1st century Jewish sects and Christianity

[votivesoul]

In John 8:44, Jesus said those with whom He was speaking were "of their father the devil" (singular, definite article).

This shows that they all had only one sire: the Dragon, Satan.

[votivesoul]

coksiw,

My thoughts shared so far are a work in progress, hence why, as you quoted, I wrote at the conclusion "It may be, therefore..."

Right now, the ideas I've expressed are only "maybe". I am still working through the data. Thanks for bringing up the many examples above. It gives me more to work on.

Peace and God bless,

Aaron

[votivesoul]

Originally Posted by votivesoul

coksiw,

My thoughts shared so far are a work in progress, hence why, as you quoted, I wrote at the conclusion "It may be, therefore..."

Right now, the ideas I've expressed are only "maybe". I am still working through the data. Thanks for bringing up the many examples above. It gives me more to work on.

Peace and God bless,

Aaron

That being said, an initial thought that covers much of your inquiry relates back to what I wrote about the Dragon being the spiritual sire or father of people opposed to Christ.

In Ephesians 2:2, Paul called "the spirit" (singular, definite article) that works in the children of disobedience is the "prince of the power of the air", which is an alias for the Dragon. Just as the Father's Holy Spirit is the Spirit of Christ, the Father of Lies Unholy Spirit is the Spirit of Antichrist.

Therefore, just as we become children of God the Father through the Spirit of Christ, the children of the Devil (that is, the children of disobedience) become his children through the Spirit of Antichrist.

In this way, then, if a secondary, external entity exists within people who are possessed, the "spirit", as it were, being cast out of people by the finger of God, is the Spirit of Antichrist, something I wrote above:

...when Jesus then exorcizes someone, He casts out of them the pervasive evil present in the second "self" rends that person from the enthralling power of the Dragon by severing the connection to the spirit of antichrist...

This bears out, I think, with what Paul wrote in 2 Thessalonians 2:9 regarding those who perform lying signs and wonders. The only source of power given to these people is from the Dragon, Satan (again, singular, definite article [in Greek, that is] See: https://biblehub.com/interlinear/2_t...onians/2-9.htm and https://biblehub.com/greek/3588.htm).

This would indicate that the world isn't plagued by hundreds of the thousands of fallen angels/demons running amok all over the place, but rather, simply one pervasive spirit, belonging to the Dragon, with which a person can run afoul, whenever they find themselves opposed to Christ.

[coksiw]

Originally Posted by votivesoul

This would indicate that the world isn't plagued by hundreds of the thousands of fallen angels/demons running amok all over the place, but rather, simply one pervasive spirit, belonging to the Dragon, with which a person can run afoul, whenever they find themselves opposed to Christ.

There are other spirits operating with Satan as described here:

[Eph 6:12 NASB] 12 For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the powers, against the world forces of this darkness, against the spiritual [forces] of wickedness in the heavenly [places.]

(notice that Paul contrasts of flesh and blood to spiritual forces clarifies that he is referring to spirits and not human governments)


[Rev 12:7, 9 NASB] 7 And there was war in heaven, Michael and his angels waging war with the dragon. The dragon and his angels waged war, ... 9 And the great dragon was thrown down, the serpent of old who is called the devil and Satan, who deceives the whole world; he was thrown down to the earth, and his angels were thrown down with him.


I did notice that in many other scriptures you see that the work of the darkness is attributed to one singular spirit, indicating Satan, as you mention. But then I see these other verses indicating that there are many of them, and the stories of devils (and even legion of them) being cast out in the Gospels and so on. The only way I can reconcile all those scriptures is by interpreting the single spirit attribution to just a way of speech pointing the head and mastermind of the darkness. Like when some people when speaking thanks the price of the gas going down to the President and its actions over the economy. But we all know it is not the President alone the one doing it.

[Esaias]

Currently studying the religious history of Galatia and Colossae, as it relates to the first century. We often assume that Paul's polemics repeatedly involve Jewish opponents, whether Pharisees, Hellenists, Gnostics, or (as I indicated in several other threads) Enochite-Essene Jewish cults. One thing I've noticed is a general lack of attention to the wider philosophical milieu of the world in which Paul evangelised and ministered.

My studies are now exploring that angle more specifically. I believe it will shed some light on some issues that have been a bit contentious around here lately.

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by Esaias

Currently studying the religious history of Galatia and Colossae, as it relates to the first century. We often assume that Paul's polemics repeatedly involve Jewish opponents, whether Pharisees, Hellenists, Gnostics, or (as I indicated in several other threads) Enochite-Essene Jewish cults. One thing I've noticed is a general lack of attention to the wider philosophical milieu of the world in which Paul evangelised and ministered.

My studies are now exploring that angle more specifically. I believe it will shed some light on some issues that have been a bit contentious around here lately.

As noted in the post immediately above this reponse, the church at Colossae was not dealing with judaizing heretics, gnostic heretics, nor in fact does it appear they were dealing with any Christian heresy at all.

The lack of discussion by Paul concerning the role of the law and the dichotomy between works and faith indicates he was not addressing a Jewish-Christian heretical group and teaching or even a Jewish non-Christian subversive or opposition movement. I had long thought the Colossian error was a proto-gnostic Judaizing influence (like what was afflicting the Galatian churches) but closer examination of the epistles forces me to abandon that assumption. Whenever Paul has to deal with Judaizers, whether mainstream Pharisees or Gnostic syncretists, he always frames the discussion around several key themes: the two covenants, law vs grace, works vs faith, etc. Here, in Colossians, those themes are absent. Instead he focuses on themes more relevant to a Greek audience and situation: philosophy, cosmology, and liturgy, and resurrection.

Many have assumed the Colossian issue involved Judaizing elements, either mainstream or gnostic-speculative, due to the references in ch 2 to a liturgical calendar. But this not only a mere assumption, but an unfounded one, which will be seen here shortly when I break down the actual grammar of ch 2's key sections.

The truth is, I now realise, Paul was dealing with a genuinely pagan philosophical movement, most likely the Cynic movement. All the points he makes are handily exactly what points Cynicism was known for. The Cynic movement was in fact spreading through Asia Minor at the time Paul wrote. Cynics and Christians often interacted because they appealed to the same classes of society for the most part: slaves, the poor, rural peoples. Both groups were visible in Greek society and noticed for their rejection of mainstream social values as well as their strict ethics and lifestyles.

Yet, Cynics were noted opposers of Christianity, and the points they objected to are exactly the points Paul makes in his epistle to the Colossians.

[votivesoul]

Originally Posted by coksiw

There are other spirits operating with Satan as described here:

[Eph 6:12 NASB] 12 For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the powers, against the world forces of this darkness, against the spiritual [forces] of wickedness in the heavenly [places.]

(notice that Paul contrasts of flesh and blood to spiritual forces clarifies that he is referring to spirits and not human governments)

Earlier in Ephesians (2:6) Paul wrote that believers sit with Christ in heavenly places (same Greek term as 6:12, i.e. ἐπουρανίοις). Sitting with Christ in these heavenly realms is a symbol of the Lord's authority; in fact, it is a reference to the Psalm 110:1-2 prophecy.

As believers, we are given full authority, the same as Christ's, over Satan. In Colossians 2:15, Paul wrote that Jesus triumphed over the very things listed in Ephesians 6:12. Since and because we sit with Christ on His Father' throne, to say that the listed items in Ephesians 6:12 are devils of a purely spiritual nature is to say that these evil spirits are all amassed in the very place (the heavenly realms) that we as believers sit with Christ, the very place where Jesus went to after He disarmed and overthrew them.

This seems like a very inconsistent Christology. Either He defeated all these things (if they are devils) and so, in Him, have we, or they are still a force to be reckoned with and we as believers have to continually wrestle against them, even though we are also told they were thoroughly thrashed by the Savior.

So, which is it (if these things are devils)?

[Rev 12:7, 9 NASB] 7 And there was war in heaven, Michael and his angels waging war with the dragon. The dragon and his angels waged war, ... 9 And the great dragon was thrown down, the serpent of old who is called the devil and Satan, who deceives the whole world; he was thrown down to the earth, and his angels were thrown down with him.

The angels here referenced are just as likely to be human messengers who have ever attempted to expand the kingdom of the Dragon, that is, Babylon, throughout the earth. See, for example, 2 Corinthians 11:14-15.

I did notice that in many other scriptures you see that the work of the darkness is attributed to one singular spirit, indicating Satan, as you mention. But then I see these other verses indicating that there are many of them, and the stories of devils (and even legion of them) being cast out in the Gospels and so on. The only way I can reconcile all those scriptures is by interpreting the single spirit attribution to just a way of speech pointing the head and mastermind of the darkness. Like when some people when speaking thanks the price of the gas going down to the President and its actions over the economy. But we all know it is not the President alone the one doing it.

I think the problem here is not realizing that heaven and earth are not located in two different locations, as if geographical in nature. When the reality is, heaven is a realm and reality that, albeit invisible in nature, nonetheless, overlays and exists upon, and yet also transcends, the earth.

This is shown by Eden, by the Tabernacle, the Temple, and finally the Church. All are the habitation of God here on earth. After all, you sit in heavenly places with Christ Jesus even as you sit on your couch.

[coksiw]

Brother the word "heaven" is use abstractly in greek to mean anything above the earth, as “cielo” in Spanish.

It can refer to the place where God is as in several verses you described, but also, the place were the stars are as in:
"[1Co 15:40 NASB] 40 There are also heavenly bodies and earthly bodies, but the glory of the heavenly is one, and the [glory] of the earthly is another."
Eph 6:12 is referring to the place where the clouds are (the atmosphere), as we know in what level the devil moves: “in which you formerly walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, of the spirit that is now working in the sons of disobedience.”
EPHESIANS‬ 2:2‬ NASB‬‬

This can be described as the three heavens as suggested in "[2Co 12:2 NASB] 2 I know a man in Christ who fourteen years ago--whether in the body I do not know, or out of the body I do not know, God knows--such a man was caught up to the third heaven." If the third is the one where God is, then the first is where the clouds are (or atmosphere) and the second where the heavenly bodies are (stars, sun, moon).

[Esaias]

Cross posting this from the Eschatology Debate section:

Originally Posted by Esaias

It was long assumed by commentators that stoicheion referred to several things, as demonstrated by the research of Bandstra in his The Law and the Elements of the World:

1. Basic elements (air, earth, water, fire) out of which all matter is composed (somewhat in contrast to the atomic theory floating around at the same time).

2. Elemental spirits or beings which governed destiny connected with astrological/astronomical functions.

3. Principles of religious or philosophical teachings.

Bandstra notes that #2 is the most common understanding among 20th century commentators, but he opts for #3 and applies it to "the law and the flesh". He correctly points out that #2 (the "personalised cosmological" interpretation of elemental spirit beings) is not attested to in 1st century writings and even among the patristic authors it was first used to refer to a "heavenly body" without reference to any idea of any kind of "astral spirit".

Others likewise have recognised the incorrectness of #2 as being anachronistic (see for example Binzler, Schweizer, etc).

The discussion devolves to whether the stoicheion in question are principles of religious teachings (3) or cosmological elements (1).

Against the idea of stoicheion being religious principles is the fact that everytime stoicheion occurs with kosmos in extant literature the term stoicheion always refers to the physical elements. The context of Colossians, with its emphasis on philosophy, indicates the term there means physical elements. 2 Peter seems likewise focused on the cosmological rather than the "principles of religion" aspect, especially in light of its contrast and comparison with the Deluge.

Only in Galatians does the principles of religion interpretation hold any ground because of the contextual emphasis on law, worship, circumcision, religious calendars, etc. But even in Galatians, the cosmological aspect is there, thus there is diversity of opinion on the meaning of stoicheion in Galatians. but in Colossians and 2 Peter, it seems there is overwhelming evidence the term is referring to the corporeal elements of the cosmos.

[Esaias]

And this:

Originally Posted by Esaias

"Against the idea of stoicheion being religious principles is the fact that everytime stoicheion occurs with kosmos in extant literature the term stoicheion always refers to the physical elements. The context of Colossians, with its emphasis on philosophy, indicates the term there means physical elements"


In Colossians, the issue involves a non Christian philosophical-religious system that is derived from the stoicheion of the kosmos. The grammar is pretty direct that it is not stoicheion of a philosophy that is being opposed, but rather a philosophy based upon and derived from the stoicheion of the kosmos, meaning a philosophy based on a particular physic, or understanding of the natural elements of the universe.

The phrase kata ta stoicheia tou kosmou indicates the ground or basis of the Colossian opposition's philosophy. It is literally a philosophy "about the elements of the world". The elements of the world are the ground or basis for the opposing philosophy, and stands in opposition (and apposition) to Christ. The philosophy Paul is arguing against is a philosophy based on a particular view of the constructive elements of the cosmos, and he argues in favour of a view based on Christ being the incarnate deity.

The opposition view is also said to be derived "according to the traditions of men", indicating the Colossian opposition was an already pre-existing philosophical system rather than a new-fangled invention. The Colossian Christians were interacting with and being critiqued ("judged") by a somewhat popular Greek philosophical movement that was making inroads in Asia Minor in the first century. That philosophical movement (essentially what we today would call a religious movement) critiqued and opposed apostolic Christianity as being incompatible with reality and the basic structure of the cosmos. This, the opponents claimed, led to vain worship and vain living, as compared to their own claimed humility, frugality, and disregard for higher spiritual beings.

In other words, the apostle was combating the Cynic movement, which at the time was a formidable antiChristian pagan movement whose primary critique of Christianity was based upon Cynicism's view of the natural elements which formed the basis for a philosophy of living and ethics and religious duty.