anethema

Again with the artificial 1st-2nd cen dichotomy. By the same reasoning the "apocalyse of John" could not be written before what? 200ANNODOMINI? what facile absurdity argues that demons werent part of the mindset of Greco-judeo people in post 70ANNODOMINI palestine?

Diogenes the Cynic

Who has argued that people didn't believe in demons? I'm only saying that Paul did not claim they crucified Jesus.

stephan huller

Marcion believed he thought so. I think origen too of 1 cor 2:8

stephan huller

And getting back to the OP. Here's why I question Hoffmann's sincerity. How could Hoffmann have written his thesis on Marcion and argued that Marcion was a lot older than the Church Fathers claim he was but deny that the possibility that Jesus might have been supernatural? It's like the left hand doesn't know the right hand.

And speaking of hands touching hands, Casey on the other hand can be argued to be broadminded to a fault. Stephanie is a good example of that.

Grog

So you say.

Who is Paul talking about here?

Romans 8:38
For I am convinced that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor things present, nor things to come, nor powers,

πεπεισμαι γαρ οτι ουτε θανατος ουτε ζωη ουτε αγγελοι ουτε αρχαι ουτε δυναμεις ουτε ενεστωτα ουτε μελλοντα

αρχαι beginning, corner, (at the, the) first (estate), magistrate, power, principality, principle, rule. (biblos.com)

Gal 1:3
3 Grace and peace to you from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ, 4 who gave himself for our sins to rescue us from the present evil age,

Galatians 4:3
3 So also, when we were underage, we were in slavery under the elemental spiritual forces of the world. 4 But when the set time had fully come, God sent his Son, born of a woman, born under the law, 5 to redeem those under the law, that we might receive adoption to sonship.

ουτως και ημεις οτε ημεν νηπιοι υπο τα στοιχεια του κοσμου ημεν δεδουλωμενοι


Galatians 4:9
9 But now that you know God—or rather are known by God —how is it that you are turning back to those weak and miserable forces?

νυν δε γνοντες θεον μαλλον δε γνωσθεντες υπο θεου πως επιστρεφετε παλιν επι τα ασθενη και πτωχα στοιχεια οις παλιν ανωθεν δουλευειν θελετε


Notice that Jesus freed those under the law from the principalities, not the Romans.

2 Cor 4:4
4 The god of this age has blinded the minds of unbelievers, so that they cannot see the light of the gospel that displays the glory of Christ, who is the image of God.

This all gets us to the critical passage:

1 Cor 2:8
8 None of the rulers of this age understood it, for if they had, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory.

ην ουδεις των αρχοντων του αιωνος τουτου εγνωκεν ει γαρ εγνωσαν ουκ αν τον κυριον της δοξης εσταυρωσαν


It is not beyond a reasonable interpretation to say that Paul here refers to the elemental powers. Indeed, reputable scholars have held it to be the case. We can see that Paul does indeed make references to elemental spirits as the rulers of this age. Clearly, Galatians 4:3 and 4:9 can only be referring to elemental spirits since Jesus' death did not triumph over Roman rule. The clincher here though is Romans 13:


Ro 13:1Let everyone be subject to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God. 2 Consequently, whoever rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves. 3 For rulers hold no terror for those who do right, but for those who do wrong. Do you want to be free from fear of the one in authority? Then do what is right and you will be commended. 4 For the one in authority is God’s servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for rulers do not bear the sword for no reason. They are God’s servants, agents of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer.

Clearly, Paul is not speaking here of the "weak and miserable forces" that he urges the Galatians to not turn back to. Nor could he reasonably argue that "god of this age" who has "blinded the minds of unbelievers" is the same god who has instituted the civil authorities who "hold no terror for those who do right" but are "agents of wrath" for the wrongdoer.

It seems to argue against reason to say that 1 Cor 2:8 must mean the Romans in light of Romans 13:1, on the one hand, and the clear Pauline belief in evil "principalities" in Romans 8:38.

Not only is a crucifixion by demons in 1 Cor 2:8 plausible, it seems to be the only logical solution here.

Diogenes the Cynic

There's an excluded middle there - you're saying Paul believed in demons and also spoke of "rulers," and "principalities: (more literally "first things"), therefore when he says "rulers," he must be talking about demons. That's not a strong argument, especially since Paul says these "rulers" did not know who Jesus was and says that if they did know, they would not have crucified him. How does that comport with ostensibly evil demons who hate God? Why would they refrain from killing Jesus if they knew who he was?

Why would they NOT know who he was?

Paul can only be talking about unwitting humans, here, not demons.

Grog

Because by killing him, they allowed him victory over them. You seem to not have read my post very well:

Galatians 4:4
So also, when we were underage, we were in slavery under the elemental spiritual forces[a] of the world. 4 But when the set time had fully come, God sent his Son, born of a woman, born under the law, 5 to redeem those under the law

You've simply ignored most of my argument. Reconcile Romans 13 with 1 Cor 2:8, Galatians 4:3, 9, with all being references to the same agents behind the crucifixion of Jesus.

Steven Carr

Doesn't Paul say the Jews killed Jesus? After all, 1 Thessalonians 2 is authentic...., just ask Bart Ehrman.

GakuseiDon

I think the passages you have given above can be reconciled against each other. The point raised by Diogenes the Cynic above is a fair one: you said that by killing him, the demons allowed Jesus victory over them. So why are they still fighting Paul? Why aren't they remorseful, like in the Ascension of Isaiah?

Paul writes that Jesus is now is made manifest and known to all nations (Rom 16:26), so I assume the demons must know by now that they are doomed. So are they still fighting? Yep! According to 2 Cor 4:4:

4 The god of this age has blinded the minds of unbelievers, so that they cannot see the light of the gospel that displays the glory of Christ, who is the image of God.

This doesn't sound like the actions of a devil that wouldn't have crucified Christ if he'd had known what was to come. You can argue that he didn't know, but then how to explain 1 Cor 2:8?

1 Cor 2:8 Which none of the rulers [archōn] of this age knew: for had they known [it], they would not have crucified the Lord of glory.

So, if the demons know now, why are they trying to stop the gospel message?

I think when Paul is telling us that "the god of this age has blinded the minds of unbelievers", he is giving us the reason why "none of the rulers of this age knew". But I can't see why the demons would have continued to try to stop the gospel message, if they know they are now doomed.

On Rom 13:3, where "rulers [archōn] are not a terror to good works, but to evil", this obviously doesn't include Satan, in spite of his description as an archōn. Does it include Roman rulers not involved in the crucifixion of Jesus? My guess is that it does, despite their reputation. What about the Roman rulers involved in the crucifixion? Their minds were blinded. They didn't know what they did. If they had, they wouldn't have crucified Jesus.

Steven Carr

Indeed they wouldn't.

For as Paul explains in Romans 13, they were God's agents, who did not bear the sword for no reason, and who held no terror for the innocent.

According to Paul, the authorities were God's agents and must have had a damned good reason to kill Jesus, so can't be damned for that act.

You can't really blame them for flogging, mocking, beating and crucifying Jesus for they didn't know he was a mere human being, who only later became exalted at the resurrection. (For we all know that that was how early Christians regarded Jesus, as 'Son of God' had no supernatural connotations.)