Ted Hoffman

Clement of Alexandria(IIRC) and Ascension of Isaiah have the multi-layered cosmogony.

Soul Invictus

I'm reading about the usage of Greek words such as en sarki and kata sarka. What words of the passage do these represent, and what idea are these words supposed to convey?

The question seems to be that during the time, there were questions as to if Jesus was a human and alos if Jesus's persona was that that exceeded a normal human's..such as from a spiritual realm. This is what I've been able to gather thus far. Please let me know if this doesn't encompass the theme adequately.


Kalvan,
You stated that "eληλυθoτα" just seems to mean "having come" and that the "in" is not integral to the verb form; it's a separate word. Since Greek is notably different than English, what meaning does the usage of the word "come" supposed to hold? I'm speaking from the position of the original text's POV.

Haran

The word εληλυθοτα is a masculine, singular, active, perfect participle in the accusative case.

What that means is that it would be translated something like "having come".

Another use of this form of the word can be found in Acts 18:2:

...και ευÏ?ων τινα Ιουδαιον ονοματι Ακυλαν ποντικον τω γενει Ï€Ï?οσφατως εληλυθοτα απο της Ιταλιας...

translated...

...and having found a certain Jew, named Aquila, of Pontus, recently having come from Italy...

Therefore, 1Jn 4:2 would be, literally, "...Jesus Christ in flesh having come..." or in more readable English "...Jesus Christ having come in flesh...".

There are numerous instances of the phrase εν σαÏ?κι ("in flesh") which talk of death and circumcision contrasted with εν πνευματι ("in spirit"), so it seems that the surface understanding of "pinchable flesh" or "human bodily flesh" would be correct. Others seem to be placing these words on a Procrustean bed to force them into fitting their unfounded theories.

Soul Invictus

En sarki is used interchangeably with kata sarka - both translated to mean "in flesh" or "in the flesh". This is understood to communicate a meaning of pinchable or human bodily flesh. Is this correct?

Diogenes the Cynic

Two years of Attic Greek in college. Independent study in Koine. I minored in Classical Languages and my Latin is better than my Greek. I can usually muddle through my Greek NT if I've got a lexicon at the ready.

Crazy Liz

Yes.

Ted Hoffman

Only in texts influenced by Gospel traditions. Like John. In Pauline epistles, it means reincarnating in a sublunar realm above the earth.

Haran

I'd like to see these texts outside the gospel for myself. I know there is original usage for certain Greek words within the NT, but can you produce some other classic ancient Greek texts that show the meaning of en sarki and kata sarki as "reincarnating in a sublunar realm above the earth"? I'd like to read them for myself to try and understand this "sublunar realm" thingy. Thanks.

Soul Invictus

With respect to the usage in John, does en sarki or kata sarka imply being human, or does it deal solely with the skin, or flesh?

Ted Hoffman

Carrier writes:

"The actual phrase used, kata sarka, is indeed odd if it is supposed to emphasize an earthly sojourn. The preposition kata with the accusative literally means "down" or "down to" and implies motion, usually over or through its object, hence it literally reads "down through flesh" or "down to flesh" or even "towards flesh." It very frequently, by extension, means "at" or "in the region of," and this is how Doherty reads it. It only takes on the sense "in accordance with" in reference to fitness or conformity (via using kata as "down to" a purpose rather than a place), and thus can also mean "by flesh," "for flesh," "concerning flesh," or "in conformity with flesh." I have only seen it mean "according to" when followed by a cited author (e.g. "according to Euripedes," i.e. "down through, or in the region of Euripedes"), so it is unconventional to translate it as most Bibles do (a point against the usual reading and in favor of Doherty's). Even the "usual reading" is barely intelligible in the orthodox sense, especially since on that theory we should expect en sarki instead. The word kata can also have a comparative meaning, "corresponding with, after the fashion of," in other words "like flesh." In short, all of the common meanings of kata with the accusative support Doherty's reading: Jesus descended to and took on the likeness of flesh. It does not entail that he walked the earth. It could allow that, but many other strange details noted by Doherty are used to argue otherwise. At any rate, he makes a pretty good case for his reading, based on far more than this.

It came to my mind as I went along that Doherty's thesis resembles what we know of ancient Sumerian worship of Ishtar, better known in the Bible as Astarte, Ashtoreth, or Ashera, which had evolved by Jesus' day into the goddess Cybele. Though the texts are over a thousand years prior to the dawn of Christianity, the tradition remained in some form throughout the Ancient Near East, and extant then or not it remains relevant as a "proof of concept." In Sumerian tablets, we learn that the goddess Inanna descended from Heaven, past earth, down into Hell, crossing seven gates there (Samuel Kramer, History Begins at Sumer: Thirty-Nine Firsts in Man's Recorded History, rev. ed., 1981: cf. p. 162). Eventually she is killed by a demon in Hell: "The sick woman was turned into a corpse. The corpse was hung from a nail. After three days and three nights had passed," her vizier petitions the gods in heaven to resurrect her. Her Father gives her the "food of life" and the "water of life" and resurrects her, then she ascends back to heaven, sending another God (her lover) to die in her place: "the shepherd Dumuzi" (aka Tammuz, a forerunner of Attis). Doherty argues that Christianity began with a story like this: where all the action takes place in realms beyond earth. Ishtar still had flesh and could be killed, even crucified, and resurrected, then ascend back to heaven, but she was never "on earth." There is a lot more to Doherty's theory than that, of course. I offer this analogy only to show that such an understanding of a dying and rising God actually was, and thus could be held by ancient peoples who were among the ideological ancestors of the Christians."

Emphasis mine.