TedM

I'd have to go review Doherty to see for sure, but If I'm right 1 Cor 15 is the only passage in Paul's epistles where he tells them explicity the basis for OTHER PEOPLE's claim (prior to his own) of Jesus' resurrection: ie people said they saw him because he appeared to them. (edit: 1 Cor 9 implies the same)

Yes, he talks about wisdom and revelation via scriptures/god's spirit regarding the mysteries, but none of those-if I recall correctly--clearly are referring to Jesus' resurrection being attested to by others.

Here's my point:

IF that is true, then any argument that 15: 3-11 is 'out of character' with Paul's gospel is flawed, as this passage is the only one directly addressing the issue.

dog-on

Or, it is simply A case of you reading it with a later understanding and the Catholics having done a great job.

TedM

How can it be 'out of character' when there is nothing to evidence that? Where else does Paul say how OTHERS came to believe in the resurrection prior to his conversion?

dog-on

If there were such people, probably the same way Paul says he did. Through the scriptures.

Toto

The logic escapes me.

If I Cor 15:3-11 is unique in Paul's writing, being the only time he refers to Jesus appearing to anyone other than Paul, doesn't that make it out of character by definition?

I.e., Paul doesn't show any evidence of caring about other people's visions.

TedM

No. 'Out of character' does not refer to how often someone has done something. It refers to whether the action/saying performed is in conflict with other actions/sayings that person has done/made. If there aren't other actions/sayings to compare against then one can only be agnostic to the question of whether it is in or out of character.

But where else does Paul need to reference them in order to justify the idea that Jesus really had been resurrected, in the minds of other people?

aa5874

Well, first of all "Paul" did NOT state he had a vision of the resurrected Jesus. "Paul" claimed he was the last to SEE the resurrected Jesus.

"Paul" is claiming to be a WITNESS not a DREAMER.

Now, it is not logical at all that 1 Cor. 15 is an interpolation when the Pauline writings are INUNDATED with statements that Jesus was RAISED from the dead.

Rom 1:4 - Gal 1:1 - Php 3:10 - 1Thess 1:10 - It simply cannot be shown the Pauline writer could NOT have written 1 Cor 15, that he previously wrote that Jesus did NOT resurrect, and that the Pauline writer was an Heretic.

Virtually ALL the Epistles claimed Jesus was RAISED from the dead and is compatible with the NT Canon and the doctrine of the Church.

Toto

Paul derives his authority in Rom 1 Paul's authority seems to depend on the Resurrection. He could at any time have bolstered this resurrection by referring to others' experiences, but he doesn't. His authority is his own experience.

TedM

I think you have misread that. To me it is saying that JESUS was appointed the Son of God in power by his resurrection from the dead.

That is how it reads to me and that would make more sense. Perhaps there is another passage more supportive that you can find..

Toto

Jesus was appointed by his resurrection, and Paul derives his authority/mission from the resurrected Jesus.