FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.

Go Back   FRDB Archives > Archives > Religion (Closed) > Biblical Criticism & History
Reload this Page Peter, Paul and the Jesus Myth
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Yesterday at 03:12 PM
Search

 
Page 2 of 7 1 2 34 Last »
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 11-27-2009, 11:07 PM   #11
Contributor
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: MT
Posts: 10,656
Default
Quote:
Originally Posted by spin View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by ApostateAbe View Post
In Paul's letter to the Galatians, chapters 2 and 3, Paul writes of meeting Peter (also calling him Cephas) and getting angry in Peter's face over whether or not Christians should be circumcised. Paul seems to treat Peter as an important leader of the Christian cult. In all of the gospels, Peter is reported as a direct disciple of Jesus, seemingly the most important follower Jesus had.

Peter apparently was not a myth. So, if Jesus was only a myth, how do you explain Peter? I can think of several potential solutions, but I would like to know your solution.
Peter is mentioned only in Gal 2:7-8 and nowhere else in the Pauline corpus. Paul usually refers to someone called Cephas, as in the rest of Galatians and in 1 Corinthians. The mention of Peter in Gal 2:7-8 is totally unexpected given Paul's use of the name Cephas. In fact the reference to Peter sits poorly in its present context. Verse 7 attaches only with difficulty with what came before it (how does the "to the contrary" tounantion work?) and the exclusive commission to Peter contradicts the shared commission of the pillars in the follow verse. The text reads well without vv.7-8 and those verses represent a status quo doctrine of Petrine ascendancy. One cannot assume that Peter and Cephas refer to the same person despite the later gospel material tying the two names together, for in the Epistle of the Apostles these two names occur together in a list of names of apostles, ie two separate figures side by side named Peter and Cephas.
2 We, John, Thomas, Peter, Andrew, James, Philip, Bartholomew, Matthew, Nathanael, Judas Zelotes, and Cephas, write unto the churches of the east and the west, of the north and the south declaring and imparting unto you that which concerneth our Lord Jesus Christ
So the presence of the name Cephas does not imply a reference to Peter, though its presence is a convenient hook for later orthodoxy. The mention of Peter in Gal 2:7-8 has all the earmarks of an orthodox interpolation. Nothing can be made out of its presence in Galatians.

spin
OK, great, thanks. Do you know if Clement of Alexandria believed that "Cephas" is different from "Peter"? Wikipedia's article on "Aramaic of Jesus" has that claim, but it has a [citation needed].
ApostateAbe is offline  
Old 11-27-2009, 11:39 PM   #12
Contributor
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: the fringe of the caribbean
Posts: 18,988
Default
Quote:
Originally Posted by ApostateAbe View Post
...OK, great, thanks. Do you know if Clement of Alexandria believed that "Cephas" is different from "Peter"? Wikipedia's article on "Aramaic of Jesus" has that claim, but it has a [citation needed].

In the book of Acts, Paul did meet Peter in Jerusalem, based on your "history" book of myths, the Bible. See Acts 15. The speech made by Peter at the meeting with Paul is recorded.

Acts 15.1-2
Quote:

1And certain men which came down from Judea taught the brethren, and said, Except ye be circumcised after the manner of Moses, ye cannot be saved.

2When therefore Paul and Barnabas had no small dissension and disputation with them, they determined that Paul and Barnabas, and certain other of them, should go up to Jerusalem unto the apostles and elders about this question.

Ac 15:7 -
Quote:
And when there had been much disputing, Peter rose up, and said unto them, Men and brethren, ye know how that a good while ago God made choice among us, that the Gentiles by my mouth should hear the word of the gospel, and believe.
Acts 15.12
Quote:

12Then all the multitude kept silence, and gave audience to Barnabas and Paul, declaring what miracles and wonders God had wrought among the Gentiles by them.
In the NT, Paul did meet Peter in Jerusalem after a bolt of light made him blind to reality. It is all in your "history" book of myths, the Bible.
aa5874 is offline  
Old 11-27-2009, 11:56 PM   #13
Contributor
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: MT
Posts: 10,656
Default
Quote:
Originally Posted by aa5874 View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by ApostateAbe View Post
...OK, great, thanks. Do you know if Clement of Alexandria believed that "Cephas" is different from "Peter"? Wikipedia's article on "Aramaic of Jesus" has that claim, but it has a [citation needed].

In the book of Acts, Paul did meet Peter in Jerusalem, based on your "history" book of myths, the Bible. See Acts 15. The speech made by Peter at the meeting with Paul is recorded.

Acts 15.1-2


Ac 15:7 -

Acts 15.12
Quote:

12Then all the multitude kept silence, and gave audience to Barnabas and Paul, declaring what miracles and wonders God had wrought among the Gentiles by them.
In the NT, Paul did meet Peter in Jerusalem after a bolt of light made him blind to reality. It is all in your "history" book of myths, the Bible.
Thanks, aa, I appreciate it.
ApostateAbe is offline  
Old 11-28-2009, 01:11 AM   #14
Contributor
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: nowhere
Posts: 15,747
Default
Quote:
Originally Posted by ApostateAbe View Post
Do you know if Clement of Alexandria believed that "Cephas" is different from "Peter"? Wikipedia's article on "Aramaic of Jesus" has that claim, but it has a [citation needed].
It comes to us only preserved by Eusebius (Eccles Hist, 1.12.2). (Clement's intent is transparently apologetic.)


spin
spin is offline  
Old 11-28-2009, 07:21 AM   #15
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: San Bernardino, Calif.
Posts: 5,435
Default
Quote:
Originally Posted by ApostateAbe View Post
But I am not sure how advocates of the mythical-Jesus position explain Peter.
I'm not sure about ahistoricists (a term I prefer to mythicists) in general, but I explain him as a leader of the religious cult (or one of the cults) out of which Christianity as we now know it evolved. To grossly oversimplify: When a historical Jesus was added to stories about the cult's origins, Peter had to be worked into the narrative somehow.
Doug Shaver is offline  
Old 11-28-2009, 09:17 AM   #16
Contributor
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: MT
Posts: 10,656
Default
Quote:
Originally Posted by spin View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by ApostateAbe View Post
Do you know if Clement of Alexandria believed that "Cephas" is different from "Peter"? Wikipedia's article on "Aramaic of Jesus" has that claim, but it has a [citation needed].
It comes to us only preserved by Eusebius (Eccles Hist, 1.12.2). (Clement's intent is transparently apologetic.)


spin
Cool, thanks.
ApostateAbe is offline  
Old 11-28-2009, 09:22 AM   #17
Contributor
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: the fringe of the caribbean
Posts: 18,988
Default
Quote:
Originally Posted by ApostateAbe View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by aa5874 View Post

In the NT, Paul did meet Peter in Jerusalem after a bolt of light made him blind to reality. It is all in your "history" book of myths, the Bible.
Thanks, aa, I appreciate it.
I hope you appreciate that Jesus, Peter and Paul were 1st century fiction characters that have no historical support.

The NT as complied is a PACK of LIES or just incredulous belief.
aa5874 is offline  
Old 11-28-2009, 09:27 AM   #18
Contributor
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: MT
Posts: 10,656
Default
Quote:
Originally Posted by Doug Shaver View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by ApostateAbe View Post
But I am not sure how advocates of the mythical-Jesus position explain Peter.
I'm not sure about ahistoricists (a term I prefer to mythicists) in general, but I explain him as a leader of the religious cult (or one of the cults) out of which Christianity as we now know it evolved. To grossly oversimplify: When a historical Jesus was added to stories about the cult's origins, Peter had to be worked into the narrative somehow.
That is the explanation I expected to be most popular, but I am getting all kinds of answers. Maybe I'll make a poll.
ApostateAbe is offline  
Old 11-28-2009, 09:33 AM   #19
Contributor
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: MT
Posts: 10,656
Default
Quote:
Originally Posted by aa5874 View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by ApostateAbe View Post

Thanks, aa, I appreciate it.
I hope you appreciate that Jesus, Peter and Paul were 1st century fiction characters that have no historical support.

The NT as complied is a PACK of LIES or just incredulous belief.
No, I just appreciate you reminding me about that passage in Acts, that's all.
ApostateAbe is offline  
Old 11-28-2009, 09:48 AM   #20
Contributor
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: the fringe of the caribbean
Posts: 18,988
Default
How in the world did Peter manage to become the leader of the Jesus cult when in the NT Peter publicly denied multiple times he had any association with Jesus?

How did Peter manage to convince people that Jesus resurrected when he was a known liar?

It must be obvious the Petrine character was fiction. Peter makes no sense, he has zero credibility. Peter has now become the most unlikely candidate to be the leader of the Jesus sect. And the Jews in Jerusalem must have been looking for him, they must have some good news and bad news for him.

Is it Peter's turn to resurrect?

The dead in Christ shall rise FIRST.
aa5874 is offline  
 
Page 2 of 7 1 2 34 Last »

« Previous Thread | Next Thread »
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 03:42 AM.

Top

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