Who is the "king" in the Ascension of Isaiah?

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
Giuseppe
Posts: 13732
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: Who is the "king" in the Ascension of Isaiah?

Post by Giuseppe »

Effectively, the hypothetical change from Galilee to Jerusalem (as place of death) may be similar to the happened change from Nazareth to Bethlehem (as place of birth).
The disciples are made fugitives to Galilee RAPIDLY as midrash from:
Zechariah 13:7
7 “Awake, sword, against my shepherd,
against the man who is close to me!”
declares the Lord Almighty.
“Strike the shepherd,
and the sheep will be scattered,
and I will turn my hand against the little ones

But what if the rapidity of the fugue and the uni-directionality of the place of fugue (the Galilee and not the Egypt, for example) betrayes the embarrassment about the Galilee as the original place of death (and the collateral need of justify their immediate presence there)?

(En passant, the Book of Apocalypse places the place of death in the city called Egypt, if I remember well).

Note that also the episode of the denial of Peter would betray the Galilee as old place of death for Jesus: the words "you also are Galilean" addressed to Peter may serve to eclipse the rival tradition, something as: "just you who pretend that you saw the Galilean crucifixion, now you see the same execution in Jerusalem and can't deny it, otherwise you are a sinner".
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.
Giuseppe
Posts: 13732
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: Who is the "king" in the Ascension of Isaiah?

Post by Giuseppe »

In addition, Jesus preaches the coming of the kingdom of God in Galilee first: how can he be titled "king of the Jews" in Jerusalem? I mean: there is no reason why something started in Galilee should end in Jerusalem.

Personally, I think that the Risen Jesus is put in Galilee to mean that the Revelation of the Gnosis (what Jesus was doing in Galilee, after all) continues un-disturbed just there where it had started (as if the crucifixion in Jerusalem had zero expiatory value). So there was no death in Galilee. Simply, the first euhemerizers of the deity Jesus placed in Galilee the first "signs and wonders" of the gnostic Saviour, the his exclusively revelatory activities.

The late story of the expiatory death was placed in the Pilate's Jerusalem as reaction and correction of the revelatory life in the herodian Galilee.

So Jesus was judaized by having him dead in Jerusalem.

Pilate as killer means that the Roman world had need of expiation.

Whereas Herod as killer means that the Jewish world had precluded itself from the reception of the Gnosis.
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.
Post Reply