Steven Carr

1 Corinthians 15:3-8 contains a set of bullet-points, before Paul lectures the Christians about resurrection.

Which lecturer gives a set of bullet-points and then never explains what these points mean in more detail?

Certainly not Paul, who does expand on his bullet-points.

But the only thing he uses them for is to claim that he too is an apostle, because Jesus appeared to him as well.

It appears that Paul did not think anything else worth expanding on his bullet points.

Why not? What Paul writes in 1 Cor. 15:3-8, if not an interpolation, can only be a summary of what he said in more detail previously. So why does this detail not get used again?

I don't know any lecturer who simply points again to his bullet points because the class have not understood, without a word of explanation or reminder of the significance of these bullet points.

Perhaps all the passage had originally was a claim that Peter, James and Paul had seen Jesus, and this was used by Paul to remind the Corinthians that he was an apostle like them....

Keith&Co.

Incompetent ones or ones with something to hide. "PLease don't ask me to show how i came to these conclusions," he doesn't say, but quickly skips to the next talking point.

J. P. Holding?

THere have been more than a few posters here that make an assertion, and prove it by making the assertion again.

andrewcriddle

The bullet-points serve primarily to establish (or attempt to establish) the resurrection and only secondarily to establish Paul's apostleship.

They (or at least verses 3-7) are often regarded as a more or less ofiicial stereotyped list which is meant to be given in its entirety.

Andrew Criddle

Toto

Bullet points - as if Paul were using PowerPoint.

Ian Parker in The New Yorker "Absolute PowerPoint," May 28, 2001, claimed that PowerPoint changes the way people organize information and the way they think.

I don't think Paul was ahead of his time. I think his "bullet points" were just statements.

Steven Carr

All Paul uses them for is to establish his apostleship.

Why is nothing else relevant to the themes of the chapter?

Steven Carr

They are just statements. So why are they not developed into arguments? The rest of the chapter ignores them, apart from using one small piece to establish that Paul was an apostle.

andrewcriddle

They attempt establish the resurrection of Christ as bedrock fundamental Christian teaching. The status of the resurrection of Christ as a fundamental Christian claim is the basis for Paul's subsequent argument.

Andrew Criddle