godfry n. glad

Two questions:

In the unquestionably Pauline epistles, does Paul ever refer to the members of the Jerusalem church in such a way as to suggest that they had been in the company of a living, breathing, preaching Jesus?

In those same epistles, or any other ancient document, is there a reference to Paul claiming that his experience of the Christ was just as authentic as those of the Jerusalem church (i.e., that the Pillars experienced the Christ as a vision, rather than as a corporeal human)?

Citations would be appreciated.

godfry n. glad

CX

One of the things mythicists seize on is that Paul is strikingly uninterested in the historical Jesus. He makes no direct references and only a few ancillary references. In Galatians he refers to James as "the Lord's Brother". This would seem to have in mind an earthly Jesus. Also Paul's references to resurrection from the dead would tend to imply that Jesus had at one time been alive. That's about it though. I don't think there are any direct references to any of the Jerusalem church members having been connected to the earthly Jesus aside from the reference to James who it seems clear was not involved in Jesus earthly ministry.

Underlying the obvious opposition to Paul's apostleship seems to be a contention that Paul had not seen the earthly Jesus but only a vision of the resurrected Jesus. I suppose we can conclude from that some earthly connection to Paul's opponents. That he doesn't talk about it doesn't strike me as too surprising since his lack of contact with the earthly Jesus undermined his own apostolic claims so he would likely have been loathe to draw attention to the earthly Jesus. Plus by emphasizing a spiritual Jesus and direct revelation to himself by that Jesus, he lays the foundation for the somewhat radical theological positions he establishes and defends.

As to your second question Paul refers to the "Pillars" by that term only in the Galatian correspondence. In that context he does not say much about their relationship to Jesus, but downplays their authority and significance by saying that he basically didn't think much of them, didn't give a rat's ass about their position in the Jerusalem church and that they (with apparently no resistance) accepted him as a genuine apostle to the Gentiles.

Paul does not address at all the distinction between the source of his authority (spiritual) and theirs (discipleship of the earthly Jesus). He definitely does not say, however, that they had only a vision of the resurredted Christ like he did as is evident by the tension in the Corinthian and Galatian epistles. He does however make a point of establishing his equality with them.

The Galatian correspondence is aimed primarily at this point and the two Corinthian epistles discuss it at length as well. I'd would read all 3 for a clear picture (from Paul's perspective anyway. We have no way of knowing how the spin he puts on all of it differs from what actually happened since we only get his undoubtedly biased side of the story).

[ March 20, 2002: Message edited by: CX ]</p>

boneyard bill

godfry n. glad asks:

In I Corinthians 15:4-8 Paul equates the appearance of Jesus to Cephas, the Twelve, and many others with Jesus' appearance to Paul himself. The only distinction he makes is in stating that Jesus appeared to him last.

However, if Paul's experience of the risen Jesus is to be understood as a vision, we must also accepts Luke's account. Paul does not unabiguously describe the resurrection experience himself. It seems likely, however, that Paul's reference in II Corinthians 12: 2-4 in which he is called to the third heaven, is a description of that experience. If that is the case, he doesn't even specifically mention a vision of Christ. However, we can only speculate on whether or not this is his account of the resurrection experience. He doesn't say so specifically.