Did the Church Fathers Really Take ΙΣ = Jesus?

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
Post Reply
Secret Alias
Posts: 18362
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Did the Church Fathers Really Take ΙΣ = Jesus?

Post by Secret Alias »

I have argued repeatedly that the Church Fathers knew ΙΣ = אּישׁ. I think if we look closely at the section of Barnabas whether we will all find it difficult to accept that Barnabas is identifying the nomen sacrum ΙΣ as 'Joshua.' Instead I think it will be readily apparent that it meant, as I would have it, that ΙΣ = the heavenly man אּישׁ.

The argument clearly develops around the question of why Jesus had to be crucified - something which is particularly unusual if, as Barnabas clearly believes, ΙΣ was a god or a divine being. In chapter 5 Barnabas starts with the clear identification that ΙΣ was the heavenly man to whom God Almighty was engaged in conversation when Adam was created:
if the Lord endured to suffer for our souls, though He was Lord of the whole world, unto whom God said from the foundation of the world, Let us make man after our image and likeness (Ποιήσωμεν ἄνθρω πον κατ' εἰκόνα καὶ καθ' ὁμοίωσιν ἡμετέραν), how then did He endure to suffer at the hand of men? ... For if He had not come in the flesh neither would men have looked upon Him and been saved, forasmuch as when they look upon the sun ... they cannot face its rays.(Barnabas 5:5)
Let us take for granted, as Schwartz has suggested based on the Damascus Document - that אּישׁ replaced 'Adam' in Genesis chapter 1. It is at least plausible then that Barnabas already has ΙΣ = אּישׁ in mind. Yet the nomen sacrum hasn't appeared as of yet. It is very unusual in fact. In the previous line we hear Barnabas declare that "a man shall justly perish (ὅτι δικαίως ἀπολεῖται ἄνθρωπος), who having the knowledge of the way of righteousness forceth himself into the way of darkness." There is some Adamic myth being referenced here quite clearly. All of which leads to the author's explanation of why God had to be crucified in the flesh.

The nomen sacrum ΙΣ appears about ten lines later in the middle of the author's explanation. According to him, that 'mystery' - or secret knowledge - that ΙΣ would come crucified was revealed by the angel to Moses in the burning bush. The passage in question is most peculiar and ultimately leads many scholars to misread the nomen sacrum (i.e. as having something to do with Joshua). For according to the author the angel's reference to 'the good earth' (γῆν τὴν ἀγαθήν) is in reality a confirmation that God would come in the flesh to be crucified.

Here is what Barnabas reveals about this mystery saying that "Forasmuch then as He was about to be manifested in the flesh and to suffer, His suffering was manifested beforehand" to Israel who declared amongst themselves
Let us bind the righteous one, for he is unprofitable for us. (Wisdom of Solomom 2:12)
What sayeth the other prophet Moses unto them?
"Behold," these things saith the Lord God" enter into the good earth (τὴν γῆν τὴν ἀγαθήν) which the Lord swear unto Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and inherit it, earth (γῆν) flowing with milk and honey.
But what saith Gnosis (γνῶσις)? Understand ye.
Set your hope, it is said, on Him who is about to be manifested to you in the flesh, even IC. [unknown scripture) («Ἐλπίσατε», φησίν, «ἐπὶ τὸν ἐν σαρκὶ μέλλοντα φανεροῦσθαι ὑμῖν IC.»)
For man is earth suffering (Ἄνθρωπος γὰρ γῆ ἐστιν πάσχουσα); for from the face of the earth came the creation of Adam. What then saith He?
Into the good land, a land flowing with milk and honey. (Εἰς τὴν γῆν τὴν ἀγαθήν, γῆν ῥέουσαν γάλα καὶ μέλι)
Blessed is our Lord, brethren, who established among us wisdom and understanding of His secret things. For the prophet speaketh a parable concerning the Lord.
Who shall comprehend, save he that is wise and prudent and that loveth his Lord? (unknown scripture)
Forasmuch then as He renewed us in the remission of sins, He made us to be a new type, so that we should have the soul of children, as if He were recreating us.

For the scripture saith concerning us, how He saith to the Son;
Let us make man after our image and after our likeness, and let them rule over the beasts of the earth and the fowls of the heaven and the fishes of the sea.
And the Lord said when He saw the fair creation of us men;
Increase and multiply and fill the earth.
These words refer to the Son.

Again I will shew thee how the Lord speaketh concerning us. He made a second creation at the last; and the Lord saith;
Behold I make the last things as the first. (unknown scripture)

In reference to this then the prophet preached;
Enter into a land flowing with milk and honey, and be lords over it.
Behold then we have been created anew, as He saith again in another prophet;
Behold, saith the Lord, I will take out from these,
that is to say, from those whom the Spirit of the Lord foresaw,
their stony hearts, and will put into them hearts of flesh; (unknown scripture)
for He Himself was to be manifested in the flesh and to dwell in us.

For the Lord saith again;
For wherein shall I appear unto the Lord my God and be glorified? I will make confession unto Thee in the assembly of my brethren, and I will sing unto Thee in the midst of the assembly of the saints.
We therefore are they whom He brought into the good land. What then is the milk and the honey? Because the child is first kept alive by honey, and then by milk. So in like manner we also, being kept alive by our faith in the promise and by the word, shall live and be lords of the earth.

Now we have already said above; And let them increase and multiply and rule over the fishes. But who is he that is able to rule over beasts and fishes and fowls of the heaven; for we ought to perceive that to rule implieth power, so that one should give orders and have dominion.

If then this cometh not to pass now, assuredly He spake to us for the hereafter, when we ourselves shall be made perfect so that we may become heirs of the covenant of the Lord.
This entire section is superficially interpreted by many as having some relationship with 'Joshua' because the entry into the Promised Land is mentioned. Nevertheless a careful reading of the material reveals instead that Barnabas' point is that it was known to Moses and Solomon that god would appear as 'man' (i.e. in good flesh) in order to refashion and redeem humanity.

I am especially drawn toward the fact that Barnabas is citing some sort of scripture that mentions this above:
Set your hope on Him who is about to be manifested to you in the flesh, even IC
I guess one can argue that Barnabas added the reference to "even IC" (ὑμῖν ἸC). But even still the underlying sense is the same - "the good earth" is a reference to God appearing as man (= IC) not as someone named Jesus. Indeed there is no specificity whatsoever regarding the 'name' or identity that God would take on other than he would appear as a man (which of course was something which might seem controversial to Jews).
“Finally, from so little sleeping and so much reading, his brain dried up and he went completely out of his mind.”
― Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, Don Quixote
Secret Alias
Posts: 18362
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: Did the Church Fathers Really Take ΙΣ = Jesus?

Post by Secret Alias »

Now since the Wisdom of Solomon is the one apocryphal text we can identify in this section, let's see what it says about God appearing as אֵ֥שׁ. We read:
For while gentle silence enveloped all things, and night in its swift course was now half gone, thy all-powerful Logos leaped from heaven, from the royal throne,
into the midst of the land that was doomed, a stern warrior carrying the sharp sword of thy authentic command, and stood and filled all things with death, and touched heaven while standing on the earth. Then at once apparitions in dreadful dreams greatly troubled them, and unexpected fears assailed them; and one here and another there, hurled down half dead, made known why they were dying; for the dreams which disturbed them forewarned them of this, so that they might not perish without knowing why they suffered.

The experience of death touched also the righteous, and a plague came upon the multitude in the desert, but the wrath did not long continue. For a blameless man was quick to act as their champion; he brought forward the shield of his ministry, prayer and propitiation by incense; he withstood the anger and put an end to the disaster, showing that he was thy servant. He conquered the wrath not by strength of body, and not by force of arms, but by his word he subdued the punisher, appealing to the oaths and covenants given to our fathers. For when the dead had already fallen on one another in heaps, he intervened and held back the wrath, and cut off its way to the living. For upon his long robe the whole world was depicted, and the glories of the fathers were engraved on the four rows of stones, and thy majesty on the diadem upon his head. To these the destroyer yielded, these he feared; for merely to test the wrath was enough.
But let's look to the actual passage that is referenced here (Numbers 16):
Korah son of Izhar, the son of Kohath, the son of Levi, and certain Reubenites—Dathan and Abiram, sons of Eliab, and On son of Peleth—became insolent and rose up against Moses. With them were 250 Israelite men, well-known community leaders who had been appointed members of the council. They came as a group to oppose Moses and Aaron and said to them, “You have gone too far! The whole community is holy, every one of them, and the Lord is with them. Why then do you set yourselves above the Lord’s assembly?”

When Moses heard this, he fell facedown. Then he said to Korah and all his followers: “In the morning the Lord will show who belongs to him and who is holy, and he will have him come near him. The one he chooses he will cause to come near him. You, Korah, and all your followers are to do this: Take censers and tomorrow put fire/man (אֵ֡שׁ) and incense in them before the Lord. Tomorrow it shall be the man/fire (הָאֵ֡שׁ) the Lord chooses, he will be the holy one. You Levites have gone too far!”

Moses also said to Korah, “Now listen, you Levites! Isn’t it enough for you that the God of Israel has separated you from the rest of the Israelite community and brought you near himself to do the work at the Lord’s tabernacle and to stand before the community and minister to them? He has brought you and all your fellow Levites near himself, but now you are trying to get the priesthood too. It is against the Lord that you and all your followers have banded together. Who is Aaron that you should grumble against him?”

Then Moses summoned Dathan and Abiram, the sons of Eliab. But they said, “We will not come! Isn’t it enough that you have brought us up out of a land flowing with milk and honey to kill us in the wilderness? And now you also want to lord it over us! Moreover, you haven’t brought us into a land flowing with milk and honey or given us an inheritance of fields and vineyards. Do you want to treat these men like slaves? No, we will not come!”

Then Moses became very angry and said to the Lord, “Do not accept their offering. I have not taken so much as a donkey from them, nor have I wronged any of them.”

Moses said to Korah, “You and all your followers are to appear before the Lord tomorrow—you and they and Aaron. Each man is to take his censer and put incense in it—250 censers in all—and present it before the Lord. You and Aaron are to present your censers also.” So each of them took his censer, put fire (אֵ֡שׁ) and incense in it, and stood with Moses and Aaron at the entrance to the tent of meeting. When Korah had gathered all his followers in opposition to them at the entrance to the tent of meeting, the glory of the Lord appeared to the entire assembly. The Lord said to Moses and Aaron, “Separate yourselves from this assembly so I can put an end to them at once.”

But Moses and Aaron fell facedown and cried out, “O God, the God of all spirits and all flesh, will you be angry with the entire assembly when only the one man sins?”

Then the Lord said to Moses, “Say to the assembly, ‘Move away from the tents of Korah, Dathan and Abiram.’”

Moses got up and went to Dathan and Abiram, and the elders of Israel followed him. He warned the assembly, “Move back from the tents of these wicked men! Do not touch anything belonging to them, or you will be swept away because of all their sins.” So they moved away from the tents of Korah, Dathan and Abiram. Dathan and Abiram had come out and were standing with their wives, children and little ones at the entrances to their tents.

Then Moses said, “This is how you will know that the Lord has sent me to do all these things and that it was not my idea: If all those of the Adam (כָּל־הָֽאָדָם֙) die a natural death and suffer the fate of all those of the Adam (כָּל־הָֽאָדָם֙), then the Lord has not sent me. But if the Lord brings about something totally new, and the earth opens its mouth and swallows them, with everything that belongs to them, and they go down alive into the realm of the dead, then you will know that these men (הָאֲנָשִׁ֥ים) have treated the Lord with contempt.”

As soon as he finished saying all this, the ground under them split apart and the earth opened its mouth and swallowed them and their households, and all those associated with Korah, together with their possessions. They went down alive into the realm of the dead, with everything they owned; the earth closed over them, and they perished and were gone from the community. At their cries, all the Israelites around them fled, shouting, “The earth is going to swallow us too!”

And fire (אֵ֥שׁ) came out from the Lord and consumed the 250 men who were offering the incense.

The Lord said to Moses, “Tell Eleazar son of Aaron, the priest, to remove the censers from the charred remains and scatter the fire (הָאֵ֖שׁ) some distance away, for the censers are holy— the censers of the men who sinned at the cost of their lives. Hammer the censers into sheets to overlay the altar, for they were presented before the Lord and have become holy. Let them be a sign to the Israelites.”

So Eleazar the priest collected the bronze censers brought by those who had been burned to death, and he had them hammered out to overlay the altar, as the Lord directed him through Moses. This was to remind the Israelites that no one except a descendant of Aaron should come to burn incense before the Lord, or he would become like Korah and his followers.

The next day the whole Israelite community grumbled against Moses and Aaron. “You have killed the Lord’s people,” they said.

But when the assembly gathered in opposition to Moses and Aaron and turned toward the tent of meeting, suddenly the cloud covered it and the glory of the Lord appeared. Then Moses and Aaron went to the front of the tent of meeting, and the Lord said to Moses, “Get away from this assembly so I can put an end to them at once.” And they fell facedown.

Then Moses said to Aaron, “Take your censer and put incense in it, along with (אֵ֥שׁ) from the altar, and hurry to the assembly to make atonement for them. Wrath has come out from the Lord; the plague has started.” So Aaron did as Moses said, and ran into the midst of the assembly. The plague had already started among the people, but Aaron offered the incense and made atonement for them. He stood between the living and the dead, and the plague stopped. But 14,700 people died from the plague, in addition to those who had died because of Korah. Then Aaron returned to Moses at the entrance to the tent of meeting, for the plague had stopped.
“Finally, from so little sleeping and so much reading, his brain dried up and he went completely out of his mind.”
― Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, Don Quixote
Secret Alias
Posts: 18362
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: Did the Church Fathers Really Take ΙΣ = Jesus?

Post by Secret Alias »

Of course Barnabas's point isn't just that there was a divine being called 'man.' This wouldn't have surprised Jews. Instead he is grappling with the difficulty some have with the idea that this god Man would appear to mankind and be crucified. As noted above this is explained by the saying:
εἰς τὴν γῆν τὴν ἀγαθήν = into the good land
The equivalent expression in the Jewish Targums is:
לַאְרַע טָבָא
But how he makes the leap from here to 'good man' is quite obscure in the surviving Greek. He makes reference to a lengthy argument as we saw that because Adam was made from the earth, 'the land' as such means man. I think this is the clearest sign that the original text was formulated in Hebrew where another way of saying 'the good land' =
הָאֲדָמָה הַטּוֹבָה (cf. Joshua 23:13, 15 etc.)
The way the text reads now it is clear the original text was written in Hebrew or at least as James Carleton Paget in his study of Barnabas notes by someone with a fluent working knowledge of the Hebrew original:
Most commentators have taken 6:8-19 as a midrash on the mixed O.T. citation (recalling Exod. 33:1, 3) found in verse 8 - Ἰδού, τάδε λέγει κύριος ὁ θεός: Εἰσέλθατε εἰς τὴν γῆν τὴν ἀγαθήν, ἣν ὤμοσεν κύριος τῷ Ἀβραὰμ καὶ Ἰσαὰκ καὶ Ἰακώβ, καὶ κατακληρονομήσατε αὐτήν, γῆν ῥέουσαν γάλα καὶ μέλι. The flow of the argument that follows the citation is not always easy to identify. After quoting the mixed quotation from Exodus and Leviticus (Exod. 33:1 and Lev. 20:24), B. begins the first section of his interpretation, which he attributes to 'knowledge'.140 In this interpretation, Jesus is to be identified with the land, and this by means of a word play present in the Hebrew and not the Greek:141 Adamah (the land) is Adam, and Jesus, and not Joshua, is by means of his incarnation and suffering,143 the man par excellence, the second Adam.
Paget sees a similarity between this discussion and that in Tertullian Resurrection of the Flesh 26:11 - 13:
Shall you reckon onions and truffles among the good things of the earth, when the Lord declares that not even by bread shall man live?8 Thus the Jews, by hoping for earthly things and nothing more, lose the heavenly things, not knowing that even the bread that was promised is of the heavenly <sort> ... even as they reckon the holy land itself to be strictly the Jewish territory, though it ought rather to be interpreted as the Lord's flesh, so that flesh thenceforth also in all who have put on Christ is a holy land, truly holy through the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, truly flowing with milk and honey through the sweetness of his own hope,2 truly Judaean through the familiar converse of God ---- For he is not a Jew who is one openly, but who is one in secret?3 ---- so that it is also the temple of God, and Jerusalem, to which Isaiah says, Awake, awake, O Jerusalem, put on the strength of thine arm: awake as in the beginning of the day ---- that is, in that integrity in which it was before the sin of the transgression. For how can words of this kind of exhortation and invitation befit that Jerusalem which killed the prophets and stoned them that were sent unto her and at length actually slew her own Lord?5 In fact to no earth at all is salvation promised, for it must pass away, along with the fashion of the whole world.6 Even if any be bold rather to argue that the holy land is Paradise, which it is possible to say belongs also to the fathers (I mean Adam and Eve), it will be seen to follow that the promise of restoration to Paradise was made to the flesh whose appointed task it was to inhabit and to keep it, to the end that man may be called back there in that same condition in which he was when driven out.
The point then is that Barnabas is making reference to the very Adam vs Ish understanding that concludes Tertullian's text (developed itself from the conclusion of 1 Corinthians). The idea seems to be that through baptism the flesh is recreated after the heavenly type and the word of God can be implanted and reap reward as the gospels note in the parable:
Still other seed fell on good soil (τὴν γῆν τὴν ἀγαθήν). It came up and yielded a crop, a hundred times more than was sown." When he said this, he called out, "Whoever has ears to hear, let them hear."
“Finally, from so little sleeping and so much reading, his brain dried up and he went completely out of his mind.”
― Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, Don Quixote
User avatar
Peter Kirby
Site Admin
Posts: 8015
Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 2:13 pm
Location: Santa Clara
Contact:

Re: Did the Church Fathers Really Take ΙΣ = Jesus?

Post by Peter Kirby »

Secret Alias wrote:I have argued repeatedly that the Church Fathers knew ΙΣ = אּישׁ.
What's the best example?

(And, obviously, not just an example of a Greek transliteration of אּישׁ into two or three Greek letters, presented in general terms, as in Eusebius.)
"... almost every critical biblical position was earlier advanced by skeptics." - Raymond Brown
Secret Alias
Posts: 18362
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: Did the Church Fathers Really Take ΙΣ = Jesus?

Post by Secret Alias »

Well I've brought up Clement's identification of ΙΣ as the man (אּישׁ) who wrestles with Jacob and is an angel, Justin, Philo and all early Fathers who identify ΙΣ at the head of 'Israel' (either a man seeing god or a man fearing god), Justin Ἰς δὲ καὶ ἀνθρώπου καὶ σωτῆρος ὄνομα καὶ σημασίαν ἔχει. (Justin Apology 2.6) "IC has both the name and significance of man and Savior" etc. I will get back to these later. It was this argument in Barnabas (which repeats in Clement verbatim) which I found so interesting this morning.
“Finally, from so little sleeping and so much reading, his brain dried up and he went completely out of his mind.”
― Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, Don Quixote
Clive
Posts: 1197
Joined: Sun Aug 17, 2014 2:20 pm

Re: Did the Church Fathers Really Take ΙΣ = Jesus?

Post by Clive »

Is this a good example?
And Pilate said to them, Behold the man!
"We cannot slaughter each other out of the human impasse"
Secret Alias
Posts: 18362
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: Did the Church Fathers Really Take ΙΣ = Jesus?

Post by Secret Alias »

Now we move on to Clement's treatment of the very same passage in Barnabas. It comes in the midst of a discussion of Jesus's 'secret' mission on earth from the writings of Paul. Clement begins:
Rightly, therefore, the divine apostle says,
"By revelation (κατὰ ἀποκάλυψιν) the mystery was made known to me (ἐγνωρίσθη μοι τὸ μυστήριον) as I wrote before in brief, in accordance with which, when ye read, ye may understand my knowledge in the mystery of Christ (ἐν τῷ μυ στηρίῳ τοῦ Χριστοῦ), which in other ages was not made known to the sons of men (τοῖς υἱοῖς τῶν ἀνθρώπων), as it is now revealed to His holy apostles and prophets."
For there is an instruction of the perfect, of which, writing to the Colossians, he says,
"We cease not to pray for you, and beseech that ye may be filled with the knowledge of His will in all wisdom and spiritual understanding; that ye may walk worthy of the Lord to all pleasing; being fruitful in every good work, and increasing in the knowledge of God; strengthened with all might according to the glory of His power."
And again he says,
"According to the disposition of the grace of God which is given me, that ye may fulfil the word of God; the mystery which has been hid from ages and generations, which now is manifested to His saints: to whom God wished to make known what is the riches of the glory of this mystery among the nations."
So that, on the one hand, then, are the mysteries which were hid till the time of the apostles, and were delivered by them as they received from the Lord, and, concealed in the Old Testament, were manifested to the saints. And, on the other hand, there is "the riches of the glory of the mystery in the Gentiles," which is faith and hope in Christ; which in another place he has called the "foundation."

And again, as if in eagerness to divulge this knowledge, he thus writes:
"Put in mind (the) every man in all wisdom, that we may present every man perfect in Christ;" νουθετοῦντες πάντα ἄνθρωπον ἐν πάσῃ σοφίᾳ, ἵνα παραστήσωμεν πάντα ἄνθρωπον τέλειον ἐν Χριστῷ
not every man simply (πάντα ἁπλῶς ἄνθρωπον), since no one would be unbelieving. Nor does he call every man (πάντα ἄνθρωπον) who believes in Christ perfect; but he says the 'all man' (πάντα ἄνθρωπον λέγει), as if he said the whole man (ὡς εἰπεῖν ὅλον τὸν ἄνθρωπον), as if purified in body and soul (οἷον σώματι καὶ ψυχῇ ἡγνισμένον).


I want to stop there for a moment before Clement introduces the passage from Barnabas to make clear that Clement is setting up a situation very similar to what is outlined in To Theodore. There are two gospels - one of faith, the other of knowledge (an idea reinforced repeatedly in the Stromata). The gospel of faith was for the Gentiles, the gospel of perfection was for the Jews (at least metaphorically) where clearly the term 'all man' (= אשכול) was well established in mystical circles to mean 'the hidden god' - https://books.google.com/books?id=yOuCw ... an&f=false

That אשכול shows up in Paul's writings is important because the concept is critical to the mystical concept that Clement is trying to introduce. Moses saw God (Ish) and became the man of God. Seeing God's lieutenant transformed Moses into God by the very process mentioned by Paul:
"Put in mind (the) every man in all wisdom, that we may present every man perfect in Christ;" νουθετοῦντες πάντα ἄνθρωπον ἐν πάσῃ σοφίᾳ, ἵνα παραστήσωμεν πάντα ἄνθρωπον τέλειον ἐν Χριστῷ
Now let us continue with his analysis exactly where we left it:
For that the knowledge does not appertain to all, he expressly adds:
Being knit together in love, and unto all the riches of the full assurance of knowledge, to the acknowledgment of the mystery of God in Christ, in whom are hid all the treasures of wisdom and of knowledge. Continue in prayer, watching therein with thanksgiving. (συμβιβασθέντες ἐν ἀγάπῃ καὶ εἰς πᾶν πλοῦτος τῆς πληροφορίας τῆς συνέσεως, εἰς ἐπίγνωσιν τοῦ μυστηρίου τοῦ θεοῦ ἐν Χριστῷ, ἐν ᾧ εἰσι πάντες οἱ θησαυροὶ τῆς σοφίας καὶ τῆς γνώσεως ἀπόκρυφοι. τῇ προσευχῇ προσκαρτερεῖτε, γρηγοροῦντες ἐν αὐτῇ ἐν εὐχαριστίᾳ)
And thanksgiving has place not for the soul and spiritual blessings alone, but also for the body, and for the good things of the body. And he still more clearly reveals that knowledge belongs not to all, by adding:
Praying at the same time for you, that God would open to us a door to speak the mystery of Christ, for which I am bound; that I may make it known as I ought to speak.
For there were certainly, among the Hebrews, some things delivered unwritten.
For when ye ought to be teachers for the time (εἶναι διδάσκαλοι διὰ τὸν χρόνον) it is said, as if they had grown old in the Old Testament, "ye have again need that one teach you which be the first principles (στοιχεῖα τῆς ἀρχῆς) of the oracles of God (τῶν λογίων τοῦ θεοῦ); and are become such as have need of milk, and not of solid food. For every one that par-taketh of milk is unskilful in the word of righteousness; for he is a babe, being instructed with the first lessons (τὰ πρῶτα μαθήματα πεπιστευμένος). But solid food belongs to those who are of full age, who by reason of use have their senses exercised so as to distinguish between good and evil. Wherefore, leaving the first principles of the doctrine of Christ, let us go on to perfection (διὸ ἀφέντες τὸν τῆς ἀρχῆς τοῦ Χριστοῦ λόγον ἐπὶ τὴν τελειότητα φερώμεθα)."
Barnabas, too, who in person preached the word along with the apostle in the ministry of the Gentiles, says, "I write to you most simply, that ye may understand." Then below, exhibiting already a clearer trace of gnostic tradition, he says,
"What says the other prophet Moses to them?

Lo, thus saith the Lord God, Enter ye into the good land which the Lord God sware, the God of Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob; and ye received for an inheritance that land, flowing with milk and honey.

What says knowledge?

Learn, hope, it says, in IC, who is to be manifested to you in the flesh. For man is the suffering land; for from the face of the ground was the formation of Adam.

What, then, does it say in reference to the good land, flowing with milk and honey?

Blessed be our Lord, brethren, who has put into our hearts wisdom, and the understanding of His secrets.

For the prophet says, "Who shall understand the Lord's parable but the wise and understanding, and he that loves his Lord?"
I want to stop there before giving Clement's explanation of Barnabas to focus on what I missed in my original treatment of this passage.

Now when I look at things it is clear that the section has three questions followed immediately by three citations of scripture. In other words, the material that follows the second question is entirely derived from Barnabas's source viz:
Learn, hope in IC, who is to be manifested to you in the flesh. For man is the suffering land; for from the face of the ground was the formation of Adam.
In other words, it isn't Barnabas who possesses the exquisite knowledge of Hebrew but his source and this makes all the more clear that IC here means אּישׁ given that what immediately follows betrays knowledge of 'adam and 'adamah. In other words, Barnabas's source is clearly well versed in Hebrew and it makes the Ish vs Adam juxtaposition.

Clement goes on to explain the 'mystery' a little further by noting that Jesus alludes to it in the gospel:
It is but for few to comprehend these things. For it is not in the way of envy that the Lord announced in a Gospel,

"My mystery is to me, and to the sons of my house;"

placing the election in safety, and beyond anxiety; so that the things pertaining to what it has chosen and taken may be above the reach of envy. For he who has not the knowledge of good is wicked

"for there is one good, the Father"

and to be ignorant of the Father is death, as to know Him is eternal life, through participation in the power of the incorrupt One. And to be incorruptible is to participate in divinity; but revolt from the knowledge of God brings corruption. Again the prophet says:

"And I will give thee treasures, concealed, dark, unseen; that they may know that I am the Lord."

Similarly David sings: "For, lo, Thou hast loved truth; the obscure and hidden things of wisdom hast Thou showed me." "Day utters speech to day" (what is clearly written), "and night to night proclaims knowledge" (which is hidden in a mystic veil); "and there are no words or utterances whose voices shall not be heard" by God, who said, "Shall one do what is secret, and I shall not see him?"

Wherefore instruction, which reveals hidden things, is called illumination, as it is the teacher only who uncovers the lid of the ark, contrary to what the poets say, that "Zeus stops up the jar of good things, but opens that of evil." "For I know," says the apostle, "that when I come to you, I shall come in the fulness of the blessing of Christ;" designating the spiritual gift, and the gnostic communication, which being present he desires to impart to them present as "the fulness of Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery sealed in the ages of eternity, but now manifested by the prophetic Scriptures, according to the command of the eternal God, made known to all the nations, in order to the obedience of faith," that is, those of the nations who believe that it is. But only to a few of them is shown what those things are which are contained in the mystery. Rightly then, Plato, in the Epistles, treating of God, says: "We must speak in enigmas that should the tablet come by any mischance on its leaves either by sea or land, he who reads may remain ignorant." For the God of the universe, who is above all speech, all conception, all thought, can never be committed to writing, being inexpressible even by His own power. And this too Plato showed, by saying:

"Considering, then, these things, take care lest some time or other you repent on account of the present things, departing in a manner unworthy. The greatest safeguard is not to write, but learn; for it is utterly impossible that what is written will not vanish."

Akin to this is what the holy Apostle Paul says, preserving the prophetic and truly ancient secret from which the teachings that were good were derived by the Greeks: "Howbeit we speak wisdom among them who are perfect; but not the wisdom of this world, or of the princes of this world, that come to nought; but we speak the wisdom of God hidden in a mystery." Then proceeding, he thus inculcates the caution against the divulging of his words to the multitude in the following terms: "And I, brethren, could not speak to you as to spiritual, but as to carnal, even to babes in Christ. I have fed you with milk, not with meat: for ye were not yet able; neither are ye now able. For ye are yet carnal."

If, then, "the milk" is said by the apostle to belong to the babes, and "meat" to be the food of the full-grown, milk will be understood to be catechetical instruction -- the first food, as it were, of the soul. And meat is the mystic contemplation; for this is the flesh and the blood of the Word, that is, the comprehension of the divine power and essence. "Taste and see that the Lord is Christ," it is said. For so He imparts of Himself to those who partake of such food in a more spiritual manner; when now the soul nourishes itself, according to the truth-loving Plato. For the knowledge of the divine essence is the meat and drink of the divine Word.
Clearly then Clement's understanding follows from Barnabas's. It was foretold that IC would come as a heavenly man whose flesh wasn't made of earth like Adam but a special 'heavenly stuff' (= fire) which would grow clusters of perfection (hence the 'good soil' reference in Luke 8:8.
“Finally, from so little sleeping and so much reading, his brain dried up and he went completely out of his mind.”
― Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, Don Quixote
Secret Alias
Posts: 18362
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: Did the Church Fathers Really Take ΙΣ = Jesus?

Post by Secret Alias »

Again Clement's point is that Barnabas and all the other Church Fathers (he mentions Clement of Rome elsewhere) know this because there was a second 'secret' gospel reserved for the elect which outlined this mystery mentioned by Paul.
“Finally, from so little sleeping and so much reading, his brain dried up and he went completely out of his mind.”
― Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, Don Quixote
Secret Alias
Posts: 18362
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: Did the Church Fathers Really Take ΙΣ = Jesus?

Post by Secret Alias »

In fact I think that in the original Hebrew text where this is quoted we'd read:
Learn, hope in IC, who is to be manifested to you in the flesh. For Adam is the suffering land; for from the face of the ground was the formation of Adam.
This completely transforms the meaning. It is much more akin to gnostic expectations for a 'special kind' of man who appear on the earth. Barnabas's point is that the 'good earth' in the reference from Moses (just previously) should be juxtaposed with this 'prophet's' allusion to Adam as 'suffering earth.' That's the point. That the 'good land' doesn't mean physical land at all. One might expect this from a Samaritan community which didn't accept the Book of Joshua - i.e. where the Pentateuch ends ambiguously with no physical redemption in Israel.
“Finally, from so little sleeping and so much reading, his brain dried up and he went completely out of his mind.”
― Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, Don Quixote
User avatar
Peter Kirby
Site Admin
Posts: 8015
Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 2:13 pm
Location: Santa Clara
Contact:

Re: Did the Church Fathers Really Take ΙΣ = Jesus?

Post by Peter Kirby »

Secret Alias wrote:Well I've brought up Clement's identification of ΙΣ as the man (אּישׁ) who wrestles with Jacob and is an angel
I assume the reference is here:
I have to go to bed but here is Clement - Paed 1:7

Again, when He speaks in His own person, He confesses Himself to be the Instructor: "I am the Lord thy God, who brought thee out of the land of Egypt." Who, then, has the power of leading in and out? Is it not the Instructor? This was He who appeared to Abraham, and said to him, "I am thy God, be accepted before Me;" and in a way most befitting an instructor, forms him into a faithful child, saying, "And be blameless; and I will make My covenant between Me and thee, and try seed." There is the communication of the Instructor's friendship. And He most manifestly appears as Jacob's instructor. He says accordingly to him, "Lo, I am with thee, to keep thee in all the way in which thou shalt go; and I will bring thee back into this land: for I will not leave thee till I do what I have told thee." He is said, too, to have wrestled with Him. "And Jacob was left alone, and there wrestled with him a man till the morning." This was the man who led, and brought, and wrestled with, and anointed the athlete Jacob against evil. Now that the Word was at once Jacob's trainer and the Instructor of humanity--"He asked," it is said, "His name, and said to him, Tell me what is Try name." And he said, "Why is it that thou askest My name?" For He reserved the new name for the new people--the babe; and was as yet unnamed, the Lord God not having yet become man. Yet Jacob called the name of the place, "Face of God." "For I have seen," he says, "God face to face; and my life is preserved." The face of God is the Word by whom God is manifested and made known. Then also was he named Israel, because he saw God the Lord. It was God, the Word, the Instructor, who said to him again afterwards, "Fear not to go down into Egypt." See how the Instructor follows the righteous man, and how He anoints the athlete, teaching him to trip up his antagonist.

It is He also who teaches Moses to act as instructor. For the Lord says, "If any one sin before Me, him will I blot out of My book; but now, go and lead this people into the place which I told thee." Here He is the teacher of the art of instruction. For it was really the Lord that was the instructor of the ancient people by Moses; but He is the instructor of the new people by Himself, face to face. "For behold," He says to Moses, "My angel shall go before thee," representing the evangelical and commanding power of the Word, but guarding the Lord's prerogative. "In the day on which I will visit them," He says, "I will bring their sins on them; that is, on the day on which I will sit as judge I will render the recompense of their sins." For the same who is Instructor is judge, and judges those who disobey Him; and the loving Word will not pass over their transgression in silence. He reproves, that they may repent. For "the Lord willeth the repentance of the sinner rather than his death." And let us as babes, hearing of the sins of others, keep from similar transgressions, through dread of the threatening, that we may not have to undergo like sufferings. What, then, was the sin which they committed? "For in their wrath they slew men, and in their impetuosity they hamstrung bulls. Cursed be their anger." Who, then, would train us more lovingly than He? Formerly the older people had an old covenant, and the law disciplined the people with fear, and the Word was an angel; but to the fresh and new people has also been given a new covenant, and the Word has appeared, and fear is turned to love, and that mystic angel is born--Jesus. For this same Instructor said then, "Thou shalt fear the Lord God;" but to us He has addressed the exhortation, "Thou shalt love the Lord thy God." Wherefore also this is enjoined on us: "Cease from your own works, from your old sins;" "Learn to do well;" "Depart from evil, and do good;" "Thou hast loved righteousness, and hated iniquity." This is my new covenant written in the old letter. The newness of the word must not, then, be made ground of reproach. But the Lord hath also said in Jeremiah: "Say not that I am a youth: before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee, and before I brought thee out of the womb I sanctified thee." Such allusions prophecy can make to us, destined in the eye of God to faith before the foundation of the world; but now babes, through the recent fulfilment of the will of God, according to which we are born now to calling and salvation. Wherefore also He adds, "I have set thee for a prophet to the nations," saying that he must prophesy, so that the appellation of "youth" should not become a reproach to those who are called babes.
This clearly does identify the Word of God as the man who wrestled with Jacob.

On the other hand, this line:
And he said, "Why is it that thou askest My name?" For He reserved the new name for the new people--the babe; and was as yet unnamed, the Lord God not having yet become man.
Says that the Word received His name when he was born, as a babe, becoming incarnate. At this point he was unnamed -- not named.

But if the "name" was "Man" (Hebrew "Ish") and if this "name" was derived from these passages where a "man" appears, he would appear to have been named already. There is no concept to be found where the name "Man" (Hebrew "Ish") was bestowed on the baby/child -- that is known to be (written in Greek as) IHSOUS, English "Jesus," the name given to the son of god at birth, in the infancy narratives (Matthew 1:21, Luke 1:31).

Clement of Alexandria apparently believed the name of the Word, which wrestled with Jacob in this passage, to be "Jesus," given to him later.

(Waits with bated breath for the reply to the above...)

On the other hand, the part that mentions "the new name for the new people" is interesting, as if it implied a different old name as well.
the Word has appeared, and fear is turned to love, and that mystic angel is born
It's also very interesting to see the Word/Jesus referred to as an "angel."
Justin Ἰς δὲ καὶ ἀνθρώπου καὶ σωτῆρος ὄνομα καὶ σημασίαν ἔχει. (Justin Apology 2.6) "IC has both the name and significance of man and Savior" etc.
Are there other references on the short list of good ones?
"... almost every critical biblical position was earlier advanced by skeptics." - Raymond Brown
Post Reply