aa5874

It is most illogical to claim gMatthew was aware of the Pauline letters when you have shown that he did NOT use them.

The Pauline writer mentioned ZERO about the activities of his Jesus Christ except that he died for our sins, was buried and resurrected on the THIRD day According to the Scriptures.

gMatthew is DIRECTLY compatible with gMark and is virtually a carbon-copy of gMark's activities of Jesus.

The question is about gMatthew's USE and AWARENESS of the Pauline writings and again you cannot show that the author of gMatthew used even a verse from a Pauline letter.

It is UNHEARD of that the author of gMatthew was aware of PAUL when there is NO reference at all to him and gMatthew's Jesus contradicts the revealed teachings of the Pauline Savior.

Duvduv

AA, you are ignoring Bernard's point as to whether the references in Matthew about Jesus being sent to the Jews only is a rejection of the Pauline mission to the gentiles, suggesting that the author of Matthew knew about the epistles.
I don't think so since Paul didn't refer to anything from a historical Jesus.
And he had a different message than what is suggested to 12 apostles in Matthew.

aa5874

What date is supplied by the author of the letter??

The Pauline letters do NOT state at all when any letter was written.

You ought to know Jews were in Jerusalem AFTER the Fall of the Jewish Temple c 70 CE.

And may I remind, you seem to have forgotten, that I am challenging the historical veracity of the Pauline writings so I do NOT PRESUME the Pauline writer is credible.

You cannot show when Paul wrote any letter and you cannot corroborate the claims of Paul by any credible source whether apologetic or non-apologetic of antiquity.

It would appear the claim that Paul wrote letters to churches Before the Fall of the Temple c 70 CE has been circulated by "Chinese Whispers".

Even the author of ACTS did NOT start the Rumor or "Chinese Whispers".

Acts of the Apostles, virtually certain of composition AFTER the Fall of the Temple c 70 CE, did NOT ever state that Saul/Paul wrote a single letter to a church.

The author of Acts claimed Paul and his group ACTED as COURIERS for the Jerusalem Church and did DELIVER the Jerusalem Church letter.

See Acts 15.30. Paul and his men, were COURIERS, Mailmen for the Jerusalem Church.

Acts 15.30 The RUMOR, the "Chinese Whispers" that Paul wrote letters to churches STARTED AFTER Acts of the Apostles was written.

aa5874

I am arguing the REVERSE that it was the Pauline writer that REJECTED the Synoptic Jesus of gMark and gMatthew.

I am arguing that Paul was AWARE of written sources that claimed Jesus died for OUR SINS, was buried and was raised on the THIRD Day and was AWARE of Christians churches and Christian people whom he identified by name. See 1 Cor.15, Romans 16 and Galatians 1

After all, the Pauline writer wrote about Jesus AFTER he was resurrected and received REVELATIONS AFTER Jesus was supposedly resurrected.

The author of gMatthew did NOT ever mentioned that his post-resurrected Jesus visited OVER 500 people and that his Jesus abolished Jewish Laws for the Remission of Sins.

My argument is SOLID and supported by the WRITTEN statements of the Pauline writer.

The Pauline writer did KNOW of WRITTEN sources of the Jesus story and the Earliest Canonised Jesus story is AFTER the Fall of the Temple c 70 CE.

Duvduv

I know! But Bernard was arguing from verses in Matthew that these were to OPPOSE the idea of the mission to the gentiles in the epistles. It looks like you didn't read his complete posting. Please look again at his argument in #7087319 / #405 . I think it's fair for you to address in the context of this thread and for the two of you to discuss it.

aa5874

Again, I am arguing that:

1. the Pauline writer claimed he was AWARE of written sources of the Jesus story. 1 Cor. 15.

2. that Paul claimed he was AWARE of the Christian FAITH. Galatians 1

3. that Paul claimed he was AWARE of Christian people. Romans 16.

4. that Paul claimed his resurrected Jesus was the End of the Law. Romans 10

5. that Paul claimed his resurrected Jesus visited OVER 500 people and made at least FIVE other post-resurrection Visitis. 1 Cor.15

6. that Paul claimed that there was NO remission of Sins if Jesus did NOT resurrect. 1 Cor.15

7. The Jesus of gMatthew did NOT claim he came to Abolish Laws for Remission of Sins.

8. The Jesus of gMatthew did NOT claim that without his resurrection that there would be NO Universal Salvation.

9. The author of gMatthew did NOT employ the Pauline post-resurrection visits of Jesus.

10. the author of gMatthew did NOT use a verse from the Pauline writings.

I can ONLY propagate MY arguments.

My arguments are SOLIDLY supported by the WRITTEN Statements of antiquity.

The Pauline writings, All the Books of the NT Canon, were composed AFTER the Fall of the Temple c 70 CE.

Bernard Muller

to Vorkosigan:
And how do we know that?
Was Josephus lying?
Wars 6.9.1 he entirely demolished the rest of the city, and overthrew its walls,
Wars 6.9.4 And now the Romans set fire to the extreme parts of the city, and burnt them down, and entirely demolished its walls.Was Josephus lying?
Wars 7.1.1 Caesar gave orders that they should now demolish the entire city and temple,
Wars 7.1.1 there was left nothing to make those that came thither believe it had ever been inhabited. This was the end which Jerusalem came to
Wars 7.7.7 It is now demolished to the very foundations, and hath nothing but that monument of it preserved, I mean the camp of those that hath destroyed it, which still dwells upon its ruins; some unfortunate old men also lie upon the ashes of the temple, and a few women are there preserved alive by the enemy, for our bitter shame and reproach.

Duvduv

So you mean to say that you are incapable of addressing questions or challenges of others. That's strange.

Bingo the Clown-O

Yea.

Right.

No he doesn’t. The Ascents of James (from the Pseudo-Clementine Recognitions) contains a similar list of events with a similar reaction.

When he suffered, this whole world suffered with him. Even the sun grew dark, and the stars were moved, the sea was troubled, and the mountains loosened, and the tombs were opened. The veil of the temple was torn as if mourning for the coming desolation of the place. Because of these things, all the people were afraid and were constrained to question them.

“Because of these things.” (plural)

Except that the passage from the Ascents of James is unambiguous.

Do you know what that means Earl?

It means that you no longer have a motive for the redactor to make his redaction. The ramifications are profound.


It looks to me like Matthew 27 contains the redaction; not the Diatessaron. The Diatessaron preserves the original reading of Matthew. Here it is again:

And immediately the face of the door of the temple was rent into two parts from top to bottom; and the earth was shaken; and the stones were split to pieces; and the tombs were opened; and the bodies of many saints which slept, arose and came forth; and after his resurrection they entered into the holy city and appeared unto many. And the officer of the footsoldiers, and they that were with him who were guarding Jesus, when they saw the earthquake, and the things which came to pass, feared greatly, and praised God, and said, This man was righteous; and, Truly he was the Son of God.

It’s perfectly coherent. And it agrees with the Ascents of James. The only problem is that it directly contradicts Paul's doctrine on the resurrection.

Corinthians 15:20-23
But Christ has in fact been raised from the dead, the first-fruits of all who have fallen asleep. Death came through one man and in the same way the resurrection of the dead has come through one man. Just as all men die in Adam, so all men will be brought to life in Christ; but all of them in their proper order: Christ as the first-fruits and then, after the coming of Christ, those who belong to him.

See?

The Diatessaron, the Ascents of James, and (I contend) the original reading of Matthew 27 all have the tombs opening before Jesus’ resurrection.

But I am not arguing that the corpses wandered onto the site. I am arguing that the tombs were opened before Jesus’ resurrection. And that’s what the Diatessaron and the Ascents of James both say.


Now get a load of this:

2 Timothy 2:17-18
Their teaching will spread like gangrene. Among them are Hymenaeus and Philetus, who have departed from the truth. They say that the resurrection has already taken place, and they destroy the faith of some.

See?

The “resurrection” at issue is the zombie resurrection; not necessarily Jesus’ resurrection.

Sure it does.

It looks to me like 'Hymenaeus' and 'Philetus' were reading Matthew 27. It looks to me like someone later tweaked Matthew 27 in an attempt to bring it in line with Paul; but all they ended up doing was to make it incoherent.

----------------

And please don’t forget what indirect evidence is, and how it can be used to draw a conclusion.

aa5874

Your statement is clearly illogical.

Did I NOT show that the Pauline writer was AWARE of WRITTEN sources of the Jesus story where Jesus died, was BURIED and Resurrected on the THIRD day in 1 Cor. 15???

The very Pauline writer claimed he was LAST to be Visited by the resurrected Jesus after Over 500- people in 1 Cor.15.

So, I have addressed the questions many many times.

It was the Pauline writer who REJECTED the early Jesus stories AFTER the Fall of the Temple and FABRICATED Revelations from a supposed resurrected Jesus which was FOUND ALREADY WRITTEN in Christian Scriptures.

ONLY Christian Scriptures claim Jesus died for OUR SINS and was resurrected on the THIRD day.

The EARLIEST Jesus stories in the Canon are AFTER the Fall of the Temple.