Vorkosigan

It's not really important what it is called so long as it is recognized that in that realm the demons had power and could take action, and that was not a realm humans could affect by direct bodily action on their own. Do you think that when Zeus was said to live on Mt Olympus the ancients thought he lived in ice and snow? Whatever they called it, they thought of it as reality that was separate from but interacted with our own.

That is why I would think that.

Great. This has zero bearing on the conversation, though I think you for that information. The lack of a precise and clear-cut place for the activity of archons is why I am designating the area where they could take action on their own "another reality" for it obeyed rules different from our own. Theology is essentially fantasy, and theology about other realms ruled by demonic powers is fantasy squared. I don't think Paul ever makes clear what happened -- although given the Christian forgery machine, it is unlikely that a clear expression of where the mythical Jesus died would have survived the second century cutting rooms -- and thus, I do not feel that the subject can be discussed with any precision.

Vorkosigan

Vorkosigan

We've been through this, and I don't feel like dancing that dance again. You can, by backreading the Gospels into Paul and filtering it through 2,000 years of doctrinal inertia, come up with something like the list you have.

But it is precisely the validity of that methodology that is in question throughout all our conversations. Mark is fiction, and the whole earthly narrative of Jesus' existence that depends on Mark is likewise fiction. Hence, you cannot backread it into Paul to extract an earthly Jesus.

Michael

GakuseiDon

It is extremely important what it is called if you give it a name that doesn't accurately describe what you are trying to describe.

Demons lived in the air, Vork. Why not call it that? Call it "the realm of the air" if you like, or "in the firmament". But calling it a "sphere of reality" is not justified, and is a MODERN concept that you are imposing on the text.

And you know this, how? Doherty does the same thing. "Where did Attis get the knife he used to castrate himself?" But when I went looking in Plutarch and others, it appears that events like these were considered allegorical (so didn't happen at all), or they were regarded as events happening on earth, interpreted perhaps euhemestically.

So, please show me that Middle Platonists thought of Zeus living in another reality that was separate from but interacted with our own. If there is no evidence for this, surely that must place a great big question mark on Doherty's idea?

What "lack of a precise place"??? The activity of the archon spirits was in the air! I've given document after document that shows this. How can this be in doubt?

Sure, I agree. But that doesn't mean you can just impose modern concepts on ancient writers that goes against what they themselves state. Demons were made of air or fire, and lived in the air between the earth and the moon. This is simply not in doubt. To talk of a separate "sphere of reality" is to misrepresent this.

Then, let's at least look at the evidence that is available. Demons lived on earth and in the air. Calling it a "separate sphere of reality" is misleading, unless you can show me something that justifies this. Since you brought it up, please start with how Roman Middle Platonists viewed Zeus on Mt Olympus. Then we can start looking at the Jewish Middle Platonist Philo.

TedM

I know we've been through it and I"m glad you don't feel like dancing it again, but I must point out that the above mentions are from Paul's references to this 'man of flesh' he calls Jesus. I don't feel like I'm backreading anything. I've simply extracted from Paul some of the more descriptive references he makes to this "Jesus", who is central to his faith, and this is the picture that is revealed. A person who sees this picture would normally assume this Jesus had lived on earth even if the Gospels had never been written.

The only way I can see that these references are not to an earthly man are if Paul's documents had undergone interpolations in the places that say otherwise. If that were the case though I'd expect the interpolations to just keep going and actually say Jesus was born in Bethlehem, by Mary, was a teacher, miracle worker, etc... The absence of such things is to me fairly strong evidence of the absence of interpolations to remove references to this other sphere which is being speculated.