Compare Apocalypse of Moses 37.5; Life of Adam and Eve 25.3.
2 Baruch 51:11: For there shall be spread before them the extents of Paradise, and there shall be shown to them the beauty of the majesty of the living creatures which are beneath the throne and all the armies of the angels who are now held fast by my word, lest they should appear, and are held fast by a command, that they may stand in their places till their advent comes. http://www.cepher.net/2-baruch-51.aspx
Comments from the International Critical Commentary on 2 Corinthians:
εἰς τὸν παράδεισον. See on Luke 23:43 and Sewte on Revelation 2:7, the only other passages in N.T. in which παράδεισος occurs; also Hastings, DB. ii. pp. 668 f., DCG. ii. p. 318; Salmond, Christ. Doct. of Immortality, pp. 346 f. The word tells us little about the nature of the unseen world. In the O.T. it is used either of the Garden of Eden (Genesis 2:9, Genesis 2:2:10, Genesis 2:15, etc.) or of a park or pleasure-ground (Song of Solomon 4:13; Ecclesiastes 2:5; Joel 2:3; etc.); but it represents three or four different Hebrew words. We must leave open the question as to whether St Paul regards paradise and the third heaven as identical, or as quite different, or as one containing the other, for there is no clue to the answer. See Int. Journal of Apocrypha, July 1914, pp. 74 f.
63 comments:
https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=b7Meabtj8mcC&pg=PA167&lpg=PA167&dq=vedic+third+heaven&source=bl&ots=m4ihiw8sp_&sig=OkC1HNP5cK06B-AVYf5BkvprjQI&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjj6KCdidHeAhXLfMAKHQhqCrEQ6AEwAHoECAQQAQ#v=onepage&q=vedic%20third%20heaven&f=false
http://upload.vedpuran.net/Uploads/73543Atharvaveda.pdf
Pg227,350
Duncan, the one page in the book you supplied, speaks of the third heaven as "seat of the gods"
Page 350 is similar and includes the line that the gods won immortality in the third heaven.
Interesting, but is there any reason to think Paul's third heaven is a product of Judeo-Christianity? The idea was prevalent enough in Judaic documents that predated Paul.
Besides, see https://fosterheologicalreflections.blogspot.com/2015/04/wright-scott-and-levels-of-heaven.html
Yes, I remember your post but I have only just become aware of this witness.
What does it mean by gods?
Interesting that it is also interpreted as "third earth".
Document dates to about 1100BCE. It is something that the Babylonians & Persians were aware of so I do not see it as much of a stretch to mention it. Especially when you mention Judeo.
https://www.academia.edu/28117232/Rgvedic_Verses_interpreted_in_the_Maitrayani_Samhita
https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=KpIWhKnYmF0C&pg=PA37&lpg=PA37&dq=maitrayani+samhita+dated&source=bl&ots=5KNwUQKxxS&sig=zZuGyzbioN6ukhnRYT0VMCuJyf8&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiKocCh49PeAhVOFMAKHS5hDesQ6AEwB3oECAAQAQ#v=onepage&q=maitrayani%20samhita%20900bce&f=false
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=18&v=Z4WUjdaRbvA
Interestingly, he has also produced this book which I will have to obtain:-
https://www.amazon.co.uk/What-Did-Ancient-Israelites-Eat/dp/0802862985
http://ochs.org.uk/news/hinduism-monotheistic
I would like the transcripts from these talks.
We're not sure about the origin of the Judeo-Christian "third heaven" belief. 2 Enoch and Testament of Levi (in different rescensions) even speak of 7 heavens. However, it has been suggested that 1 Kings 8 might provide some basis for the third heaven idea. Either way, I don't see a connection between Hindu/Vedic understanding of a third heaven and the Judaic/Christian notions. The connection would have to be demonstrated if it were the case. We would need proof.
My meagre point was to just show a possible relationship between paradise and the third heaven. Not everyone believes the two are identical. Andrew Lincoln also supplies evidence that the Christian "third heaven" likely originated from the Judaic third heaven, which might be seven heavens. The other work by Wright, discussed in my earlier blog post, is worth reading too.
https://books.google.com/books?id=zv_TAwAAQBAJ&pg=PA229&dq=third+heaven+judaism&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwig5pLNr9TeAhUIy1kKHTAvDfIQ6AEINDAC#v=onepage&q=third%20heaven%20judaism&f=false
Some scholars often try to associate Persian and Jewish beliefs. That is a highly debatable proposition in my book, but to believe that Jews readily assimilated Babylonish beliefs with Jehovah's approval is even more of a stretch IMO.
That was why I posted. The point about third earth.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seven_Heavens
See section on mesapotamian.
Take for example the 7. Why would you need direct proof of something we know existed well before any judeo evidence. Are there no other texts of value before the Bible?
Was Paul counting the heavens - how would he know it was the third?
IMO these are just turn of phrase that were around at the time. I would not conclude that there are three heavens because he used the phrase. No more than I would conclude there were 7.
It is the point that heavens and world's seem interchangeable.
1 kings 8:30 has to be tempered with Isaiah 19:1
What I'm trying to say is that surface similarities don't mean two ideas came from the same source or that they're related. We have to prove that A and B stand in relation (R) to one another. Significant differences might cast doubt on a substantive relationship between two seemingly related ideas.
Did the Jewish seven heavens ideas emanate from Babylonish precincts? It's possible that the Jews held to a belief in 3+ heavens before the Babylonian Exile. When I mentioned 1 Kings 8, I was thinking of 8:27, which some works cite to demonstrate an earlier belief in multiple heavens, as it were. Paul clearly refers to the "third heaven," not the 7th. And I seriously doubt that Solomon or many faithful Jews would have taken their theological cues from Babylon. See Psalm 137; Isaiah 52. Additionally, the Tanakh condemns magic. So why would a faithful Jew let magic shape his/her theology?
I'm not saying that extra-biblical texts even prior to the Bible hold no value. The question is whether such texts in any meaningful way influenced Jewish theology. No, I don't believe Paul was counting the heavens; he inherited the idea (likely) from his forebears.
The problem with your observation about three heavens is that there's good reason to believe Paul was talking about the third heaven as James Scott, Andrew Lincoln and others point out. Even Tanakh suggests there is the sky above us where the birds fly (see also Revelation 14:6), we have the farther reaches of outer space, then the heavens of God's dwelling. 3 could be symbolic, but I'm just saying that not any old number would do for Paul. The third heaven could refer to the highest heaven or it could accentuate the intensity of Paul's experience. But I don't see why heavens and world should be interchangeable here. How does that fit within the 2 Cor. 12:3-4 context?
From NIV Cultural Backgrounds Study Bible:
Jewish texts contrasted “paradise” (v. 4), considered the restoration of Eden, with Gehinnom, i.e., hell. Although Jewish thought expected paradise to exist someday on the renewed earth, many also believed that it currently remained in heaven — but which one? Jewish sources diverge as to how many heavens there are (ancient estimates range from 3 to 365!). The most common views were three and seven heavens; the realm of air and the birds was a lower heaven. Paul apparently identified paradise as in the “third heaven” (v. 2), probably meaning the highest heaven, where God is.
From Mounce's Complete Expos Dictionary:
Paul refers to the “third heaven” in 2 Cor. 12:2. The meaning of this phrase is debated, but it is probably to be understood as the highest level of heaven, either literally as the zenith of a tripartite division, or metaphorically as the ultimate or fullest expression of paradise. See NIDNTT-A, 565.
From the NIDNTT under paradeisos:
b) In 2 Cor. 12:4 Paul speaks of a personal experience in the Spirit in which he was "caught up to paradise" and there heard words that a person is "not permitted to tell." This statement is parallel to what he says in 12:2 about being "caught up to the third heaven." Paul's reference to this experience "fourteen years ago" underlines the fact that it occurred long before the foundation of the Corinthian church. That this visionary experience took place either "in the body or out of the body" (he is not sure) rules out the Damascus road experience, for Paul did not regard this as a vision.
Ancient cosmology pictured three, five, seven, or ten heavens, three being a commonly accepted number. Paul's use of "the third heaven" and "paradise" may reflect a widely accepted image for something that by his own account is indescribable (cf. 2 Cor. 12:4). The idea of hearing "inexpressible things" is possibly related to the idea of a sealed revelation found in the OT (Isa. 8:16; Dan. 12:4; cf. Rev. 14:3), though similar language is found also in the mystery religions and in apocalyptic writings of Paul's day. In all this the apostle is using contemporary images of the transcendent world to describe an ecstatic experience that was evidently far more impressive than anything of which his opponents could boast. But this experience was something for his own private, personal edification. What a Christian should boast about is one's weaknesses, that God may be glorified in and through him or her.
https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=sEIngqiKOugC&printsec=frontcover&dq=Encyclopedia+of+Ancient+Deities&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwit7-Xaj9beAhVQOMAKHZoaAxMQ6AEIKjAA#v=onepage&q=third%20heaven&f=false
https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=sEIngqiKOugC&printsec=frontcover&dq=Encyclopedia+of+Ancient+Deities&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwit7-Xaj9beAhVQOMAKHZoaAxMQ6AEIKjAA#v=onepage&q=seventh%20heaven&f=false
https://vedkabhed.wordpress.com/2014/01/02/vedic-paradise-an-overview-3/
Lots of interesting things to be learned about Lao-Tzu. One scholar claims that the historical existence of Lao-Tzu (reputed founder of Daoism) is uncertain. However, assuming that he did exist, what are likely myths later arose concerning him. For example, that he was born old, conceived by a virgin, eventually ascended into the sky and became venerated as Lord Lao. He was considered to be (and still is) the incarnate form of the Dao.
We can see surface similarities between Lao-Tzu and Lord Jesus; however, substantial differences also exist. I don't see how the Chinese three-heaven schema has any substantial/historical connection with the Jewish-Christian idea. Both Confucius and Aristotle teach the "golden mean," but in very different ways. And we have no reason to believe that one thinker influenced the other.
Moreover, the Abrahamic religions all refused to be polytheistic like their eastern counterparts.
Another difference is that apparently, the Christian heaven cannot be measured. One evidently cannot say heaven is so many miles away from the earth since heaven is supposed to be a spiritual realm in Judeo-Christianity.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shangdi
I know that the Chinese or Confucian Tian/Heaven is far removed from the Judeo-Christian deity and notion of heaven. Confucius was neutral about metaphysics at best, and he had metaphysical animus, at worst. His heaven seems more like a depersonalized force that governs the universe.
I was and rewmain more concerned about the Judeo-Christian perspective on third heaven/Paradise, but here is another perspective on Tian in Confucius:
As A. C. Graham has noted, Confucius seems to be of two minds about Tian. At times, he is convinced that he enjoys the personal protection and sanction of Tian, and thus defies his mortal opponents as he wages his campaign of moral instruction and reform. At other moments, however, he seems caught in the throes of existential despair, wondering if he has lost his divine backer at last. Tian seems to participate in functions of "fate" and “nature” as well as those of “deity.” What remains consistent throughout Confucius' discourses on Tian is his threefold assumption about this extrahuman, absolute power in the universe: (1) its alignment with moral goodness, (2) its dependence on human agents to actualize its will, and (3) the variable, unpredictable nature of its associations with mortal actors. Thus, to the extent that the Confucius of the Analects is concerned with justifying the ways of Tian to humanity, he tends to do so without questioning these three assumptions about the nature of Tian, which are rooted deeply in the Chinese past.
See https://www.iep.utm.edu/confuciu/
One more:
"While Heaven (tian) has some characteristics that overlap the category of deity, it is primarily an impersonal absolute, like dao and Brahman."
http://www-scf.usc.edu/~xueyuanw/itp104/project/culture/confucianism.html
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/227250875_The_gods_of_Abraham_Isaiah_and_Confucius
Firstly, the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob is not Tian--the deity of Confucius and others.
Secondly, the Chinese understanding/conception of Tian developed over time and even Confucius is not consistent in his portrayal of Tian. But there is reason to believe that Tian largely became an impersonal force like nature or the moral governance of the world.
Look at what Confucius actually said and how his readers/followers understood him, which admittedly led to differing interpretations.
This paper also weighs multiple interpretations of Confucian "theology":
https://s3.amazonaws.com/academia.edu.documents/36557552/confucian_theology.pdf?AWSAccessKeyId=AKIAIWOWYYGZ2Y53UL3A&Expires=1542735375&Signature=kP2MLSy8cbCKj%2Fuu7Fg5tp83W6Q%3D&response-content-disposition=inline%3B%20filename%3DConfucian_Theology_Three_Models.pdf
I am not so interested in what tian became but what di originally meant. The paper speaks of solid evidences that contradict many scholarly suppositions. I suppose that is where I need to look at the actual evidence.
The article I referenced from the Internet Encyl of Philosophy discusses both the original Tian conception and how it developed under Confucius. Not even followers of Confucius understand/interpret him the same way. But notice the comments here about Tian; it's also a translation of the Confucian Analects: www.indiana.edu/~p374/Analects_of_Confucius_(Eno-2015).pdf
http://jur.byu.edu/?p=9427
http://www.chinaknowledge.de/Literature/Historiography/oracle.html
This is the type of evidences as referenced in the paper I posted. Considerably predating Confucius.
http://www.sino-platonic.org/complete/spp108_chinese_deity_heaven.pdf
https://books.google.co.uk/books?hl=en&lr=&id=BH1ZrCsslosC&oi=fnd&pg=PP1&dq=Wang+Yirong+bronze+inscriptions&ots=ir3vgYUi17&sig=6dn0xo5rXZ_UuIeakVhD-GL20_M#v=onepage&q=Wang%20Yirong%20bronze%20inscriptions&f=false
Duncan, the links and files I posted deal with Tian pre and post-Confucius. The link you submitted about oracle bone inscriptions is interesting historically and when it comes to the study of religion. However, that page doesn't say one word about Tian, although it provides links to other material concerning Tian.
And I've encountered the sino-platonic pdf, which does obviously pertain to Tian. In any event, I still contend that Jehovah (YHWH) is a long ways from Tian.
You would have to see the inscriptions themselves to learn about Shangdi/Tian.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/305922309_On_the_Identity_of_Shang_Di_and_the_Origin_of_the_Concept_of_a_Celestial_Mandate_TIAN_MING
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/320031031_High_Gods_Low_Gods_and_Morality_in_Ancient_China_Developing_New_Methods_Answering_Old_Questions
https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/early-china/article/cosmopolitical-background-of-heavens-mandate/8DC57504E729652C231E65A6BD5BB14A
עליון
ο θεος ο ύψιστος
Hebrew - Psalm 136:26
Aramaic - Ezra 5:12
Greek - Revelation 11:13
Job 38:7
Ezra and Revelation use the expression "God of heaven" rather than Most High God. Compare Daniel 2:44. Also, in Ezra 1:2, the Tetragrammaton is apparently used with the "God of heaven" expression, indicating that the Jews viewed one personage/entity as the God of heaven. He was viewed as distinct from all other gods, being the God of gods. We also have to ask what "God of heaven" means. And why link Greek/Hebrew/Aramaic language with Chinese?
The point of the famed Axis Age (Axial Age) hypothesis is that cultures developed along similar lines without communicating these ideas to one another or drawing them from another.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tarim_mummies
https://www.britishmuseum.org/pdf/Chinese_trade.pdf
https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/the-history-of-jews-in-china
No solid evidence that Jews/Hebrews interacted with the ancient Chinese.
Does there really need to be?
China / Egypt interaction is evident through trade, but we have been here before.
The Axial age is at least 200 years too late.
I would think with the current level of finds in countries throughout the world that the trade routes have been open for a very long time, so to deny communication between cultures is just as pernicious as http://jan.ucc.nau.edu/~alcoze/for398/class/pristinemyth.html .
Baseless.
https://ay14-15.moodle.wisc.edu/prod/pluginfile.php/81889/mod_resource/content/1/Denevan2011PristineMythRevisited.pdf
https://cdli.ucla.edu/files/publications/cdlj2015_002.pdf
https://www.biblicalarchaeology.org/daily/ancient-cultures/ancient-near-eastern-world/who-were-the-phoenicians/
First of all, let's be clear: I'm responding to your apparent claim that we should see connections between Confucianism/Chinese philosophy and the Judeo-Christian God, particularly as that God is exemplified in texts like Ps. 136:26 and Ezra 5:12.
So I mentioned the Axis Age in that context because Confucius did not begin until then. But even if you want to go further back, I think the idea you're trying to set forth becomes even more problematic.
From my perspective, I must deal with evidence of some kind or another. Granted, we often believe certain things for which we have no tangible evidence. For instance, we have no physical evidence that Christ was raised from the dead, but I still believe it. Peter told early Christians that they had never seen Christ but they still loved him and exercised faith in Jehovah's Messiah. So I'm not trying to insist on having something physical to believe X.
However, when it comes to history, a different standard is set. We can't just posit things because they seem reasonable or comprehensible. History uses imagination and posits hypotheses. Yet evidence is also needed to back these hypotheses. Please show me one line of evidence that's indicative of the idea that ancient China and Israel interacted at all. I've never seen direct and substantial evidence to support this point.
The Phoenicians are different from Israel, but that article you referenced did not indicate or say that the Phoenicians had dealings with the Chinese.
You might have invoked this paper before. However, it sets forth the possibility that trade between parts of Asia and the Levant occurred, which means the paper is not dogmatic in this regard:
This finding raises the intriguing possibility of long distance trade in the early Iron Age, assuming that the extracted cinnamaldehyde is indeed derived from the bark of the cinnamon tree.
This is consistent with other suggestions that trade from South/South East Asia to the West took place at such an early date."
Assume that trade took place; that still does not prove that one religious idea shaped the other.
The paper I'm quoting is https://s3.amazonaws.com/academia.edu.documents/33705236/MAA_cinnamon.pdf?AWSAccessKeyId=AKIAIWOWYYGZ2Y53UL3A&Expires=1543429499&Signature=b9pFMymFYe2%2Fc7C7%2BKtSjc7hGGs%3D&response-content-disposition=inline%3B%20filename%3DCINNAMALDEHYDE_IN_EARLY_IRON_AGE_PHOENIC.pdf
My post are relevant as there were trade links between Ur and the Indus. This does not proove a direct connection to the Hebrews but it does go some way to showing that each of the nations certainly did not exist in insular world's. We know the basic relationship between the Hebrews and the sea people who were very well traveled. I still think the axial age idea has to demonstrate that Hebrews were insular, not the other way around. The time of Solomon certainly demonstrates import/export.
The link did not work but I found it at https://www.academia.edu/7051736/CINNAMALDEHYDE_IN_EARLY_IRON_AGE_PHOENICIAN_FLASKS_RAISES_THE_POSSIBILITY_OF_LEVANTINE_TRADE_WITH_SOUTH_EAST_ASIA
http://ccnmtl.columbia.edu/services/dropoff/china_civ_temp/week06/pdfs/religi.pdf
I'm not claiming that Israel (Hebrews/Jews) were insular. The Bible itself mentions numerous cultures with which the Jews interacted; however, I don't see good reason yet to believe that ancient China interacted with ancient Israel. And even if trade occurred, that doesn't mean they necessarily talked religion with one another. Yes, even the Hebrew Bible suggests Solomon was busy exporting/importing--I agree. But with whom is my question?
As for the Axis/Axial Age idea, it suggests that all the ideas that fermented during that time grew independent of one another. Here's how one source explains this age:
"in Palestine prophets arose: Elijah, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Deutero-Isaiah; Greece produced Homer, the philosophers Parmenides, Heraclitus, Plato, the tragic poets, Thucydides and Archimedes. All the vast development of which these names are a mere intimation took place in those few centuries, independently and almost simultaneously in China, India and the West"
See http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Axial_Age
Whether one buys into the Axis Age or not, I don't believe the historical evidence for ancient Israel and China interaction is available yet.
But when I posted the original blog entry, I was thinking of theology and how we might understand 3rd heaven/paradise in a Pauline context.
As you know, I have reason to believe that the Vedic tradition is far older than is generally stated. So it may not be a connection between China and the Hebrews but rather an eastern network with the Indus at its core.
My analogy may possibly be the bronze and iron ages. Did independent nations discover bronze smelting or was it passed on, or at least the germ of the concept triggered by knowing that a neighbour had something that they did not. Bronze required significantly more energy (trees) to smelt than iron so nessesity led from one to the other. Today some may liken the arms (nuclear) race.
https://www.sfu.ca/~poitras/rp_axial_08.pdf
The thin end of the wedge.
https://www.jstor.org/stable/23998793?seq=1#metadata_info_tab_contents
I can understand why some want to propose new dates for the Vedic tradition: it's quite possible (IMO) that the Vedas might have been created earlier than traditionally proposed. Does that mean we might have a connection between the Indus and Jerusalem or however you'd like to frame matters? I think it highly unlikely, but maybe evidence will one day appear for such a connection.
Post a Comment