Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Toto · 02-22-2011, 12:06 AM

The original issue was whether Paul listed any human characteristics about Jesus. However much ambiguity there is in "rulers of this age" it cannot provide any human identity for Jesus.

mountainman · 02-22-2011, 05:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

Quote:

Originally Posted by judge

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

Nope. Paul said that the rulers of the age crucified Jesus, and that refers to demons. .

How do you know? Just explain it in your own words rather than pointing me to a book by Carl Sagan, who as far as I know aint an authority on these matters.

To repeat the previous discussions on this issue:

This is what Paul says: 1 Cor 2:8

Quote:

None of the rulers of this age understood it, for if they had, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory

Earl Doherty

Quote:

Corinthians 2:6-8:

6 And yet I do speak of a wisdom for those who are mature, not a wisdom of this passing age, nor of the rulers of this age who are passing away. 7 I speak of God's secret wisdom, a mystery that has been hidden and predestined by God for our glory before time began. 8 None of the rulers of this age understood it, for if they had, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory."

A great amount of scholarly ink has been spilled over the meaning of "the rulers of this age" (ton archonton tou aionos toutou, verses 6 and 8). In both pagan and Jewish parlance, the word archontes could be used to refer to earthly rulers and those in authority (as in Romans 13:3). But it is also, along with several others like it, a technical term for the spirit forces, the "powers and authorities" who rule the lowest level of the heavenly world and who exercise authority over the events and fate (usually cruel) of the earth, its nations and individuals. That invisible powers, mostly evil, were at work behind earthly phenomena was a widely held belief in Hellenistic times, including among Jews, and it was shared by Christianity. J. H. Charlesworth (Old Testament Pseudepigrapha, p.66) puts it this way:

"Earth is full of demons. Humanity is plagued by them. Almost all misfortunes are because of demons: sickness, drought, death and especially humanity's weaknesses about remaining faithful to the covenant (with God). The region between heaven and earth seems to be almost cluttered by demons and angels; humanity is often seen as a pawn, helpless in the face of such cosmic forces."

There has not been a universal scholarly consensus on what Paul has in mind in 1 Corinthians 2:8, but over the last century a majority of commentators (see below), some reluctantly, have decided that he is referring to the demon spirits. The term aion, "age," or sometimes in the plural "ages," was in a religious and apocalyptic context a reference to the present age of the world, in the sense of all recorded history, since the next age was the one after the Parousia when God's Kingdom would be established. One of the governing ideas of the period was that the world to the present point had been under the control of the evil angels and spirit powers, and that the coming of the Kingdom would see their long awaited overthrow. Humanity was engaged in a war against the demons, and one of the strongest appeals of the Hellenistic salvation cults was their promise of divine aid in this war on a personal level....

...

Modern scholars like C. K. Barrett (First Epistle to the Corinthians, p.72), Paula Fredriksen (From Jesus to Christ, p.56), and Jean Hering (The First Epistle of St. Paul to the Corinthians, p.16-17, a brief but penetrating analysis), have felt constrained to agree. Delling in the Theological Dictionary of the New Testament (I, p.489) notes that the spirit rulers are portrayed by Paul as "treating the Lord of glory as prey in ignorance of the divine plan for salvation." They operated in the spiritual realm, which S. Salmond (The Expositor's Greek Testament, Ephesians, p.284) describes as "supra-terrestrial but sub-celestial regions." Paul Ellingworth, A Translator's Handbook for 1 Corinthians, p.46, states: "A majority of scholars think that supernatural powers are intended here."

S. G. F. Brandon (History, Time and Deity, p.167) unflinchingly declares that although Paul's statement "may seem on cursory reading to refer to the Crucifixion as an historical event. . .the expression 'rulers of this age' does not mean the Roman and Jewish authorities. Instead, it denotes the daemonic powers who . . . were believed to inhabit the planets (the celestial spheres) and control the destinies of men. . . . Paul attributes the Crucifixion not to Pontius Pilate and the Jewish leaders, but to these planetary powers."

Do you know of any scholarly ink spent on examining the issue of whether or not the NHC text The Reality of the Rulers has any relevance, or can add any information to, the interpretations of the reality of these rulers in Paul.

Here is the opening paragraph of the text:

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Reality of the Rulers from Nag Hammadi

On account of the reality of the authorities, (inspired) by the spirit of the father of truth,
the great apostle - referring to the "authorities of the darkness" -
told us that "our contest is not against flesh and blood;
rather, the authorities of the universe and the spirits of wickedness."
I have sent this (to you) because you inquire about the reality of the authorities. "

Who is this "great apostle" for example? Is this Paul?
Does Paul refer to "authorities of the darkness" ?

Toto · 02-22-2011, 08:53 AM

The great apostle is Paul. The Hypostasis of the Archons is dated to the third century, which is a bit later than Paul is usually dated.

Read more at p. 217 Introduction to the New Testament, Volume 2 (or via: amazon.co.uk) By Helmut Köster, also on google books

avi · 02-22-2011, 09:12 AM

Thanks for that link, Toto. Much appreciated, as always....

Great job....

avi

Chaucer · 02-22-2011, 10:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

Carrier is not misleading or careless. But I think you are tending in that direction.

As to the question of Carrier's own relationship to his being or not being misleading, I came across this statement of his on a YouTube video that I will just let speak for itself --

"I don't mind politicians who lie to get things done as long as they're doing it in the interests of the people instead of their own interests." -- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=df9nKRvlmkY, 12:45-12:52

Chaucer

Toto · 02-22-2011, 11:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chaucer

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

Carrier is not misleading or careless. But I think you are tending in that direction.

As to the question of Carrier's own relationship to his being or not being misleading, I came across this statement of his on a YouTube video that I will just let speak for itself --

"I don't mind politicians who lie to get things done as long as they're doing it in the interests of the people instead of their own interests." -- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=df9nKRvlmkY, 12:45-12:52

Chaucer

That's how politics works. Carrier was speaking there about proponents of science education who claim that science and religion are compatible, as part of a strategy of pushing science education. You notice that in other parts, he is quite clear that skeptics have to be brutally honest, whatever the political implications.

Thank you for allowing me to clear up that confusion on your part.

Chaucer · 02-22-2011, 01:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chaucer

As to the question of Carrier's own relationship to his being or not being misleading, I came across this statement of his on a YouTube video that I will just let speak for itself --

"I don't mind politicians who lie to get things done as long as they're doing it in the interests of the people instead of their own interests." -- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=df9nKRvlmkY, 12:45-12:52

Chaucer

That's how politics works.

That is not how all politics works. That's just a canard to keep suckers in a state of useful subjection, disillusion and apathy. It's a very effective social lie circulated by the powerful: a lie that, unchallenged, can become a truth. It isn't the truth -- not for Mandela, Eleanor Roosevelt, Wale[n]sa, Franklin, Gandhi, Solon, Pericles, the reformed Asoka, or Urukagina, or many others.

This irks me no end, because one big reason that my parents quit their childhood religion was that they found out they had been lied to on life-altering issues by people they thought they could really trust. As tenured academics, they eventually grew to feel 'safe' when reading books and articles by atheists and (other) skeptics instead, because whenever they checked, these works were found correct. Not that they always agreed with every opinion in such works, but at least these works didn't lie outright.

I'm not saying they thought that atheists and skeptics never lie or distort, but it was their experience that they were able to trust them on historical matters that had been personally researched and released to the public; that they didn't have as strong of an agenda as some theists where one's relationship with the facts might be compromised. So I don't like this at all. Carrier may have a lot of interesting and good arguments to offer on other subjects. But you don't mess around with data, either as a politician or a historian or anything else in which many readers and listeners start to depend on you -- no one in that kind of seriously responsible position would do so on purpose anyway, without ruining their integrity. That questionable kind of papering over of salient data isn't necessary if you have a strong argument, either as a politician or as a scholar.

Chaucer

No Robots · 02-22-2011, 02:27 PM

Perhaps Carrier believes it in the public interest to lie about the historicity of Christ.

spin · 02-22-2011, 03:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by No Robots

Perhaps Carrier believes it in the public interest to lie about the historicity of Christ.

:horsecrap:

spin · 02-22-2011, 03:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

Carrier was speaking there about proponents of science education who claim that science and religion are compatible, as part of a strategy of pushing science education. You notice that in other parts, he is quite clear that skeptics have to be brutally honest, whatever the political implications.

He also made it clear that he distances himself from those who do so. He has his role in things which he is pursuing, which involves being brutal honest.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

Thank you for allowing me to clear up that confusion on your part.

That's hopeful on your part. The confusion you refer to is not one that will be cleared up rationally. Having watched to this video, I see the comment about lying has been taken out of context as use here in this thread. This is not a reflection on Carrier at all, but of the one who abuses the comment by misrepresenting it.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

02-22-2011, 12:06 AM	#31
Toto Contributor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Los Angeles area Posts: 40,549	The original issue was whether Paul listed any human characteristics about Jesus. However much ambiguity there is in "rulers of this age" it cannot provide any human identity for Jesus.

02-22-2011, 08:53 AM	#33
Toto Contributor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Los Angeles area Posts: 40,549	The great apostle is Paul. The Hypostasis of the Archons is dated to the third century, which is a bit later than Paul is usually dated. Read more at p. 217 Introduction to the New Testament, Volume 2 (or via: amazon.co.uk) By Helmut Köster, also on google books

02-22-2011, 09:12 AM	#34
avi Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Location: eastern North America Posts: 1,468	Thanks for that link, Toto. Much appreciated, as always.... Great job.... avi

02-22-2011, 02:27 PM	#38
No Robots Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Edmonton Posts: 5,679	Perhaps Carrier believes it in the public interest to lie about the historicity of Christ.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.