TedM

They already had conformed to authority. The person I responded to claimed no pre-existing authority for belief in the resurrection. Or at least that's how it came across. The issue I'm trying to get at is what in their minds allowed them to conform--why did they believe? It wasn't simple because 'somebody--anybody' said this or that. People, even so-called 'sheep' make a judgement as to whether somebody has a level of credibility or not. Those who believed miracles later on had made a judgement that the Church or Scripture was authoritative. What was the authority of someone proclaiming they had seen a resurrection?

Horatio Parker

You seem to be arguing for christian exceptionalism.

But to answer the question, the authority would be revelation.

TedM

That's not an authority. Revelation is an experience.

Horatio Parker

What then is an authority?

aa5874

What??? Pilate did NOT have the time??? Your post is a big joke. Are you claiming the Jews would have KILLED Pilate if he did NOT Crucify Jesus???

PILATE brought in Soldiers to ABOLISH the LAWS of the Jews.

The Soldiers were ALREADY brought to Jerusalem from Caesarea.

Antiquities of the Jews 18 Why don't you do some actual research for yourself instead of asking questions??

Please EXAMINE Apologetic writings Attributed to EUSEBIUS and ORIGEN.

Origen's "Commentary on Matthew" 1 and Eusebius' "Church History" 6.25

At this point, I will NO longer tolerate propaganda from posters. If you want to be taken seriously you MUST, MUST, MUST show that you are willing to present evidence to support your arguments--NOT imagination and speculation.

TedM

Well, ok. I guess a revelation can be given authority if presumed to be from God. But the people believing the claim have to believe that person making the claim has some authority--ie is telling the truth. They have to have some reason(in their own minds) to trust that person. Anyone can make a claim, but there is some process of discernment that takes place for the claim to be accepted by a group of people.

aa5874

Who accepted Paul's supposed Revelation??? If Jesus did ACTUALLY Exist and had disciples then Paul's revelation's had NO real impact on those who would have been ACTUALLY Taught by Jesus himself.

Let us go through the ENTIRE NT Canon and you will see that it was NOT Paul's revelation that was accepted but it was the gMark Jesus story.

Please READ the Pauline letters.

1. The Pauline writer claimed he was a PERSECUTOR and that he PERSECUTED the Faith BEFORE he was called to preach. See 1 Corinthians 15 and Galatians 1

2. The Pauline writer claimed that there were Scriptures that claimed Jesus DIED for our Sins, died and was Resurrected on the THIRD DAY. See 1 Corinthians 15

3. There were Churches in Christ BEFORE the Pauline writer was called to preach. See Galatians 1.

4. ALL the Pauline letters are to CHURCHES in Christ that supposedly were already in existence.

5. There were Christians BEFORE the Pauline writer. See Romans 16

By the time Paul was called to preach it was ALREADY KNOWN and WRITTEN that Jesus died for our Sins and was resurrected on the Third DAY.

Who needed the Pauline Revelations??? The people who Paul supposedly Persecuted ALREADY knew of Jesus and the same Jesus REVEALED things to PETER according to Acts of the Apostles. See Acts 10

In the very Canon we can see that the Pauline letters are really IRRELEVANT and were NOT used at all by any author of the very same NT.

There is even a WHOLE BOOK called Revelation by John with 21 chapters which is Most Blatant Evidence that the supposed Pauline Revelations were OBSOLETE and USELESS.

TedM

Why are you writing to me? In any case Paul established churches. Why didn't you post those quotes, aa? You pick and choose.. His revelations obviously impacted the churches he founded and in fact it was PAUL and his claims to revelation that not only saved Christianity in the early days, but created Christianity as we know it. Without Paul more than a billion people would never have become Christians.

You simply see what you want to see by twisting things to be the way you want them to be. Only a twisted and paranoid perception of reality can explain how people like you doubt Paul's existence or his impact on the entire world after studying his works.

It would be advisable to stop writing to me because this is the kind of response you'll get, if any. I see too that you once again have been unable to produce the apologetic sources you say claim that Paul was alive when GLuke was written. Is that because you can't find them now?

Horatio Parker

Let's assume credibility for the revealer. The revealer believes in his revelation, and he has convinced others of its truth.

Why would that revelation then have to be consistent with history in any way? Why could not historical accounts have been written to provide consistency with the revelation, since it's known to be true? The revealer knows and therefore would know how events had to have unfolded.

aa5874

Again, please READ the Pauline letters. Your claim is UTTERLY erroneous.

There were Christians BEFORE the Pauline writer and he attempted to DESTROY the Christian Faith.

The Pauline writer claim he WASTED the Church of GOD beyond measure.

Galatians 1:13 KJV Based on the Pauline writings the Christian FAITH was known and preached BEFORE the Pauline writer was called to preach. The Christian Faith did NOT need the Pauline revelations.

Your claim is absurd and EXPOSES you as one who cannot accept evidence that contradicts you..

It was the gMark Jesus story that IMPACTED the authors of the NT Canon.

1. The author of the LONG gMark virtually copied every single word of the Short gMark.

2. The author of gMatthew used virtually all of the SHORT gMark and almost word-for-word.

3. The author of gLuke also used the SHORT gMark.

The EVIDENCE is clear. It was the gMark Jesus story that IMPACTED the Jesus cult in antiquity.