Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Thomas II · 01-25-2006, 07:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by robto

The terms "received" and "handed on" were technical terms for the transmission of tradition in the mystery religions. Paul uses them in 1 Cor 15:3 as well. They were also used in pre-Xian Judaism (Wisdom, I think).

So, "received from the Lord" probably means via tradition, rather than revelation.

"Paul" says :"FOR I RECEIVED FROM THE LORD...(via REVELATION) WHAT I ALSO HANDED ON TO YOU( via the traditional way)".
If he would have said "WE have received from the Lord..." then yes,via tradition. but he said "I RECEIVED..." and that means via revelation.
He is basically saying " Hey, God just showed me this I'm sharing with you guys..."

The Admiral · 01-25-2006, 03:12 PM

So, when all is said and done, do we have any more proof for the historicity of Paul than we have of Jesus?

The Admiral

Toto · 01-25-2006, 03:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Admiral

So, when all is said and done, do we have any more proof for the historicity of Paul than we have of Jesus?

The Admiral

We have nothing written by Jesus, but we do have some letters that appear to be written by Paul, or someone using his name. Paul does not fit any mythic profiles or claim to perform any supernatural acts. So it is more likely that there was a Paul.

GakuseiDon · 01-25-2006, 03:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

We have nothing written by Jesus, but we do have some letters that appear to be written by Paul, or someone using his name. Paul does not fit any mythic profiles or claim to perform any supernatural acts. So it is more likely that there was a Paul.

I think Paul seems to say that he performed supernatural acts:

Romans15:
17 Therefore I have reason to glory in Christ Jesus in the things which pertain to God. 18 For I will not dare to speak of any of those things which Christ has not accomplished through me, in word and deed, to make the Gentiles obedient-- 19 in mighty signs and wonders, by the power of the Spirit of God, so that from Jerusalem and round about to Illyricum I have fully preached the gospel of Christ.

The following is part of Paul's 'I am a fool' speech', so I'm not sure how it should be taken:

2Cor12:11
I have become a fool *in boasting; you have compelled me. For I ought to have been commended by you; for in nothing was I behind the most eminent apostles, though I am nothing. 12 Truly the signs of an apostle were accomplished among you with all perseverance, in signs and wonders and mighty deeds. 13 For what is it in which you were inferior to other churches, except that I myself was not burdensome to you? Forgive me this wrong!

Also, on miracles in the early church:

1Cor12:
7 But the manifestation of the Spirit is given to each one for the profit of all: 8 for to one is given the word of wisdom through the Spirit, to another the word of knowledge through the same Spirit, 9 to another faith by the same Spirit, to another gifts of healings by *the same Spirit, 10 to another the working of miracles, to another prophecy, to another discerning of spirits, to another different kinds of tongues, to another the interpretation of tongues. 11 But one and the same Spirit works all these things, distributing to each one individually as He wills.

1Cor12:
27 Now you are the body of Christ, and members individually. 28 And God has appointed these in the church: first apostles, second prophets, third teachers, after that miracles, then gifts of healings, helps, administrations, varieties of tongues. 29 Are all apostles? Are all prophets? Are all teachers? Are all workers of miracles? 30 Do all have gifts of healings? Do all speak with tongues? Do all interpret? 31 But earnestly desire the *best gifts.

Gal3
5 Therefore He who supplies the Spirit to you and works miracles among you, does He do it by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith?

Paul gives no details of any of the miracles (or "mighty deeds").

Toto · 01-25-2006, 04:16 PM

Paul doesn't walk on water or rise from the dead. I don't see that he claims to have done more that the usual faith healing, oratory, maybe some speaking in tongues.

NOGO · 01-25-2006, 04:23 PM

When Paul says that he received from the Lord he means that it was inspired.
This occured when Paul read the scriptures and some bizarre ideas came into his head. He believed that God put these ideas into his head. This is what received from the Lord means.

In other words to gives credibility to his interpretation of scriptures Paul claims that they are from the Lord - as opposed to quoting a human Jesus.

The Didache is much more recent than Paul's letters.

Ben C Smith · 01-25-2006, 05:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

Paul doesn't walk on water or rise from the dead. I don't see that he claims to have done more that the usual faith healing, oratory, maybe some speaking in tongues.

The usual faith healing, Toto? You sound like you do it all the time.

Your point is well taken. Not all miracles are created equal. Some are easier to fake; others can be explained physiologically, psychosomatically, or psychologically. I would go so far as to say that some things that we might call miracles are actually fairly normal parts of the human experience.

As for the speaking in tongues, there is no maybe about it. Paul claims to have done it early and often in 1 Corinthians 14.18.

Ben.

Spincracker · 01-25-2006, 05:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Julian

Hmmm, this would be the perfect time for me to point out that I do not consider that section as authentic. I have sketched brief and incomplete reasons here: http://www.iidb.org/vbb/showthread.p...36#post3022036

Also, since we cannot demonstrate any mechanism for divine inspiration, we must conclude that no such method is possible. Thus it must stand until such a mechanism can be shown to exist.

The easiest answer here is simply that it was written into Paul sometime well after 100CE or so, along with much (most? all?) of 1 Cor. 10-15.

Julian

What set of criteria is used to determine what is truly Paul and what was emended? I understand there are arguments floating about contending certain sections of certain texts should not be attributed to Paul, but I haven't seen any yet that are any less fallacious than how some argue the Bible should be read strictly in a Fundie's view.

The Admiral · 01-25-2006, 05:31 PM

But is Paul mentioned in any documents other than the N.T.? Is there a mention in Josephus? I think that there is, but is it the same Paul?

The Admiral

Spincracker · 01-25-2006, 05:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ben C Smith

Paul describes what we would call the last supper in 1 Corinthians 11.23-26, and he says that he received it from the Lord in verse 23.

Is there anything in the wording requiring Paul to have received this from a human source? Is there anything preventing Paul from having received it from a human source?

Conversely, is there anything in the wording requiring Paul to have received this from a divine revelation? Is there anything preventing Paul from having received it from a divine revelation?

Thanks.

Ben.

"Received from the Lord" could have different connotations than we may understand it today...i.e...another person, or disciple could have informed Paul of the supper he missed, and so Paul would be correct in saying to his audience he received it from the Lord. It does not necessarily mean God tapped him on the shoulder w/ a menu and list of instructions.

It simply appears to be a daily moral/spiritual inventory.

01-25-2006, 03:12 PM	#12
The Admiral Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2000 Location: Racine, Wi. USA Posts: 768	1st Corinthians So, when all is said and done, do we have any more proof for the historicity of Paul than we have of Jesus? The Admiral

01-25-2006, 05:31 PM	#19
The Admiral Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2000 Location: Racine, Wi. USA Posts: 768	Paul But is Paul mentioned in any documents other than the N.T.? Is there a mention in Josephus? I think that there is, but is it the same Paul? The Admiral

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

01-25-2006, 04:16 PM	#15
Toto Contributor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Los Angeles area Posts: 40,549	Paul doesn't walk on water or rise from the dead. I don't see that he claims to have done more that the usual faith healing, oratory, maybe some speaking in tongues.

01-25-2006, 04:23 PM	#16
NOGO Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Canada Posts: 1,562	When Paul says that he received from the Lord he means that it was inspired. This occured when Paul read the scriptures and some bizarre ideas came into his head. He believed that God put these ideas into his head. This is what received from the Lord means. In other words to gives credibility to his interpretation of scriptures Paul claims that they are from the Lord - as opposed to quoting a human Jesus. The Didache is much more recent than Paul's letters.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.