3 Therefore I want you to know that no one who is speaking by the Spirit of God says, “Jesus be cursed,” and no one can say, “Jesus is Lord,” except by the Holy Spirit.
(1 Corinthians 12:3)
So Zinner:
1 Corinthians 12:3 reveals that Jewish Christians proclaimed that "Jesus is separated", anathema, which should not be rendered "Jesus is cursed"; anathema literally means something set aside either for destruction or for use of the sacred services of the Temple. Anathema is thus semantically related to the Hebrew term qodesh, 'sacred', 'consecrated', and the positive sense of anathema must be the one intended by Jewish Christians in this context. In fact this interpretation of anathema finally provides a simple yet satisfactory explanation of the previously perplexing reference in Didache 16 to Jesus who will save the world as up' autou tou katathematos, which is usually translated as some form resembling "the Curse", but which will be properly rendered as "the Separated One" or "the Consecrated One", "the One set apart". And this usage likewise confirms the Didache's Jewish-Christian provenance. Draper is correct to see in the Didache's up' autou tou katathematos a Jewish-Christian tradition, but his conclusion that it was framed in response to Paul's remark in Galatians misses the mark; it is more closely related to 1 Corinthians 12:3, which represents an authentic Ebionite Jerusalem Christology.
(The Gospel of Thomas, Samuel Zinner, 2011)
A human Jesus not being still invented, his being separated (anathemized) is a direct reference to the separation happened through the celestial cross. That separation gave form to world.
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.
3 Therefore I want you to know that no one who is speaking by the Spirit of God says, “Jesus be cursed,” and no one can say, “Jesus is Lord,” except by the Holy Spirit.
(1 Corinthians 12:3)
The same passage says us another thing: in the hymn to Philippians, the name above all names, is 'Lord', since what one can say by the Spirit of God, when talking about the celestial crucificion in outer space, is not only that Jesus is "separated" (Stauros being a separator between lower and upper heavens), but also that the reward for the crucifixion/separation is that Jesus becomes 'Lord'.
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.
Also, just lol at "...the cross doesn't work generally as celestial separator. The idea is missing in Paul." and then quoting Pagels as saying precisely that this is Pauline. And then after a bunch of apologetics, you say "He didn't see the cross as separator, but despite of it he was the precursor of the idea, as Earliest Gentilizer." as if this means anything.
Paul doesn't say what he does, but rather he was the originator of the idea that he himself didn't believe.
Hm. I don’t think Revelation deep time’s the crucifixion. Did you have passages in mind? Because if it’s Rev. 12:8 [correction, 13:8], for example, that doesn’t say the lamb was slain at the foundation of the world, but that the names of those he would save were written in a celestial book at that time (theistic determinism, a la Calvinism). Just as Paul says in Galatians that scripture forewrote the crucifixion (meaning the scriptures were written before the atonement sacrifice happened). The idea of a crucifixion before time is something Robert Price has proposed; I don’t know where he gets the idea. It’s not in the NT.
It seems that Carrier's criticism is the same criticism made by Loisy against the Couchoud's idea that Rev 13:8 is evidence of a crucifixion before time.
But I find that Couchoud knew well that kind of criticism and he replied to it in the following way:
When is the sacrifice of the Lamb supposed to have taken place? A single text gives the answer: the passage where the visionary damns the idolators “whose names are not written in the book of the Lamb sacrificed from the foundation of the world” (xiii. 18). M. Loisy introduces a comma after “sacrificed,” thereby making the text to mean “whose names are not written, since the foundation of the world, in the book of the sacrificed Lamb.” The comma is not in the text and nothing compels us to place it there. It is true enough that the inscription or non-inscription in the Book of Life was determined at “the foundation of the world” (xvii. 8). All the more reason for affirming that the sacrifice of the Lamb, the cause of which inscription in the Book is effect, also took place at “the foundation of the world.” When Jesus is named “the first born of the dead” (i. 5), when he says “I hold the keys of death and Hades” (i. 18), these words are to be taken in their plain sense. He is the first Being who has both known and conquered death. The Lamb sacrificed from the world's foundation is of the same order as the Bull of Mithraism from whose sacrifice, at the beginning of time, issued the fountain of universal life. They are both mystery-images with a sacred repast as the link between them. In both cases a primeval sacrifice is the condition of salvation for the believer.
(Creation of Christ, p. 441, my bold)
According to Couchoud, the names of evil people were written in the Book of Life before the foundation of the world as effect of the sacrifice of the Lamb.
If the Book is “of the Lamb sacrificed” (genitive possessive), then the existence of the Book assumes already the existence of a Lamb sacrificed, hence these names were written in that Book AFTER the death of Jesus.
Couchoud — Carrier: 2 - 1 ?
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.
Giuseppe wrote: ↑Wed Jul 08, 2020 8:01 am
Please don't be idiot. See precisely:
What is in evidence:
A celestial crucifixion in outer space
A celestial crucifixion that is a cosmic separation
A cosmic separation alluded and behind the separationist Christology of the first gospel, final episode
I hope you realize that by saying "crucifixion in outer space", you are insinuating a historical scenario. Outer space is still a real, tangible place.
There is no evidence for a celestial crucifixion.
What is not still in evidence:
Absence in Paul of a separation idea connected with the celestial crucifixion
There is no evidence for a celestial crucifixion, neither in Paul or any Gnostic text.
Last edited by Joseph D. L. on Wed Jul 08, 2020 9:44 am, edited 1 time in total.
When is the sacrifice of the Lamb supposed to have taken place? A single text gives the answer: the passage where the visionary damns the idolators “whose names are not written in the book of the Lamb sacrificed from the foundation of the world” (xiii. 18). M. Loisy introduces a comma after “sacrificed,” thereby making the text to mean “whose names are not written, since the foundation of the world, in the book of the sacrificed Lamb.” The comma is not in the text and nothing compels us to place it there. It is true enough that the inscription or non-inscription in the Book of Life was determined at “the foundation of the world” (xvii. 8). All the more reason for affirming that the sacrifice of the Lamb, the cause of which inscription in the Book is effect, also took place at “the foundation of the world.” When Jesus is named “the first born of the dead” (i. 5), when he says “I hold the keys of death and Hades” (i. 18), these words are to be taken in their plain sense. He is the first Being who has both known and conquered death. The Lamb sacrificed from the world's foundation is of the same order as the Bull of Mithraism from whose sacrifice, at the beginning of time, issued the fountain of universal life. They are both mystery-images with a sacred repast as the link between them. In both cases a primeval sacrifice is the condition of salvation for the believer.
How can Jesus be sacrificed before sin had entered into the world?
.
1. The following are the transactions which they narrate as having occurred outside of the Pleroma: The enthymesis of that Sophia who dwells above, which they also term Achamoth, being removed from the Pleroma, together with her passion, they relate to have, as a matter of course, become violently excited in those places of darkness and vacuity [to which she had been banished]. For she was excluded from light and the Pleroma, and was without form or figure, like an untimely birth, because she had received nothing [from a male parent]. But the Christ dwelling on high took pity upon her; and having extended himself through and beyond Stauros, he imparted a figure to her, but merely as respected substance, and not so as to convey intelligence. Having effected this, he withdrew his influence, and returned, leaving Achamoth to herself, in order that she, becoming sensible of her suffering as being severed from the Pleroma, might be influenced by the desire of better things, while she possessed in the meantime a kind of odour of immortality left in her by Christ and the Holy Spirit.
By the celestial crucifixion of Christ, the world was created by the mere matter without form.
Where is the evidence? Christ isn't crucified on Stauros. Nor does this have anything to do with Revelation or Hebrews. This doesn't say anything that you are claiming it does.
You're the biggest troll on this site. Kirby only allows you to post because he is obligated to satisfy a special needs quota.
