aa5874

After posting here for about 5 years it has been brought to my attention that the claim that the Pauline writings are ACTUALLY the earliest writings of the Jesus story are based on "Chinese Whispers".

There is ZERO source of antiquity that can SHOW that the Pauline writings are the earliest writings of the Jesus story.

No Scholar, no apologetic source, no-one can provide a single corroborative source of antiquity to place any of the Pauline writings or writers BEFORE any of the Jesus story was KNOWN and circulated.

The Pauline writers claimed Jesus DIED for OUR SINS, was BURIED and was RAISED from the dead on the THIRD day ACCORDING to the Scriptures.

The Pauline writings are NOT the earliest WRITTEN SOURCES for the Jesus story.

1Co 15:3 -

Huon

aa, you should always remember that all the known manuscripts and papyri (papyruses ?) concerning the NT are rather recent, not older than the beginning of the third century, and that they were duly "improved" (so to say...) at that time.

arnoldo

Are the scriptures the Pauline writer is referring to from the OT or some other writings??:constern01:

Spanky

"According to the scriptures" refers to the purported prophecies of Jesus found in the Old Testament that the New Testament writers often sold as proof for their Messiah.

aa5874

A Pauline writer claimed there were people in Christ BEFORE him. The Jesus story PREDATED "Paul" based on his OWN words.

Romans 16:7 -

aa5874

You are promoting "Chinese Whispers".

Please tell how in the world have you established WHEN any of the Pauline writings were composed or when "Paul" ACTUALLY lived?

Even if "according to the Scriptures" means the Old Testament as you assume that does NOT show that any "Pauline writing was the earliest source of the Jesus story.

In your scenario, the earliest written source of the Jesus story would be the OLD TESTAMENT and NOT "Paul".

Now, please SHOW me where in the OLD TESTAMENT a character called JESUS CHRIST DIED for our Sins, was Buried and was RAISED from the dead on the THIRD day.

You CANNOT.

gurugeorge

"Now to him who is able to strengthen you according to my gospel and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery which was kept secret for long ages but is now disclosed and through the prophetic writings is made known to all nations [...] " Rom 16:25-26

What do you think the "prophetic writings" are aa? The gospels? That wouldn't make sense would it?

The clearest solution to the puzzle is that "Paul" and probably the Jerusalem people before him thought they saw evidence in Scripture, that "The Messiah" had already been and gone and done his work (albeit in spiritual fashion, not a military, kingly fashion). That's also what "according to Scripture" in Corinthians probably means - like "according to the BBC". In this case, Scriptures written in the distant past are prophesying something in their future, but in Paul's and the Jerusalem peoples' past; however, Paul and/or the Jerusalem people think it was hidden in Scripture (so they thought nobody else had understood it or "seen" it till them).

(Later, after the Diaspora and with the true origins of Christianity probably being lost and muddled, people interpreted "according to Scripture" as the same type of hidden message, but this time about the fake gospel Jesus - who is a later, post-Diaspora construct based on "Paul"'s Christ and probably other sources too. And even later, once the NT Canon had been settled as new "Scripture", simple folk came to think "Scripture" referred to the gospels, so "according to Scripture" changed its meaning again.)

Religious people read things into holy texts all the time, and purport to find hidden truths and messages in them. This seems to be another example of that process. God knows what they thought they saw in Scripture - we may never be able to recover just how they thought they saw the "message" in there, unless we're lucky with new literary finds.

At any rate, that gives a clear picture of the very earliest nubbin of Christianity: no human Jesus, just a myth with its very first seeds growing out of perfervid scripture-poring and visionary/ecstatic experiences.

aa5874

Please, please, please!!! Do not confuse the issue.

In 1 Cor. 15 a Pauline writer claimed Jesus Christ DIED for our Sins, was BURIED and was RAISED from the dead on the THIRD day according to the Scriptures.

There is NO Hebrew Scripture that make such claim.

The Gospels make the claim that Jesus was crucified, and was resurrected on the THIRD day.

The Canonised and NON-Canonised Gospels were REGARDED as Scripture in antiquity.

Justin Martyr claimed that the Gospel was READ in the Churches in the 2nd century as Scripture.

The Church claimed "Paul" was Aware of gLuke which is REGARDED as Scripture.

You simply cannot show that the Gospels were NOT ALREADY regarded as Scripture when the Pauline writings were composed.


Unsubstantiated "Chinese Whispers" are NOT solutions.

Let us deal with the WRITTEN STATEMENTS in the Pauline writings.

1. "Paul" claimed he was LAST to see the resurrected Jesus.

2. Paul" claimed OVER 500 people BEFORE HIM was aware of the resurrection of Jesus.

3. "Paul" claimed that there were people in Christ BEFORE him.

4. "Paul" claimed there were apostles BEFORE him.

5. "Paul" claimed he MET the apostle James, the Lord's brother.

6. "Paul" claimed he PERSECUTED the FAITH he NOW preached.


The Pauline writers have claimed in their WRITTEN TESTIMONY that the Jesus story PREDATED them.

I have NO intention to be discussing your Speculations. I only want to deal with SOURCES, SOURCES, SOURCES......SOURCES of antiquity.

You MUST know that Canonised Gospels and Non-Canonised Gospels of ANTIQUITY were considered Scripture and read in the Churches.

You MUST know that it was NOT Hebrew Scripture alone that was regarded as Scripture in antiquity.

The very Pauline writings WERE REGARDED as SCRIPTURE in antiquity.

boneyard bill

You are overlooking yet another possibility. Paul does not cite his scripture nor does he quote from it. But there are some passages in Paul that are very close to Mark. This suggests that Paul knew Mark or vice versa. But it could also mean that they both knew a common source.

It is generally believed that the passion story in Mark derives from a pre-existing passion gospel. Likewise, we have the gospel Q hypothesis which proposes an early gospel. The author of John does not actually claim, as is often alleged, to be the eyewitness of the events described. The beloved disciple wrote them down, but actual passage in John suggests that the beloved disciple was merely the source for the Johannine gospel but not its actual author. So there is a preceding written source for it as well. The opening of that gospel is generally regarded as an early Christian hymn. Likewise, some of the passages in Paul's letters seem to be quotations of common hymns known to the early Christians. It seems highly probable that there were written documents which might be cosidered Christian scripture that has not survived. Indeed, this is one of the complications in trying to establish scriptural priority. We can't know what might have derived from common sources, some written and some oral.

Paleographic studies are perhaps our best guide but very difficult with regard to Paul especially. How many separate authors of Pauline letters were there? Is Paul himself a historical figure?

aa5874

Well, you may be overlooking an OBVIOUS possibility. There are some words found in the Pauline writings that are ONLY found in the Canonized gLuke and NOWHERE else in the ENTIRE Canon.

Luke 22:19 -
1Cor. 11:24 - Apologetics sources, the very Church through Eusebius claimed there was a TRADITION that "Paul" was AWARE of gLuke. See "Church History" 3.4.8 and 6.25.

I don't want to argue about SOURCES that don't exist and have NOT even been known to exist.

I am NOT interested in "Chinese Whispers"

What is so difficult about "PAUL".

"Paul" is simply an UNCORROBOATED character for the time zone BEFORE the Fall of the Temple.

The Pauline Jesus is uncorroborated for the time zone BEFORE the Fall of the Temple.

The Pauline teachings are uncorroborated for the time zone BEFORE the Fall of the Temple.

The Pauline conversion in Acts is Fiction.

The Pauline claim that he SAW the resurrected Jesus is Fiction.

The Pauline writings are NOT dated by paleography to the 1st century.

The claim that the Pauline writings are the earliest source for the Jesus stories are based on "Chinese Whispers" since there is ZERO credible external corroborative source for the ENTIRE PAULINE writings and the Pauline writers.