FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.


Go Back   FRDB Archives > Archives > Religion (Closed) > Biblical Criticism & History
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Yesterday at 03:12 PM

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 07-31-2006, 07:11 AM   #61
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: San Bernardino, Calif.
Posts: 5,435
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JoeWallack
when Paul says his knowledge of Jesus was based on Revelation and not from Man, is it means his fellow believers did not tell him of their Revelations, they told him of their Memories.
Where does Paul say that anybody told him of any memories of Jesus? Where does Paul say that any man said even one word to him about Jesus, from memory or from anything else?
Doug Shaver is offline  
Old 07-31-2006, 09:37 AM   #62
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: USA, Missouri
Posts: 3,070
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Doug Shaver
Where does Paul say that anybody told him of any memories of Jesus? Where does Paul say that any man said even one word to him about Jesus, from memory or from anything else?
I can't think of a place, but it doesn't take much thinking to realize Paul knew SOMETHING about Jesus since he had been persecuting his followers and likely had at least later heard SOMETHING about him since he spent 15 days with one of the Pillars, and that what was 'revealed' was much in line with what people already believed since the believers in Judea praised God for his newfound belief in Christ. It's ridiculous to think that all of what Paul knew about Jesus (mythical or historical) came from personal revelation. The most reasonable interpretation of Paul's comments in Galations is that it was Paul's personal conviction and gospel that came by way of revelation from no man.

ted
TedM is offline  
Old 07-31-2006, 09:22 PM   #63
Regular Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Phoenix
Posts: 412
Default

Quote:
But if it is preached that Christ has been raised from the dead, how can some of you say that there is no resurrection of the dead? 13If there is no resurrection of the dead, then not even Christ has been raised. 14And if Christ has not been raised, then our preaching is vain, your faith also is vain. 15Moreover, we are even found to be false witnesses of God, because we witnessed against God that he raised Christ, whom he did not raise if in fact the dead are not raised. 16For if the dead are not raised, not even Christ has been raised. 1 Cor 15:12-16 [NASB/NIV]

There are some devastating implications to be drawn from this passage. Paul expresses himself as though the raising of Christ from the dead is a matter of faith, not of historical record as evidenced by eyewitness to a physical, risen Jesus at Easter. He is so adamant about the necessity to believe that the dead will be raised, that he is prepared to state—and he repeats it four times—that if they are not, then Christ himself "has not been raised." If men he knew had witnessed the actual return of Jesus from the grave, I do not think he would have thought to make even a rhetorical denial of it.
The above is an example of one of Earl's top 20 missing references to the Gospel Jesus. This passage has "devastating implications" that the raising of Christ from the dead is a matter of faith and not historical "record?" What?

Paul is settling a dispute between believers. Some were saying that there was no resurrection at all, yet they believed in Christ and the forgivness of sin, two ideas which are incompatable. He doesn't need to reflect on "records," that's what a non-believer would need to hear. Paul is simply putting emphasis on, and stoking, the conduit of their faith - proclamation of the gospel. There is no mysterious "silence" here except that inserted by Earl. The other 19 are equally non-persuasive.

If this is an example of a "devastating" case against the resurrection of Christ then the resurrection of Christ is in good shape.
Nuwanda is offline  
Old 08-02-2006, 07:14 AM   #64
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Nazareth
Posts: 2,357
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JoeWallack
when Paul says his knowledge of Jesus was based on Revelation and not from Man, is it means his fellow believers did not tell him of their Revelations, they told him of their Memories.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DougShaver
Where does Paul say that anybody told him of any memories of Jesus? Where does Paul say that any man said even one word to him about Jesus, from memory or from anything else?
JW:
when Paul says his knowledge of Jesus was based on Revelation and not from Man, is it means his fellow believers did not tell him of their Revelations, they told him of their Memories.

Paul makes an important Point that his Knowledge of Jesus is from Jesus and not from Man. I agree that Paul never Explicitly identifies a man telling him something Historical about Jesus. But what is the better Implication? That Jesus believers before and after Paul's Conversion told him something about a supposed Historical Jesus or never told him anything about a supposed Historical Jesus?

I prophesy that you will say the above Assumes Historical Jesus. I think it is in that direction but short of begging the question. Men could have told Paul of a supposed Historical Jesus even if there wasn't one. No question the Saved Paul CorpseUs never tells us the specifics of who and what Paul learned from Men which also has an Implication that Paul learned little or nothing about HJ from Men. Even though I Am HJ right now I'm still close to Undecided. One possible factor which has been mentioned here is in addition to Paul's emphasis of Impossible Jesus his Preserved Boysonbury Gems of Jesus were not just casual letters to a specific Church at a specific time and place but Church Policy letters trying to emphasize the Big picture (Impossible Jesus).



Joseph
JoeWallack is offline  
Old 08-02-2006, 11:59 PM   #65
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: San Bernardino, Calif.
Posts: 5,435
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JoeWallack
I agree that Paul never Explicitly identifies a man telling him something Historical about Jesus. But what is the better Implication? That Jesus believers before and after Paul's Conversion told him something about a supposed Historical Jesus or never told him anything about a supposed Historical Jesus?
Given an assumption of a historical Jesus, I'd say the likeliest implication of his silences was that he heard some things about him but ignored them in his letters.

Given his silences, though, then we must ask about their most probable implication in the light of all other evidence relevant to Jesus' historicity.
Doug Shaver is offline  
Old 08-04-2006, 03:09 AM   #66
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: San Bernardino, Calif.
Posts: 5,435
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nuwanda
He doesn't need to reflect on "records," that's what a non-believer would need to hear.
Why do you suppose it is that non-believers care so much about records?
Doug Shaver is offline  
Old 08-04-2006, 03:46 AM   #67
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: none
Posts: 9,879
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Doug Shaver
Given an assumption of a historical Jesus, I'd say the likeliest implication of his silences was that he heard some things about him but ignored them in his letters.

Given his silences, though, then we must ask about their most probable implication in the light of all other evidence relevant to Jesus' historicity.
I think its quite simple.

1. Paul was too early for oral tradition to have been codified.
2. His epistles weren't concerned for what Jesus did while on earth, but what his sacrifice means to Christians.
3. He probably understood that he was the last person that people would trust on matters of what Jesus did, not actually knowing the man himself.
Chris Weimer is offline  
Old 08-04-2006, 11:46 PM   #68
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: San Bernardino, Calif.
Posts: 5,435
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Weimer
2. His epistles weren't concerned for what Jesus did while on earth, but what his sacrifice means to Christians.
What, according to anything he wrote, might he have known about Jesus that gave him any ideas about what his sacrifice meant?
Doug Shaver is offline  
Old 08-05-2006, 12:57 AM   #69
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: none
Posts: 9,879
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Doug Shaver
What, according to anything he wrote, might he have known about Jesus that gave him any ideas about what his sacrifice meant?
That he died and was resurrected to conquer the flesh for all humans to have eternal life (?).
Chris Weimer is offline  
Old 08-05-2006, 11:16 AM   #70
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: usa
Posts: 3,103
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Doug Shaver
What, according to anything he wrote, might he have known about Jesus that gave him any ideas about what his sacrifice meant?
While I agree that Paul says very little about Jesus, there are instances where he does mention Jesus that parallels gospel material

1 Cor. 7:10-11 = Mt. 19:3-9; Mk. 10:6 -- Ruling on Divorce ("To the married I give charge, not I but the Lord")
1 Cor. 7:25 = Mt. 19:10-12 -- On Celebacy ("I have no directions from the Lord")
1 Cor. 9:14 = Lk. 10:7 -- Support for Apostles ("the Lord directed that those who preach...")
1 Cor. 11:23-26 = Lk. 22:14-20 -- Institution of the Lord's Supper ("the Lord Jesus ... said")


Rom. 12:14 = Lk. 6:27 -- Blessing of the persecuted
Rom. 12:17 = Lk. 6:29 -- Not repaying evil with evil
Rom 12:18 = Mk. 9:50 -- Peace among yourselves
Rom. 13:7 = Lk. 20:20-26 -- Paying taxes to authorities
Rom. 13:8-10 = Mk. 12:28-31 -- Loving Your Neighbor Sums Up Law
Rom. 14:10 = Lk. 6:37 -- Do not judge
Rom 14:13 = Lk. 17:1-4 -- No stumbling block
Rom. 14:14 = Mk. 7:15 -- Nothing is unclean

1 Thess 5:2 = Lk. 12:39 -- Thief in the night
1 Thess 5:13 = Mk. 9:50 -- Peace among yourselves
1 Thess 5:15 = Lk. 6:29 -- Not repaying evil with evil


1 Cor. 2:9: "What no eye has seen, nor ear heard, nor the heart of man conceived..."
GThom 17: "I shall give you what no eye has seen and what no ear has heard and what no hand has touched and what has never occurred to the human mind."

1 Cor. 4:8: "Already you have become rich! Without us you have become kings!"
GThom 81: "Let him who has grown rich be king."

1 Cor. 10:27: "If one of the unbelievers invites you to dinner and you are disposed to go, eat whatever is set before you."
GThom 14:2: "When you go into any land and walk about in the districts, eat what they set before you." (cf. Lk. 10:1-12)

1 Cor. 13:2: "If I have all faith, so as to move mountains, but have not love, I am nothing."
Mt. 17:20: "If you have faith as a grain of mustard seed, you will have to this mountain, 'Move from here to there,' and it will move." (cf. GThom 48)

Gal 2:28: "There is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus."
GThom 22:4: "When you make the male and the female one and the same, so that the male not be male nor the female female...then you will enter [the kingdom]."

Phil. 3:3: "For we are the true circumcision, who worships God in spirit." (cf. Rom 2:25-29)
GThom 54: "Rather, the true circumcision in spirit has become completely profitable."
gnosis92 is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 09:39 PM.

Top

This custom BB emulates vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.