Why Wells had read P.-L. Couchoud better than Doherty and Carrier

[Giuseppe]

The intellectual honesty of G.A. Wells is a continue source of wonder for me...

When Wells wrote:

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.

https://infidels.org/library/modern/g_a ... liest.html

...he proved to be based implicitly on the same reply made by Paul-Louis Couchoud against Alfred Loisy:

La crucifixion est celle d'un être surnaturel exécutée par des êtres surnaturels. Coup également décisif contre l'historicité. M. Loisy objecte que, dans la pensée de Paul, les Princes de cet Age ont pu agir par des intermédiaires humains. Supposition qui n'a aucun appui dans le texte. Si, dans l'Évangile de Judas, Satan agit par Judas, c'est que toute une représentation nouvelle s'est substituée à celle de Paul. Le rôle de Satan subsiste comme un témoin du thème original. Dans l'Ascension d'Isaïe le thème original a été conservé: ce sont bien Satan et les autres Princes qui crucifient directement Jésus.

Jésus dieu ou homme ?
In la Nrf , Paris 1939, my bold


Differently from Richard Carrier (and here is his greatness), Couchoud conceded that Ascension of Isaiah had a Jesus on the earth, only he described the obvious thing: only the demons crucified Jesus in the Ascension of Isaiah.

The crucifixion by hand of only demons is necessarily, Couchoud argues (and Wells recognizes), the survival of an older myth, where the location is: outer space.

Accordingly, what is necessary, existed.

Hence, as the logic goes, Ascension of Isaiah is evidence of a crucificion in outer space even if Ascension of Isaiah has the demons crucifying Jesus on the earth.

• If you are killed by Russian soldiers, then probably you are killed in Ucraina.

• If Jesus was killed by only demons, then probably he was killed in outer space.

[GakuseiDon]

• If you are killed by Russian soldiers, then probably you are killed in Ucraina.

• If Jesus was killed by only demons, then probably he was killed in outer space.

Actually, for the logic to match, wouldn't the logic be: if you are killed by Russian soldiers, then you are probably killed in Russia?

The thing is, demons were active on earth. Paul writes about being hampered by Satan; the AoI has Beliar come to earth in the form of Nero to kill one of the apostles; Origen writes about spiritual forces in charge of Tyre and other places. If the story has Jesus as a man killed by demons, then the story is probably set on earth.

[Giuseppe]

If the story has Jesus as a man killed by demons, then the story is probably set on earth.

Come on, GDon. It is an anomaly, having Jesus killed only by demons in Ascension of Isaiah, despite of (or at contrary precisely in virtue of) the obvious earthly context found in it.

The anomaly is easily removed/explained if we have a previous story where the location (outer space) fits with the killers (only demons). Hence, the probability is concrete, that a such previous story is just 1 Corinthians 2:6-8.

That is precisely the point made by Couchoud and well recognized by Wells.

Intellectual honesty requires admitting the obvious: in the Ascension of Isaiah the demons crucify directly Jesus.

[neilgodfrey]

Intellectual honesty requires admitting the obvious: in the Ascension of Isaiah the demons crucify directly Jesus.

Possible, but I think the odds against are mounting. While French and Italian scholars in recent decades have engaged with English language scholarship, I have not seen as much evidence yet of English language publications engaging with the works of Norelli, Pesce, Bettiolo and others. (If I have missed it please give me details.)

It does appear that there really is a strong case to be made for that "little gospel" (11:2-22) in which the crucifixion is described as being part of the original text. See Excursis X in Norelli, Enrico. Ascensio Isaiae: Commentarius. Turnhout: Brepols, 1995. I hope to be posting more details later this year on the blog but I think you have access to Italian works so can follow it up before then.

[GakuseiDon]

Intellectual honesty requires admitting the obvious: in the Ascension of Isaiah the demons crucify directly Jesus.

There is no reference to demons directly killing the Beloved (Jesus) in the AoI. The key passage is this:

9.13. Nevertheless they see and know whose will be thrones, and whose the crowns when He has descended and been made in your form, [and they will think that He is flesh and is a man.]
14 And the god of that world will stretch forth his hand against the Son, and they will crucify Him on a tree, and will slay Him not knowing who He is.

Satan "stretching forth his hand" implies action at a distance, i.e. getting others to act. So who is the "they" in 9.14? From the context of 9.13, the crucifixion appears to happen after the Beloved has descended and been made in the form of a man (the part in brackets not appearing in the Slavonic/Latin2 versions). Where was Jesus made into a man? The only places are on earth or under it (which Ben C Smith has argued as a possibility), since the form of the Beloved is explicitly given in the other locations and he is NOT portrayed as a man.

Anyway, this is an old topic, discussed many times. I'll let you have the last word!

[neilgodfrey]

Satan "stretching forth his hand" implies action at a distance, i.e. getting others to act.

That was the translation of the text as amended by Dillmann and followed by Charles and Tisserant.

But the more recent scholarly edition (translations and commentary) of Bettiolo, Norelli at al, shows that it is more probable that the text should read "And the god of that world shall come forth by the hand of his son".

But even so, the idiom "stretch forth his hand" does not necessarily suggest action at a distance at all.

[Giuseppe]

It does appear that there really is a strong case to be made for that "little gospel" (11:2-22) in which the crucifixion is described as being part of the original text.

I have only the Norelli's translation in Italian:

e il dio di quel mondo si farà avanti per mano di suo figlio, e metteranno le loro mani su di lui e lo crocifiggeranno sul legno non sapendo chi è

...where it is not at all sure, pace GDon, that the unnamed authors of the crucifixion are humans.

Even in the other reference to crucifixion:

E dopo ciò lo straniero lo invidiava e incitava i suoi figli di Israele contro di lui, non sapendo essi chi era; e lo consegnavano al re, e lo crocifiggevano e lo facevano scendere presso l’angelo che è nello She’ol.

...it is not at all sure, pace GDon, that the "king" is a human being, despite of the fact that "the sons of Israel" are clearly human beings.

Hence, Couchoud's claim that the demons kill directly Jesus yet stands.

[Giuseppe]

Neil, I would be curious about if Norelli identifies the "son" of "the prince of that world", by the hand of which (=of the son) Jesus is put to death, with the same unnamed "king" by the hand of which (=the "king") the "sons of Israel" crucify Jesus.

I doubt that Norelli, having historicist lens, can arrive to similar suggestions, which would make even more evident the direct action of the demons against Jesus.

But but I remember that Paul talked about a distinction between Satan and another demon... wasn't Irish75 on this forum to start a thread about that topic?

[Sinouhe]

Neil, I would be curious about if Norelli identifies the "son" of "the prince of that world", by the hand of which (=of the son) Jesus is put to death, with the same unnamed "king" by the hand of which (=the "king") the "sons of Israel" crucify Jesus.

I doubt that Norelli, having historicist lens, can arrive to similar suggestions, which would make even more evident the direct action of the demons against Jesus.

But but I remember that Paul talked about a distinction between Satan and another demon... wasn't Irish75 on this forum to start a thread about that topic?

In this book, Norelli identify the prince of this world with Herod :

013EEF58-0FFF-4837-8B26-1242EDF8F0CF.jpeg (941.23 KiB) Viewed 1379 times

7D5FA605-0771-4400-8FAF-A3209867E8AA.jpeg (276.94 KiB) Viewed 1379 times

[Giuseppe]

Neil, I would be curious about if Norelli identifies the "son" of "the prince of that world", by the hand of which (=of the son) Jesus is put to death, with the same unnamed "king" by the hand of which (=the "king") the "sons of Israel" crucify Jesus.

I doubt that Norelli, having historicist lens, can arrive to similar suggestions, which would make even more evident the direct action of the demons against Jesus.

But but I remember that Paul talked about a distinction between Satan and another demon... wasn't Irish75 on this forum to start a thread about that topic?

In this book, Norelli identify the prince of this world with Herod :

013EEF58-0FFF-4837-8B26-1242EDF8F0CF.jpeg
7D5FA605-0771-4400-8FAF-A3209867E8AA.jpeg

"probably Herod"!!!
This is what happens when a scholar has lens that are Gospel-coloured!

Commenting the same unnamed "king", Mythicist Marc Stephane wrote at contrary: "probably a planetary archon".