The rulers of "this age"... what is the age?

[rgprice]

6 Yet among the mature we do speak wisdom, though it is not a wisdom of this age or of the rulers of this age, who are doomed to perish. 7 But we speak God’s wisdom, secret and hidden, which God decreed before the ages for our glory. 8 None of the rulers of this age understood this; for if they had, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory. 9 But, as it is written,

“What no eye has seen, nor ear heard,
nor the human heart conceived,
what God has prepared for those who love him”—

10 these things God has revealed to us through the Spirit; for the Spirit searches everything, even the depths of God.

This passage presents interesting challenges. The wisdom Paul speaks is not of this age, it is from older ages. The wisdom has been hidden and secret.

But, we are told that the Lord was apparently crucified by the rulers of this age.

The key question here is, how does Paul define the ages? When did the current age start? The fact that Paul (and many others) believed that the current age was coming to an end indicates that the current age is quite old. But how old?

1 Cor 10:
9 We must not put Christ to the test, as some of them did, and were destroyed by serpents. 10 And do not complain as some of them did, and were destroyed by the destroyer. 11 These things happened to them to serve as an example, and they were written down to instruct us, on whom the ends of the ages have come.

This event must be something that happened long ago. It was "written down to instruct us." This is talking about something that happened during the time of Moses though. Does this mean literally that Christ was there at this time, or something else?

1 Cor 10: 1 I do not want you to be unaware, brothers and sisters, that our ancestors were all under the cloud, and all passed through the sea, 2 and all were baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea, 3 and all ate the same spiritual food, 4 and all drank the same spiritual drink. For they drank from the spiritual rock that followed them, and the rock was Christ. 5 Nevertheless, God was not pleased with most of them, and they were struck down in the wilderness.

Numbers 21:
4 From Mount Hor they set out by the way to the Red Sea, to go around the land of Edom; but the people became impatient on the way. 5 The people spoke against God and against Moses, “Why have you brought us up out of Egypt to die in the wilderness? For there is no food and no water, and we detest this miserable food.” 6 Then the Lord sent poisonous serpents among the people, and they bit the people, so that many Israelites died. 7 The people came to Moses and said, “We have sinned by speaking against the Lord and against you; pray to the Lord to take away the serpents from us.” So Moses prayed for the people. 8 And the Lord said to Moses, “Make a poisonous serpent, and set it on a pole; and everyone who is bitten shall look at it and live.” 9 So Moses made a serpent of bronze, and put it upon a pole; and whenever a serpent bit someone, that person would look at the serpent of bronze and live.

Was the time of Moses a part of the current age according to Paul's reckoning? Under some Roman schemes, the current age began after the Trojan War. However, even if Paul were using such a scheme, the time of Moses wouldn't fall in the current age, as the time of Moses was set prior to the Trojan War.

According to the Etruscans, there was a cycle of ages, somewhere between 8 and 10, and at the end of the cycle the whole world would be destroyed. This seems to be what Paul is referring to in 1 Cor 10. I'm not sure exactly how the Etruscan scheme of ages worked though or if the Jewish calendar of ages aligned with it in any way.

[Giuseppe]

Note that the genitive 'of this aeon' is genitive objective: the rulers rule what? This age.

Hence they can't be the Romans, since the Romans would be at most of "this age" (a temporal reference), but surely not the rulers who rule this age.

Only demonic archontes can rule an entire aeon.

This was recognized also by mythicist Wells:

Perhaps Doherty's strongest point is Paul's assertion (1 Cor.2:8) that Jesus was crucified by supernatural forces (the archontes). I take this to mean that they prompted the action of human agents: but I must admit that the text ascribes the deed to the archontes themselves.

(my bold)
https://infidels.org/library/modern/g_a ... liest.html

[Bernard Muller]

what is the age?
1Co 3:18 Let no one deceive himself. If any one among you thinks that he is wise in this age/world, let him become a fool that he may become wise.
The age/world is an undefined time/place which includes the one of Paul's preaching.

The rulers of this age?
Rulers of this age/world, an undefined time/place which includes the one of Paul's preaching (which certainly comprised the Romans and their empire).

Cordially, Bernard

[rgprice]

Right but its important to understand whether Paul thinks that the Jewish scriptures were produced in his age. Do any of the stories of the Jewish scripture stake place in his age? Was Adam a part of his age? I assume not. Was Noah? I assume not. Was Abraham? Not sure. Was Moses? Not sure. Was Joshua? Was David? Was Elijah? Was Isaiah? Was Daniel?

Knowing when "this age" begins according to Paul can help figure out what figures could be the basis for Paul's Jesus. Paul's Jesus, it would seem, has to be someone who was killed during Paul's age. Paul talks about Christ and Moses, so he clearly talks about Christ existing during the time of Moses, but it's unclear if Paul conceived of Jesus being of the form of flesh during that time.

[Ben C. Smith]

Right but its important to understand whether Paul thinks that the Jewish scriptures were produced in his age. Do any of the stories of the Jewish scripture stake place in his age? Was Adam a part of his age? I assume not. Was Noah? I assume not. Was Abraham? Not sure. Was Moses? Not sure. Was Joshua? Was David? Was Elijah? Was Isaiah? Was Daniel?

Knowing when "this age" begins according to Paul can help figure out what figures could be the basis for Paul's Jesus. Paul's Jesus, it would seem, has to be someone who was killed during Paul's age. Paul talks about Christ and Moses, so he clearly talks about Christ existing during the time of Moses, but it's unclear if Paul conceived of Jesus being of the form of flesh during that time.

Jewish exegetes knew of only two ages: the Present Age and the Age to Come; the Messianic Era or Days of the Messiah sort of sat astride these two ages as a transition between them. Constructions such as "ages past" or "ages to come" are demonstrable hyperbole:

Mishnah, Berakhoth 9.5: 5 It is obligatory for one to bless for the evil in the same manner as for the good, as it says, “And you will love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your means” (= Deuteronomy 6.5). “With all your heart [בכל לבבך, instead of בכל לבך]” means with your two impulses, the evil impulse as well as the good impulse. “With all your soul” means even though he takes your soul. “With all your means [מְאֹדֶךָ],” that is, with all your money [מָמוֹנֶךָ]. Another explanation of “with all your might [מְאֹדֶךָ]” is with whatever measure [מִדָּה] He measures [מוֹדֵד] out to you, still you must thank Him very, very much. One should avoid showing disrespect towards the direction of the eastern gate because it is in a direct line with the Holy of Holies. A man should not enter the Temple Mount with his staff or while wearing his shoes or with his money belt or with dusty feet, nor should he make it a shortcut, and no spitting. At first, at the conclusion of the benedictions said in the Temple, they used to say “from the age [מִן הָעוֹלָם].” When the heretics [הַמִּינִין, the minim] perverted their ways and asserted that there was only one age, it was ordained that it should be “from the age to the age [מִן הָעוֹלָם וְעַד הָעוֹלָם].” It was also ordained that people should greet each other in the Name, as it says, “And behold, Boaz came from Bethlehem and said unto the reapers, ‘The Lord be with you,’ and they answered him, ‘The Lord bless you’ (= Ruth 2.4),” and it also says, “The Lord is with you, mighty man of valor” (= Judges 6.12), and it also states, “And despise not your mother when she is old” (= Proverbs 23.22), and it also says that “it is time to act for the Lord; they have made void Your Torah” (= Psalm 119.126). Rabbi Nathan says, “They have made void Your Torah because it is time to work for the Lord.”

[Bernard Muller]

to rgprice,

so he clearly talks about Christ existing during the time of Moses

No wonder, Christ was pre-existent for Paul. And Paul did not use "Jesus" in 1 Co 10:4. And in this verse, Christ is a rock providing water, not someone in human flesh.

Cordially, Bernard

[gryan]

1 Cor 10:
9 We must not put Christ to the test, as some of them did, and were destroyed by serpents. 10 And do not complain as some of them did, and were destroyed by the destroyer. 11 These things happened to them to serve as an example, and they were written down to instruct us, on whom the ends of the ages have come.

This event must be something that happened long ago. It was "written down to instruct us." This is talking about something that happened during the time of Moses though. Does this mean literally that Christ was there at this time, or something else?

1 Cor 10... "they drank from the spiritual rock that followed them, and the rock was Christ",

Bolding of text, mine.

RE: 1 Cor 10:9 "We must not put Christ [vs. the Lord] to the test". Textual critics, including Bart Ehrman ("Orthodox Corruption") argue persuasively IMHO that the more ancient reading is "The Lord" and this reading connects with "God who is not pleased" in vs. 5. The variant reading "Christ" assumes a connection with "the rock was Christ" in vs 4. "Christ" and is less well attested. Scribes who replaced "the Lord" with "Christ" may have been anti-adoptionistic.

RE: 1 Cor 10... they drank from the spiritual rock that followed them, and the rock was Christ (Alt. Tr. "the Anointed", David Bentley Hart). \What did Paul's typological re-reading of the story of the wilderness generation imply about his understanding of "Jesus Christ" (ie, in the mainstream reading, Jesus the blood brother of James)? I am tone deaf when it comes to typology and the standard kinds of interpretations leave me perplexed. eg, the Pulpit Commentary https://biblehub.com/commentaries/pulpi ... ans/10.htm

The author of Hebrews Ch. 4 (where Joshua is referenced at 4:8) may have been influenced by reading 1 Cor. 10 together Gal. 4 with its warning against turning back to the "weak and poor stoichia". The "οἱ πρότερον εὐαγγελισθέντες" ("formerly heard the good news") of Heb. 4:6 seems to echo the "εὐηγγελισάμην ὑμῖν τὸ πρότερον" ("I preached the good news to you formerly") of Gal. 4:13.

[DCHindley]

Since the basic meaning of Aiōn is a "defined period of time," then I would not go too far from that to explain what the author meant by it.

Based on my "has-to-be-wrong and highly speculative"™ segregation of 1 Cor 2:1-17,* the Aeon talk is introduced in the Christ commentary that I think was tacked onto letters of Paul that had nothing to to with Jesus or Christology.

The aim of this commentary is to hijack Paul for use by the promoters of the new revised and much much much better Christ cult that developed in the gentile convert wing of the original Jesus movement.

The commentator and his community had rationalized that Jesus' untimely death was not just a national messiah figure resurrected, but a divine redeemer figure called "Christ" who had has come down to earth in the person of Jesus on a rescue mission of the elect.

For him (or her), the revelation of the divine redeemer (Jesus Christ) represented a clear break from the way things had previously operated (sacrifices & temple cultus, with all the problems that come from human errors) and that the introduction of Jesus as divine redeemer represented the dawn of a new age.

The term "Hijack" is perhaps a bit inflammatory, but I do believe that the commentator's community had something in common with Paul's movement. IMHO, I do not believe that this commonality had anything to do with Jesus, but rather something to do with justification by faith in the promises God made to Abraham.

They were both forward looking movements, hoping for a better age where everyone, not just Judeans, could experience the blessings of God's promise to Abraham. The Jesus movement (as led by Jesus) and Paul's communities had both latched onto the faith of Abraham. However, the new Christ movement changed the faith to be that Jesus had symbolically overthrown the law.

DCH

*

2:1 When I came to you, brethren, I did not come proclaiming to you the *mystery* of God in lofty words or wisdom.

2:2a For I decided to know nothing among you [[2:2b]] 2:3 And I was with you in weakness and in much fear and trembling; 2:4 and my speech and my message were not in *persuasive words of wisdom*, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power, [[2:5-7a]] 2:7b which God decreed before the ages for our glorification. [[2:8]] 2:9 But, as it is written, "What no eye has seen, nor ear heard," nor the heart of man conceived, what God has prepared for those who love him, (Isa 64:4)

Quote: 2:9 (LXA Isa 64:4) From of old we have not heard, neither have our eyes seen a God beside thee, and thy works which thou wilt perform to them that wait for mercy.

2:10 *but* God has revealed to us through the Spirit. For the Spirit searches everything, even the depths of God. 2:11 For what person knows a man's thoughts except the spirit of the man which is in him? So also no one comprehends the thoughts of God except the Spirit of God.

2:12 Now we have received not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit which is from God, that we might understand the gifts bestowed on us by God. 2:13 And we impart this in words not taught by human wisdom but taught by the Spirit, interpreting spiritual truths to those who possess the Spirit.

2:14 The unspiritual man does not receive the gifts of the Spirit of God, for they are folly to him, and he is not able to understand them because they are spiritually discerned.

2:15 The spiritual man judges *all things*, but is himself to be judged by no one. 2:16a "For who has known the mind of the LORD so as to instruct him?" (Isa 40:13) [[2:16b …]]

Quote: 2:16a) (LXA Isa 40:13) Who has known the mind of the Lord? and who has been his counsellor, to instruct him?

The commentary I believe was overlaid here is this:

[[2:2b except Jesus Christ and him crucified]].

[[2:5 that your faith might not rest in the wisdom of men but in the power of God. 2:6 Yet among the mature we do impart wisdom, although it is not a wisdom of this age or of the rulers of this age, who are doomed to pass away. 2:7a But we impart a secret and hidden wisdom of God,]]

[[2:8 None of the rulers of this age understood this; for if they had, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory.]]

[[2:16b But we have the mind of Christ.]]

I think the commentator understood 2:9 to be an allusion to LXA Isa 52:15:

Thus shall many nations wonder at him; and kings shall keep their mouths shut: for they to whom no report was brought concerning him, shall see; and they who have not heard, shall consider.

[davidmartin]

Surely in Jewish thinking the fall would represent the start of the current aeon. that thought would work for any system that had a primordial paradise
then Christ becomes the 'new Adam prototype'. I doubt Paul invented the idea of archontic rulers and aeon terminology. But at the same time early texts like Thomas and the proto-gnostic Eugnostos the Blessed completely omit any talk of these, so does the Odes - that would be staples of the later gnostic systems, yet here Paul is using their language
The only way I can solve this puzzle is to assume some of the 'super apostles' were trending in that direction and Paul adopts their language here to woo his audience a bit (when in Rome) and make it work for him. But like i said i'm not sure if this wasn't a fairly new direction in his time that wasn't there before
Once a division is made between spirit and matter the whole archon/aeon system goes into high gear. Paul never quite goes there like the gnostics did but you can see how they might have used his words (well, they did - see the Hypostasis of the Archons)
But again, the earlier texts adopt a matter friendly approach more typical of Judaism (Thomas i would argue, Odes for sure, the gospel Jesus mostly)
All this makes it feel the Jewish base of the movement was already further distant even in Paul's time which is hard to make sense of but a lot can happen in even 10 years, the assumed chronology could still support that i believe