the_cave

But his points don't address my point, which has to do with a close reading of the text. It has nothing to do with any sentiments, or with any claims that no one knew of a purely spiritual Lord. (I would also like to add that the library I use had not added his text to their collection until recently, and I am the first to check it out. Until that, I was relying on his website.)

To be specific, I note that in 11:23, the Lord is in the vault, but "had not transformed himself". This is after he "made himself like the angels of the air" in 10:29,30. Since they realize who he is in 11:24, presumably some change has taken place--yet we are assured in 11:23 that when Isaiah saw him the second time, he had not transformed himself, despite the fact that he had disguised himself in 10:29,30. So, he must have undergone a change somewhere besides the vault, i.e. below it. There are two places below the vault, I guess: a) Earth b) Sheol. It would be odd for the Lord to pass into Sheol without passing through the Earth first.

[Edited to add: It seems to me that the only way out for Doherty would be to claim that the change was in the vault, but has been lost as part of the corruption that we see in the following verses--i.e. the entrance to the First Heaven is missing. On the other hand, the redactor seems pretty convinved that v.24 happens in the vault--the translation I have uses the word "vault" twice, but I don't have the original texts, of course.]

That's fine, but supposing that there was a Greek document which didn't have any mention of an earthly Christ is conjecture. He could be right, or he could be wrong. There's no way to tell.

Amaleq13

It is my understanding that the inclusion of the phrase "of this age" or "of the age" is what motivates scholars to interpret it as a reference to spiritual forces.

Are there any examples of a plural "archon" with the above phrase where it is also explicitly indicated as referring to earthly rulers?

Peter Kirby

The phrase "rulers of this age" or "princes of this era" (or however you want to translate it--"archontwn tou aiwnos toutou") appears 83 times in the Thesaurus Lingua Graecae. All of these occurences are in Christian writers. Since they all knew about First Corinthians, I don't know if you would attach value to their use of the phrase.

best,
Peter Kirby

Ted Hoffman

the cave,
Does a careful reading of AoI indicate to us that the earth is on top of Sheol? It does not. The earth is below the firmament as we learn from 4:2 where Beliar, the ruler of this world, will descend from his firmament and go to the earth in the form of a man. I think this alone is enough to show your conceptualization of the layers in AoI is incorrect.

What was Lord Christ's mission in descending through the heavens? We find it in 10:8. A detour on earth is not in his itinerary and 11:2-22, the passage in the Ethiopic text that is absent in the Latin and Slavonic texts, would be tantamount to a deviation from Jesus' mission.

11:2-22 are therefore an introduction of a separate agenda into the text. 10:8 says: "Go forth and descent through all the heavens, and thou wilt descent to the firmament and that world: to the angel in Sheol thou wilt descend"

10:29 says: "He descended into the firmament where dwelleth the ruler of this world"

I think that, in AoI, "the firmament" is synonymous with "sheol" by examining 10:8 and 10:29. I have relied on Kirby's site for the text of AoI. If you agree with this, there is no need for interposing the earth in between the layers. If you don't explain because Chist descends from the 6th heaven (10:19) to the fifth heaven (10:21) to the fourth heaven (10:22) to the third heaven (10:23) to the second heaven (10:26) to the first heaven (10:27) to the firmament (10:29) where the ruler of this world dwells. And his mission is complete at that point.

If you agree that the "angel in sheol" is "the ruler of this world", then its clear that the text as it is, is complete without 11:2-22, which is foreign material introduced to the text. In fact, it is not explained in Chapter 11 which layer the events actually take place. The use of layering is abandoned completely from 11:2-22 and this, clearly, is foreign material and it juts out like an editorial seam.

Ted Hoffman

Kirby,
But these are Christian writers of a different era, probably under Gospel influence. I think the relevant uses of the expression is to be found in patristic writings and first century writings like Pauline epistles and gnostic and neo-Platonic writings.

Ted Hoffman

Gdon,
Not correct.

In AoI, "the King of this world" (4:2) has a spritual meaning. In 2:4 and 4:2, it refers to Beliar, the angel of lawlessness and Beliar dwells in the firmanent. Men dwell below the firmament and Beliar "will descent from his firmament in the likeness of a man, a lawless king, and the slayer of his mother".

From my reading of AoI, Satan is aka Beliar (2:4) and is the angel of lawlessness (2:4) and is also the ruler of this world (4:2).

This ruler dwells in the firmament (10:29) / Sheol (10:8).

In AoI, he (the king of this world) takes the form of a lawless King (4:2) to spread lawlessness in Jerusalem, among elders and among shepherds. Not to Kill Jesus.

The Jesus story 11:2-22, which is missing in the Latin and Slavonic versions, is an interpolation.

Acts is a late document written under gospel influence.

Are you arguing that Paul believed that many Kings and Emperors ("the rulers of this world") conspired to Kill Jesus?

If not, then Paul could not have used "archon" in the plural and my argument against reading "archons" to mean "earthly rulers" carries the day.

Pilate? Which chapter? Which translation?

11:2-22 is an interpolation.

No it has not been adopted by HJers - that would be an oxymoron.

Which idea? HJers using "archon"? Interesting question but deserving a separate thread.

Peter Kirby

"But"? What is there to disagree about?

Amaleq13: "Are there any examples of a plural 'archon' with the above phrase where it is also explicitly indicated as referring to earthly rulers?"

Peter Kirby: "The phrase 'rulers of this age' or 'princes of this era' (or however you want to translate it--'archontwn tou aiwnos toutou') appears 83 times in the Thesaurus Lingua Graecae. All of these occurences are in Christian writers. Since they all knew about First Corinthians, I don't know if you would attach value to their use of the phrase."

I didn't draw any conclusion here. I simply pointed out two facts: there are 83 occurences of the four word Greek phrase, and all of them are in Christian writers. This was in response to Amaleq13's question.

"Certainly" is more like it. Clement of Alexandria is the first extant writer, after 1 Cor, to use this phrase ("archontwn tou aiwnos toutou").

Which neo-Platonic writings are you thinking about? And which gnostic ones?

All I did above was answer Amaleq13's question. I even indicated that the 82 other occurences of the exact phrase in 1 Cor. may not be of value, and I didn't say anything about the relevance or otherwise of other cites.

best,
Peter Kirby

Ted Hoffman

Kirby,
Ok, ok Peter. I get the point. Amaleq wanted examples and you provided them. My apologies.

GakuseiDon

Why does that matter? Who are the Jewish archons in Acts who kill Jesus, and why couldn't Paul be referring to them?

At least two - Herod and Pilate, representing the Jewish rulers and the Roman rulers.

Paul could have been referring to a combination of earthly and spiritual forces.

Oops! My mistake. I meant the final redactor had both Satan and the Jews as killing Jesus.

If a HJ redactor left it in, then it suggests that the redactor had no problem with it. Perhaps the redactor didn't understand it, or didn't care about it, but in this case, having Jesus killed by the Jews under the influence of Satan and his evil angels doesn't seem incompatible to HJ beliefs.

No, I mean: when did HJers start believing that the Jews were encouraged by Satan to kill Christ, as referred to in AoI?

Rick Sumner

I, for one, would like to see an answer to this.

Regards,
Rick Sumner