Toto

This sort of sarcasm is not helpful. This question actually has little or nothing to do with whether there was a historical Jesus - unless post resurrection appearances are part of your case for a historical Jesus.

Toto

That's right. The case for interpolation has been presented by Robert M. Price in the article linked to above. Price holds two PhD's and reads Koine Greek, and has published in peer reviewed journals. Since you show no evidence of having read or understood the case he presented, I don't see the point of continuing any discussion with you.

spin

Good effort:
And the last is a good example of fatigue.

A lapse in concentration causes deviation back to a less consciously chosen form. This should help one understand one type of manuscript deviation, in which a scribe through an apparent lapse in concentration falls back into using a less consciously chosen form, for example, the use of Peter instead of Cephas when copying Galatians. If Cephas is Peter and Peter is the preferred form, then it is attention that maintains Cephas and a lapse leads to Peter. It doesn't work the other way. No manuscript changes Peter in Gal 2:7-8 to Cephas.

spin

This is a good example of the effects of the Stockholm syndrome. (The captors are the christian church.)

aa5874

I should congratulate you.

Without any credible sources of antiquity that can show that "Paul" Denied that Jesus was raised from the dead then all arguments for the interpolation of 1 Cor 15 may be dis-continued or futile.

The Pauline writings as found Canonized must be compatible with the Doctrine of the Church that Jesus Christ was resurrected on the THIRD day and was WITNESSED to have resurected.

1 Cor. 15 is probably one of the MOST significant chapters in the NT where "Paul" claimed or implied that the THIRD day resurrection was the FOUNDATION of the Christian Faith and for REMISSION of Sins.

1Co 15:17 -

Iskander

Thank you so much, but the honour is always yours for I am only your student.

stephan huller

I've lost track of what the point of this conversation was. Can we all at least agree that there is a solid case for the idea that the present passage is corrupt if not interpolated?

aa5874

You are promoting logical fallacies when you appeal to authority. You should know that Not all EXPERTS agree with Price.

One does NOT have to be an expert to show the CONTENTS of the NT Canon or the writings from sources of antiquity.

I really don't care at all about what you decide to do.

I have my position and will EXPOSE arguments that are baseless.

This is the position that I am arguing.

There is simply ZERO evidence that 1 Cor. 15.3-11 is an interpolation.

1. It is claimed in virtually all the Pauline writings that Jesus Christ was RAISED from the dead.

2. No Extant epistle or writing attributed to "Paul" DENIES the resurrection of Jesus Christ.

3. No Extant writings attributed to any Heretic or Skeptic claimed "Paul" DENIED the resurrection of Jesus.

4. Church writers used the Pauline writings to argue that Jesus was RAISED from the dead on the THIRD day.

5. The resurrection of Jesus is a FUNDAMENTAL event for the Christian Faith.

6. The Pauline writings are part of the NT Canon and is compatible with the Doctrine of the Church that Jesus Christ was RAISED from the dead on the THIRD day.

aa5874

That is the very worse way to present a solid case.

You have LOST TRACK and want people to accept the opinion of the LOST?

Please, you don't know what you are talking about. You have LOST TRACK.

First, get back on track and then present something solid.

aa5874

Well, I only want you to be a STUDENT of the evidence from antiquity. It is the EXTANT surviving evidence from antiquity that will eventually leads us to the TRUTH.

The so-called "Victors" attempted to re-write history but UTTERLY failed. What the "Victors" wrote will ultimately be used against them.

The Pauline writers ATTEMPTED to historicise the resurrection by claiming to be WITNESSES of the resurrected Jesus but Jesus did NOT ever exist and neither does the God of the Jews.

The Pauline writings are historically a Pack of LIES about the resurrection.