Universal Development Per Paul in Pictograms

[Lucian]

Sorry, I am not going down the rabbit hole with you and spend the next two pages discussing where a comma goes in a single verse or whatever minute technical point you are focused on.

It's really basic grammar, that doesn't have anything to do with commas or minute technical points.

Apparently, you think the text and your opinion is infallible and no other information going on in the historical development of Christianity, bears any weight on Paul’s original meaning. I would think somebody with a doctorate would know otherwise.

But I don't think these things.

What matters to me is whether Paul saw a reassembled corpse (an impossibility and a contradiction to his explicit statement that flesh and blood do NOT inherit the kingdom of God; 1 cor 15:50) or whether he perceived the lifeless body of cosmic Christ as matter and flesh (which is very consistent with everything else he writes and gnostic Christian tenets)?

Given matter came from a single thing made of extremely ordered energy or light, then the theory of the dying cosmic Christ producing life in us, as Paul claims, is not only plausible but supported by science. What is less important is whether placement of a comma or other minute technical point is infallible or not. I am not going to go there at this time, most especially with you.

If you don't consider the correct translation of 1 Corinthians 15:8 to be important, that's a matter for you. It's strange, though, that you were nevertheless earlier expatiating on the alleged mistranslations of this verse by contemporary Bible translations.

As a reminder of where we got to, your proposed translation was grammatically impossible, and you weren't much interested in learning why. You then decided that the text was anyway corrupt ('a scribe interpolated a single verb tense in a single word when copying the text'), though you declined to do anything more than declare it was.

 

[docphin5]

It's really basic grammar, that doesn't have anything to do with commas or minute technical points. Given that you aren't interested in hearing why your translation is grammatically impossible, I continue to question whether you 'consider any information'.

But I don't think these things.

If you don't consider the correct translation of 1 Corinthians 15:8 to be important, that's a matter for you.

As a reminder of where we got to, your proposed translation was grammatically impossible, and you weren't much interested in learning why. You then decided that the text was anyway corrupt ('a scribe interpolated a single verb tense in a single word when copying the text'), though you declined to do anything more than declare it was.

Big picture,…biiiiggggg picture! i know that the knot on the tree is extremely fascinating to you but there is a whole forest that I need to take in and demonstrate to the general informal reader. If I wanted the type of discussion you are proposing it would not be here. It would be in a discussion group at the annual convention for the Association of Greek Bible Translators.

If I may digress, I was just reading about the initiation rites for gnostic Christians in the second century C.E. Included a core knowledge of Christ regarding

“the origins of soul and matter from the single spiritual first cause.”
(Thomassen, The Spiritual Seed, the church of valentinius, pg 387).

I repeat, all gnostic Christians were taught a core Christian knowledge about the source of soul and matter from a single first cause. What else is that single first cause but the dying cosmic Christ producing life in us, —aka, the lifeless birth of our world or “abortion” from heaven, perceived by Paul, et al?

Big picture….biiiggggg picture.

 

[Lucian]

Big picture,…biiiiggggg picture! i know that the knot on the tree is extremely fascinating to you but there is a whole forest that I need to take in and demonstrate to the general informal reader. If I wanted the type of discussion you are proposing it would not be here. It would be in a discussion group at the annual convention for the Association of Greek Bible Translators.

If I may digress, I was just reading about the initiation rites for gnostic Christians in the second century C.E. Included a core knowledge of Christ regarding

“the origins of soul and matter from the single spiritual first cause.”
(Thomassen, The Spiritual Seed, the church of valentinius, pg 387).

I repeat, all gnostic Christians were taught a core Christian knowledge about the source of soul and matter from a single first cause. What else is that single first cause but the dying cosmic Christ producing life in us, —aka, the lifeless birth of our world or “abortion” from heaven, perceived by Paul, et al?

Big picture….biiiggggg picture.

This doesn't advance the discussion, though it's worth noting that you raised the issue you now disparage as 'the knot on the tree'.

 

[docphin5]

This doesn't advance the discussion, though it's worth noting that you raised the issue you now disparage as 'the knot on the tree'.

It was not meant to disparage “the knot on the tree” but to put your narrow interest in perspective to the general interest of the OP. My profession was in biomedical research where I reviewed thousands of studies many of which could be characterized as investigating a knot on a tree. Important, but only a small piece of the puzzle. I appreciate those people that find the knots interesting enough to study them because we learn about the tree but my personal interest at the moment is preserving the forest.

 

[Lucian]

It was not meant to disparage “the knot on the tree” but to put your narrow interest in perspective to the general interest of the OP. My profession was in biomedical research where I reviewed thousands of studies many of which could be characterized as investigating a knot on a tree. Important, but only a small piece of the puzzle. I appreciate those people that find the knots interesting enough to study them because we learn about the tree but my personal interest at the moment is preserving the forest.

As I've said, if you now regard the correct translation of the verse (an issue you raised) to be unimportant, a 'narrow interest', or of no interest to you, that's a matter for you.

However, as a reminder, your proposed translation was grammatically impossible, and you weren't much interested in learning why. You then decided that the text was anyway corrupt ('a scribe interpolated a single verb tense in a single word when copying the text'), though you declined to do anything more than declare it was.

 

[docphin5]

Isaiah 14:19 refers to Lucifer, the falling star from heaven (v. 12), as a “corpse”.
Paul arguably refers to the dying “body of Christ” as an “abortion” in 1 cor 15:8.

From a general perspective there is no difference between a “corpse” and an aborted fetus. They are both corpses. The only difference is that abortions are narrowly defined as a lifeless births expelled from a womb.

The interesting thing is that if Paul and Isaiah perceive heaven as the “womb” for our material world expelled from heaven as a lifeless matter, then, both Paul and Isaiah have the same perception of our world, for they perceive the cause of all souls and matter in our universe from a single spiritual source.

The logical conclusion is a Judeo-Christian perception of an association between 1) the “falling star”, aka, Lucifer, 2) the “body of Christ”, and 3) matter or flesh. But before you grab the pitchforks let me clearly state that Jesus, Yeshua, or Joshua, is distinct from his “body”, for they are two parts or natures of one thing, one part spirit, and one part material, just as our body and our spirit are two parts of one thing (the soul is arguably a third part). For example, the “Spirit of Jesus” (Philippians 1:19) of Paul’s epistles would be distinct from his “body”, —the “spirit of Jesus” arising as a moral consciousness manifesting virtues (Gal 5:22) in opposition to and regulating the inordinate desires found in the “body.”

In the esoteric Gospel stories, it was the “body” of Jesus which died for sin, —his body ONLY, for his Spirit separated from the “body” to return to his Father in heaven.

“Then Jesus, calling out with a loud voice, said, “Father, into your hands I commit my spirit!” (Luke 23:46)

Therefore, Paul and Isaiah were arguably describing the same idea, that is, all souls and lifeless matter are caused by the death and expulsion from heaven of a single thing preexisting in a pristine or heavenly state.

In Christianity, it is the “body of Christ” that died for sin. In Judaism, it was Lucifer’s attempt to rule heaven for which he was expelled. And today, what do we experience? The bodies inordinate desires trying to rule over the moral consciousness and our moral intellect trying to regulate the passions and inordinate desires of body. The point being that the heavenly war continues in us. Theoretically, the heavenly battle moved to earth and we must choose a side. Fortunately, Paul says that the Most High God has decided in favor of the virtuous led by the spirit of Jesus to inherit the next world.

 

[docphin5]

As I've said, if you now regard the correct translation of the verse (an issue you raised) to be unimportant, a 'narrow interest', or of no interest to you, that's a matter for you.

However, as a reminder, your proposed translation was grammatically impossible, and you weren't much interested in learning why. You then decided that the text was anyway corrupt ('a scribe interpolated a single verb tense in a single word when copying the text'), though you declined to do anything more than declare it was.

Please do not try to speak for me or my intentions. My words speak for me. If it makes you feel better, your opinion has been noted. But as a general rule I do not consider an unsolicited anonymous opinion in an informal, online discussion as authoritative. Moreover, you are harping on a tiny detail as if your reputation depends upon its outcome. Whereas, I am focused on the bigger picture. Can we move on now?

 

[Lucian]

Please do not try to speak for me or my intentions. My words speak for me.

It's your words that I'm replying to.

If it makes you feel better, your opinion has been noted.

I wasn't aware that I was needing to feel better. My correction of your proposed translation is hardly an 'opinion'.

But as a general rule I do not consider an unsolicited anonymous opinion in an informal, online discussion as authoritative.

We've covered this already: if you don't consider successful completion of doctoral study in a relevant field to confer authority, that's odd, but your prerogative.

Moreover, you are harping on a tiny detail... Whereas, I am focused on the bigger picture... Can we move on now?

We've covered this already: if you now regard the correct translation of the verse (an issue you raised) to be unimportant, a 'narrow interest', or of no interest to you, [or a 'tiny detail'], that's a matter for you. However, as a reminder, your proposed translation was grammatically impossible, and you weren't much interested in learning why. You then decided that the text was anyway corrupt ('a scribe interpolated a single verb tense in a single word when copying the text'), though you declined to do anything more than declare it was.

I don't understand your question. You're free to come and go here as you please.

 

[Lucian]

Paul arguably refers to the dying “body of Christ” as an “abortion” in 1 cor 15:8.

But this isn't arguable, as I've said: such a reading is grammatically impossible. I remain open to explaining the very basic reason why.

And weren't you just saying you didn't much care about this issue?

 

[docphin5]

But this isn't arguable, as I've said: such a reading is grammatically impossible. I remain open to explaining the very basic reason why.

And weren't you just saying you didn't much care about this issue?

I do not believe the letter to the corinthians handed down to us is 100% reliable, therefore I look for alternative explanations for difficult passages, in this case, whether the “abortion” that Paul perceived could have been meant for the dying Christ. Yes, it could have an important connection to the dying cosmic body of Christ given everything else I found not even mentioned yet in this OP and don’t plan to unless it becomes relevant to a discussion.

Why do I believe that Paul’s letter handed down to us is not 100% reliable?
Because of articles like the one I will reference below.

It is a technical explanation why Paul’s letter handed down to us has been edited by scribes. It is not recommended for the general reader because it is too technical but important so I don’t mind slogging through it on my own time in my own investigation. But nothing I would discuss with the general audience here...in detail.

My audience here is the average secular person seeking to understand why Christian doctrines have no basis in reality. I make the argument, (hence, the meaning when I write, “arguably (this)“ or “arguably (that)”) that they do have a basis in reality if Paul’s intended original meaning is understood as the alternative demonstrated by me. If you don’t understand this approach to making an argument then you are pretty dense for someone holding a doctorate in whatever you claim to have.

Is 1 Corinthians 14:34-35 Authentic? No.

Is 1 Corinthians 14:34-35 Authentic? No.

 

[Lucian]

I do not believe the letter to the corinthians handed down to us is 100% reliable, therefore I look for alternative explanations for difficult passages, in this case, whether the “abortion” that Paul perceived could have been meant for the dying Christ. Yes, it could have an important connection to the dying cosmic body of Christ given everything else I found not even mentioned yet in this OP and don’t plan to unless it becomes relevant to a discussion.

Why do I believe that Paul’s letter handed down to us is not 100% reliable?
Because of articles like the one I will reference below.

It is a technical explanation why Paul’s letter handed down to us has been edited by scribes. It is not recommended for the general reader because it is too technical but important so I don’t mind slogging through it on my own time in my own investigation. But nothing I would discuss with the general audience here...in detail.

My audience here is the average secular person seeking to understand why Christian doctrines have no basis in reality. I make the argument, (hence, the meaning when I write, “arguably (this)“ or “arguably (that)”) that they do have a basis in reality if Paul’s intended original meaning is understood as the alternative demonstrated by me. If you don’t understand this approach to making an argument then you are pretty dense for someone holding a doctorate in whatever you claim to have.

Is 1 Corinthians 14:34-35 Authentic? No.

Is 1 Corinthians 14:34-35 Authentic? No.

We've covered this: So, it seems you're intent on emendation (in other words, changing the Greek text), a possibility I highlighted above. In that case, would you mind telling me what the interpolation is (and perhaps how it happened), and how the Greek text should read? Are you aware of any textual variants that support your case?

Note that insulting me doesn't constitute an answer to these questions, much as making the painfully basic observation that the entire Pauline corpus isn't perfectly preserved doesn't.

 

[docphin5]

<snip>

Therefore, Paul and Isaiah were arguably describing the same idea, that is, all souls and lifeless matter are caused by the death and expulsion from heaven of a single thing preexisting in a pristine or heavenly state. <snip>

The Book of Enoch describes a similar concept that parallels actual world development, that is, something going wrong with the pristine heaven and its fall to earth. For those who do not know, the Book of Enoch was among Dead Sea Scrolls (DSC) written up to 200 BC by a community of Jewish-Christians who called themselves “The Way” just as just first century Christians did. The Book of Enoch is also quoted in the New Testament canon (Jude 1:14).

” …(when) I saw in a vision how the heaven collapsed and was borne off and fell to the earth. And when it fell to the earth I saw how the earth was swallowed up in a great abyss, and mountains were suspended on mountains, and hills sank down on hills, and high trees were rent 5from their stems, and hurled down and sunk in the abyss. And thereupon a word fell into my mouth, 6and I lifted up (my voice) to cry aloud, and said: 'The earth is destroyed.' (Book of Enoch, chapter 83)

For those who do not know how our current world came about, it came from an extremely ordered single thing made of energy or light ?that suffered a separation, was consumed by fire ? , spread out (the Big Bang) like a ”cross” is spread out, and transmuted into material things ?. The whole cosmos appears lifeless except on our tiny lifeboat called planet earth where we grow a moral consciousness or where Wisdom “ARISES” in us??‍?‍?‍?.

It is almost as if the material world was baptized into death and we arose from its lifeless waters. Hmm….

Apparently, there was some intuitive sense of world developmental processes from a single thing among the magi, prophets, mystics, and apostles over 2K years ago before Hubble telescope and modern astrophysics. Could ^^^^^^^ this be Evidence for a divine entity revealing eternal knowledge (Greek: gnosis)) to pious, virtuous souls on earth? Reminding them of their noble heritage and their eternal future with him?

For the Lord GOD does nothing
without revealing his secret
to his servants the prophets. (Amos 3:7)