If you still think that to say that “rulers of this age” (demons) crucified Jesus means that they crucified him in one of the heavens you have missed my recent post, What they used to say about Paul’s “rulers of this age” who crucified the “lord of glory”. More easily forgivable, you have also missed or forgotten a series by Roger Parvus back in 2013, in particular A Simonian Origin for Christianity, Part 7: The Source of Simon/Paul’s Gospel.
In the first of those posts I quote from the Gospel of Nicodemus (also known as the Acts of Pilate) the crystal clear belief that the head demon was responsible for crucifying Jesus on earth.
Roger Parvus presents the argument that Paul believed Jesus descended to earth where he was crucified by the demonic forces. Parvus’s argument draws upon an analysis of the Ascension of Isaiah to support his case.
While it is certainly not impossible that demons who are busy fighting each other in the lower heavens could also crucify a Jesus who had descended from upper heavens for that purpose, I personally favour Roger Parvus’s view. Jesus descended to earth for a short time for the sole purpose of being crucified, descending into hell, being resurrected and returning to his original place in heaven.
Neil Godfrey
Latest posts by Neil Godfrey (see all)
- Is Everything a Question of Probability? - 2024-12-15 03:04:03 GMT+0000
- The Folly of Bayesian Probability in “Doing History” - 2024-12-13 05:51:46 GMT+0000
- Jesus Mythicism and Historical Knowledge, Part 4: Did Jesus Exist? - 2024-11-27 08:20:47 GMT+0000
If you enjoyed this post, please consider donating to Vridar. Thanks!
“I personally favour Roger Parvus’s view. Jesus descended to earth for a short time for the sole purpose of being crucified, descending into hell, being resurrected and returning to his original place in heaven.”
Neil, I have not read quite everything you have posted on this subject, nor many of the books and articles on which you have based your analysis. This does seem, though, like a very plausible explanation for what we find in the extant Pauline corpus. (We can, for this discussion, table the debate over how much of the extant corpus represents the thinking of the historical Paul, whoever that was.)
We still do not find, in the Pauline writings, a charismatic Galilean preacher who gathered some disciples, some of whom founded, after his execution, the religious movement that eventually produced the canonical gospels. I get it that you’re not saying we do, but I thought it worth mentioning in this context. Thus, even if Parvus is correct, Paul’s writings provide little if any support for the historicist case.
Correct. Roger does not accept that Paul had any notion of Jesus wandering around as a preacher and healer and exorcist etc prior to his crucifixion. One imagines his appearance on earth for only a very short time, little more than the minimum required to be crucified.
Demons crucified Jesus on earth doesn’t mean that the ”the Jews” crucified Jesus.
Only who was interested to emphasize the identity of Jesus with the Jewish Messiah – in times when someone was questioning that identity (i.e., in the second century) – could introduce ”the Jews” as killers of Jesus (even if assuming still the demons behind the Jews). That is the entire point of the strange detail that only a Judas could recognize Jesus in the middle of the night, despite of Jesus being widely knwon by all the people: Jesus is of the Jews.
Surely the Jew Paul had not interest to emphasize the Jewish identity of the Son, since no people were questioning it during his lifetime (so no need of pointing out the obvious). So for Paul only the demons crucified directly Jesus. No Jews and not Romans. Only demons.
4 or 5 reasons why only demons could have crucified Jesus in the original myth (even if the crucifixion happened on the earth).