A question about Ascension of Isaiah 9:13-14

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
User avatar
Giuseppe
Posts: 8129
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

A question about Ascension of Isaiah 9:13-14

Post by Giuseppe » Tue Nov 06, 2018 5:28 am

A question for the experts of the forum about the AoI 9:13-14.

I read:

He [Paul] went on to write: "(God) who did not spare his own Son but gave him up for us all, will he not also give up all things with him?" (Rom 8:32). The first part of the phrase would be perfectly true if by the word God was understood, not the Father, but Yaldabaoth, and by the word Son, Sabaoth, as in the passage quoted supra in full from the Ascension of Isaiah: "And the god of that world will stretch out his hand against his son" (9,14). The Latin summary corrects the words ''against his son'' by ''against the Son of God", but like Marcion, leaves the god of this world responsible for the crime which Paul will impute to the supreme god by mixing up the two persons.

(From gnosis to Christianity, p. 179)

Can you say me which is precisely the passage of AoI referred by Magne in this point, that who reads "against his son"?
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.

User avatar
Giuseppe
Posts: 8129
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: A question about Ascension of Isaiah 9:13-14

Post by Giuseppe » Tue Nov 06, 2018 5:52 am

This may help. It seems that the passage alluded by Magne is based on the translation of Tisserant:

Et le dieu de ce monde (Ialdabaoth) étendra la main sur son fils (le résumé latin corrige: sur le Fils de Dieu) et ils (les archontes) porteront leurs mains sur lui, et ils les suspendront au bois sans savoir qui il est” (Trad. E. Tisserant, p. 176-178).

(La Naissance de Jésus-Christ, p. 399).


And it seems that this Tisserant had translated from the ethiopic version:

https://www.amazon.com/Ascension-dIsaie ... 036636264X

Do you confirm that the ethopic passage reads: ''against his son'' ?
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.

User avatar
Giuseppe
Posts: 8129
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: A question about Ascension of Isaiah 9:13-14

Post by Giuseppe » Tue Nov 06, 2018 6:15 am

The French translation of Tisserant is available here:

https://ia600203.us.archive.org/4/items ... 00tiss.pdf


In particular, in p. 178, note 3, I read:

Ce texte résulte d'une correction de Dillmann adoptée par
Charles, 'edô dîba nalcdû au lieu de baeda nalcdu des manuscrits
: “étendra par la main de son fils”

This text [the translation as ''against his son''] results from a correction of Dillmann adopted by Charles, ***** in the place of ****** of manuscript: “will stretch by the hand of the his son”.

In other terms, from what I understand, it seems that the reading used by Vermeiren here:
Et princeps mundi illius propter filium ejus extendet manus suas in eum et suspendent illum in ligno, et occidet eum nesciens qui sit.
...would be corrected by Charles with this translation:
“will stretch out his hand against his son”.
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.

User avatar
Ben C. Smith
Posts: 8009
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: A question about Ascension of Isaiah 9:13-14

Post by Ben C. Smith » Tue Nov 06, 2018 6:35 am

Refer to this post for the relevant links and texts: viewtopic.php?f=3&t=4625&p=92964#p92964.

And refer to this post for the relevant translations: viewtopic.php?f=3&t=4625&start=20#p93039.
ΤΙ ΕΣΤΙΝ ΑΛΗΘΕΙΑ

User avatar
Giuseppe
Posts: 8129
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: A question about Ascension of Isaiah 9:13-14

Post by Giuseppe » Tue Nov 06, 2018 7:16 am

Ok, but where is the reading ''against his son'' from?
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.

User avatar
Ben C. Smith
Posts: 8009
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: A question about Ascension of Isaiah 9:13-14

Post by Ben C. Smith » Tue Nov 06, 2018 7:25 am

Giuseppe wrote:
Tue Nov 06, 2018 7:16 am
Ok, but where is the reading ''against his son'' from?
Only the Slavonic has "his son." The Ethiopic has "the son."

But the Slavonic also has "on account of," which is an obvious mistranslation or mistake. I imagine somebody has conjecturally restored "on account of his son" to "against his son."
ΤΙ ΕΣΤΙΝ ΑΛΗΘΕΙΑ

User avatar
Giuseppe
Posts: 8129
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: A question about Ascension of Isaiah 9:13-14

Post by Giuseppe » Tue Nov 06, 2018 7:58 am

Ben C. Smith wrote:
Tue Nov 06, 2018 7:25 am
Giuseppe wrote:
Tue Nov 06, 2018 7:16 am
Ok, but where is the reading ''against his son'' from?
Only the Slavonic has "his son." The Ethiopic has "the son."

But the Slavonic also has "on account of," which is an obvious mistranslation or mistake. I imagine somebody has conjecturally restored "on account of his son" to "against his son."
thanks, Ben.
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.

User avatar
Giuseppe
Posts: 8129
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: A question about Ascension of Isaiah 9:13-14

Post by Giuseppe » Tue Nov 06, 2018 11:23 am

Ben, excuse me but I would have a question about the correct translation from this Latin phrase:
Et princeps mundi illius propter filium ejus extendet manus suas in eum et suspendent illum in ligno, et occidet eum nesciens qui sit.
if the translation if the following:
And the Prince of that world by the son of him stretch out his hand ...
the problem is that 'of him', being 'eius' in the Latin, should allude to another person who is not the same Prince, because otherwise there would be 'propter filium suum' (in the place of 'propter filium eius').


Can you secure me that in Latin (at least in the Latin used by this translator) there is no difference between 'suum' and 'eius' in reference to 'filium' ? In other words, that in this phrase:
Et princeps mundi illius propter filium ejus extendet manus suas in eum et suspendent illum in ligno, et occidet eum nesciens qui sit.

'eius'
refers to the 'princeps mundi illius' and not to another entity.

Thank you in advance for the disturb.
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.

User avatar
Ben C. Smith
Posts: 8009
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: A question about Ascension of Isaiah 9:13-14

Post by Ben C. Smith » Tue Nov 06, 2018 1:18 pm

Giuseppe wrote:
Tue Nov 06, 2018 11:23 am
Ben, excuse me but I would have a question about the correct translation from this Latin phrase:
Et princeps mundi illius propter filium ejus extendet manus suas in eum et suspendent illum in ligno, et occidet eum nesciens qui sit.
if the translation if the following:
And the Prince of that world by the son of him stretch out his hand ...
the problem is that 'of him', being 'eius' in the Latin, should allude to another person who is not the same Prince, because otherwise there would be 'propter filium suum' (in the place of 'propter filium eius').
No, eius is a pronoun which simply means "of him," and may refer back to any relevant singular masculine antecedent. Suum is a pronominal adjective (in the masculine accusative) which means "his" and which, in its pronominal capacity, may also refer back to any relevant singular masculine antecedent. There is no difference between the two so far as range of antecedents is concerned: both most naturally refer back to princeps.
Can you secure me that in Latin (at least in the Latin used by this translator) there is no difference between 'suum' and 'eius' in reference to 'filium' ? In other words, that in this phrase:
Et princeps mundi illius propter filium ejus extendet manus suas in eum et suspendent illum in ligno, et occidet eum nesciens qui sit.

'eius'
refers to the 'princeps mundi illius' and not to another entity.

Thank you in advance for the disturb.
Antecedents are not automatic, but yes: eius and suum would both most likely point back to princeps.
ΤΙ ΕΣΤΙΝ ΑΛΗΘΕΙΑ

FransJVermeiren
Posts: 253
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2016 1:14 am
Contact:

Re: A question about Ascension of Isaiah 9:13-14

Post by FransJVermeiren » Tue Nov 06, 2018 1:26 pm

I believe that Tisserant’s work mentioned above gives some answers, in combination with the work of Charles, mentioned recently on this forum, which gives a Latin version (L2) and the Latin translation of the Slavonic version.

Here I confine myself to Tisserant’s Ascension d’Isaie.

The beginning of verse 9:14 in French translation goes as follows: Et le Dieu de ce monde étendra sa main sur son fils…

Tisserant also gives two relevant footnotes:
1. "Ce texte résulte d’une correction de Dillmann adoptée par Charles, ʼedô diba waledú au lieu de baʼeda waledú des manuscrits: «étendra par la main de son fils»."
2. "Le Dieu de ce monde, c’est-à-dire Satan ; mais il faut probablement corriger la leçon de Eth. ʼamlák en maleʼak, par une simple transposition de l’aleph, et traduire avec Lat. et Sl.: «Et le prince de ce monde…» cf. x, 29."

Summarizing in English these comments mean:
Ad 1: That Dillmann, and in his footsteps also Charles, give the translation “will stretch out his hand against his son” (“étendra sa main sur son fils”) while the Ethiopian manuscripts give “will stretch out by the hand of his son”. (This is exactly Knibb’s comment in Charlesworth’s OT Pseudepigrapha vol. p. 170, as mentioned recently.)
Ad 2: That the Ethiopian version gives ‘the God of that world’ (meaning Satan for Tisserant) at the beginning of this verse, but that with the transposition of the aleph it gives ‘prince’, and that probably one should correct to this translation like in the Latin and Slavonic version: “And the prince of that world…”. Then also the translation of this verse corresponds with the translation of verse 10:29.

Translating (on Tisserant's and Knibb's editorial authority) this phrase as indicated in the first footnote, and also honoring the second, the first part of 9:14 goes as follows: “And the prince of that world will stretch out by the hand of his son…” I can only see these comments in Tisserant p. 177-178 as support for my view that this verse is about a Roman emperor and his son: Vespasian acting by Titus's hand during the last phase of the war against the Jews.
www.waroriginsofchristianity.com

The practical modes of concealment are limited only by the imaginative capacity of subordinates. James C. Scott, Domination and the Arts of Resistance.

Post Reply