before, and you can see for yourself:

1 Cor 2:4 And my speech and my preaching was not with enticing words of man's wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power:
2:5 That your faith should not stand in the wisdom of men, but in the power of God.
2:6 Howbeit we speak wisdom among them that are perfect: yet not the wisdom of this age, nor of the rulers of this age, that come to nought:
2:7 But we speak the wisdom of God in a mystery, even the hidden wisdom, which God ordained before the age unto our glory:
2:8 Which none of the rulers of this age knew: for had they known it, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory.
2:9 But as it is written, Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love him.

"Wisdom" above isn't about how to cook a good pot roast. Paul seems to be talking about wisdom regarding the future, from the perspective of the different wisdoms about the future available: man's, rulers' and God's.

Giuseppe wrote: ↑Tue Nov 03, 2020 3:06 amAs if the wisdom of astrologers and false prophets was not human but sopranatural!

You mean, astrologers and prophets didn't claim that their knowledge was derived from the supernatural???

Again, what do you think Paul means when he writes that he isn't teaching Christians the wisdom of demons? What wisdom can that be, in your opinion? Let's assume Paul thought that Jesus was killed in outer space by demon rulers. What is the wisdom of the demon rulers that Paul decided he needed to remind Christians he wasn't teaching them?

to davidmartin,

Bernard how do you explain this then?
"For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the powers of this dark world and against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms"
that could have been written by Giuseppe himself lol

From where did you get this quote?

when Paul talks about paying homage to rulers that's him being inconsistent which he is, i'm surprised your taking Giuseppe to task over this matter which is fairly well embedded in early Christian thought in varying extremes sure, but there. you're doing it the hard way it seems to me!

(bolding mine)
Paul was writing to Christians of Rome, the seat of imperial Roman power. He certainly did not want these Christians to be persecuted as suspected subversive because Jewish Christians then believed in the kingdom of God to come down on earth (based on Jerusalem) with Jesus as the King (which could be considered a call for subversion). Paul changed that with that kingdom being moved to heaven and Jesus not a king, cancelling any suggestion of subversion. And how Paul be against Romans, because some of his converts were from Roman colonies such as Philippi and Corinth. And Paul blamed the evil age not on Romans but on Satan.
For all these reasons, Paul was not publicly anti-Roman. So he was not inconsistent.

Cordially, Bernard

"For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the powers of this dark world and against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms"

From where did you get this quote?

That's from Ephesians, I think it does lend some support to Giuseppe's basic premise - but i do differ with him in that i'm a historicist but the line is blurry if we are 'spiritual beings having a physical experience' where is the line drawn?

Paul was writing to Christians of Rome, the seat of imperial Roman power. He certainly did not want these Christians to be persecuted as suspected subversive because Jewish Christians then believed in the kingdom of God to come down on earth (based on Jerusalem) with Jesus as the King (which could be considered a call for subversion). Paul changed that with that kingdom being moved to heaven and Jesus not a king, cancelling any suggestion of subversion. And how Paul be against Romans, because some of his converts were from Roman colonies such as Philippi and Corinth. And Paul blamed the evil age not on Romans but on Satan.
For all these reasons, Paul was not publicly anti-Roman. So he was not inconsistent.

well i do tend to view Paul as not being generally that consistent as a character trait if you like, which i think he admits
there is a tension between the age being evil and under malign influence yet magically somehow the Roman authorities are good (divinely appointed even) and to be obeyed
that doesn't make any sense. especially not when Jesus was crucified by said authorities. But without this i guess Christianity could never have become a major religion!

davidmartin wrote: ↑Tue Nov 03, 2020 3:17 pm "For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the powers of this dark world and against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms"

From where did you get this quote?

That's from Ephesians, I think it does lend some support to Giuseppe's basic premise - but i do differ with him in that i'm a historicist but the line is blurry if we are 'spiritual beings having a physical experience' where is the line drawn?

It's from Eph 6:12: https://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/eph/6/1/s_1103001

"For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places."

"Rulers" there is not archon, but kosmokratōr (lord of the world) according to blueletter. It probably doesn't make much difference though.

I agree (for whatever that's worth!) that it lends some support to Giuseppe's basic premise, however also note that Paul is describing the (very human) Christian struggle against spiritual forces in the heavenly realms. Paul and those Christians obviously don't need to be in the heavenly realms themselves in order to struggle against them. So even if "rulers of this age" refer to spiritual forces, it doesn't mean that Jesus had to have been up in the heavenly realms to struggle against them anymore than Paul was.

GakuseiDon wrote: ↑Tue Nov 03, 2020 4:16 pm

davidmartin wrote: ↑Tue Nov 03, 2020 3:17 pm "For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the powers of this dark world and against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms"

From where did you get this quote?

That's from Ephesians, I think it does lend some support to Giuseppe's basic premise - but i do differ with him in that i'm a historicist but the line is blurry if we are 'spiritual beings having a physical experience' where is the line drawn?

It's from Eph 6:12: https://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/eph/6/1/s_1103001

"For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places."

"Rulers" there is not archon, but kosmokratōr (lord of the world) according to blueletter. It probably doesn't make much difference though.

I agree (for whatever that's worth!) that it lends some support to Giuseppe's basic premise, however also note that Paul is describing the (very human) Christian struggle against spiritual forces in the heavenly realms. Paul and those Christians obviously don't need to be in the heavenly realms themselves in order to struggle against them. So even if "rulers of this age" refer to spiritual forces, it doesn't mean that Jesus had to have been up in the heavenly realms to struggle against them anymore than Paul was.

yeah, i agree too. i think mythicists should consider an earthly Jesus as a myth of a myth, it's just as real as the original myth. why? because having a human Jesus is grounding and will help their theories, even if they ultimately deny it's reality.

Ephesians was not written by Paul, but some 40 tears after Paul's times.
It has been noticed that Ephesians has a different style/theology/Christology than the 7 Pauline epistles deemed authentic
See http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/ephesians.html

Cordially, Bernard

i hoped you wouldn't notice that, that's not the first time you've spotted something i hoped you wouldn't notice!

to davidmartin,

well i do tend to view Paul as not being generally that consistent as a character trait if you like, which i think he admits
there is a tension between the age being evil and under malign influence yet magically somehow the Roman authorities are good (divinely appointed even) and to be obeyed
that doesn't make any sense. especially not when Jesus was crucified by said authorities. But without this i guess Christianity could never have become a major religion!

1 Co 2:6-8 "But we impart a secret and hidden wisdom of God, which God decreed before the ages for our glorification.
None of the rulers of this age understood this; for if they had, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory.
With the rulers of this age being human and including Romans (like Pilate) & chief priests, they crucified Jesus because not knowing about the secret and hidden wisdom of God.
The Romans and chief priests are exonerated and neither bad or good.

Cordially, Bernard