I have always had issues with the opening verses of I Corinthians chapter 15. Yes most academics accept that this creed predates Paul because he writes that he received it.
“For I handed on to you as of first importance what I in turn had received: that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the scriptures 4 and that he was buried and that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the scriptures.”
However, what did he mean by received (παρέλαβον)? Paul is very keen to stress in Galatians 1 that he received his gospel directly from a revelation of Jesus Christ
“for I did not receive it from a human source, nor was I taught it, but I received it through a revelation of Jesus Christ.”
Paul is also our earliest written source for this creed and repeats his comments in 1 Galatians
“who gave himself for our sins to set us free from the present evil age, according to the will of our God and Father”
So why do so many accept that what Paul was teaching was something he had been told and that others also believed?
Paul also holds that accepting Jesus died for all humankind and as a sacrifice for our sins is the way to achieve salvation as he writes in 3 Romans
“But now, apart from the law, the righteousness of God has been disclosed and is attested by the Law and the Prophets, 22 the righteousness of God through the faith of Jesus Christ[d] for all who believe.[e] For there is no distinction, 23 since all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God; 24 they are now justified by his grace as a gift, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, 25 whom God put forward as a sacrifice of atonement[f] by his blood, effective through faith. He did this to demonstrate his righteousness, because in his divine forbearance he had passed over the sins previously committed; 26 it was to demonstrate at the present time his own righteousness, so that he is righteous and he justifies the one who has the faith of Jesus.”
I find that some of Paul’s writing have echoes of a cult leader.
I have the only true belief.
Do not challenge me.
Ignore anyone else.
Only accept what I tell you.
Certainly it is Paul’s ideas (or ideas he promoted) that have come down to us as some of the central tenets of Christianity.
We are all sinners
Jesus was a sacrifice for our sins
Jesus was resurrected
Jesus is going to return (Parousia)
Jesus was something more than a mere human being.
So how far can we be sure that what Paul preached about Jesus dying for our sins and being resurrected were told to him by other human beings who believed that?
Or was it all based on his own mystical experiences and idiosyncratic beliefs?
I take Paul to be a honest relgious fanatic. History is full of such.
There is a distinction that needs to be made however. Paul definitely received info from other Christians. In context, what he received directly from Christ was his intepretation of the significance of Jesus’ death.
I cannot accept that early first century *Galilean* Jews believed that their fallen leader had died for the sins of humankind and was some sort of semi-divine/greater than human figure.
I can accept that those who knew and loved the man may have believed they had seen him alive. Such experiences are not uncommon amongst the bereaved. I can also accept the possibility that his followers believed he would be sent back by the Almighty to complete his Messianic mission but I cannot accept that what Paul taught was comparable to what the men and women who knew the real man believed.
I tend to the view that Paul is really the founder of Christianity. In traditional Jewish belief, there isn’t an expectation of a universal human sacrifice for the sins of humankind. Atonement in Judaism is often achieved through sincere repentance, prayer, and acts of kindness, as well as through the Yom Kippur (Day of Atonement) service within the contemporary context.
Whatever those who followed Jesus may have believed (or written down) was lost after 70 CE and the field (as it were) was effectively open to a gentile religion heavily influenced by Paul’s writings to develop.
I suspect that the Ebionite sect had far more in common with the group who followed Jesus than those who took the more Pauline position.
I am not entirely sure what you mean by “very Jewish”. From his epistles it would appear that with regard to sin and individual salvation he found Judaism inadequate for him. One might certainly consider him as something of a renegade Jew. His comments on the Law are particularly “interesting”.
@Flosshilda
“So how far can we be sure that what Paul preached about Jesus dying for our sins and being resurrected were told to him by other human beings who believed that?
Or was it all based on his own mystical experiences and idiosyncratic beliefs?”
Paul tells the galatians that James and Peter were believers before he was. He tells them he discussed his understanding of the faith with Peter and James and they added nothing to it. He tells them he originally persecuted the church but later joined it. This James whom he describes as a pillar of the church was according to Josephus later executed on the orders of the sanhedrin as a breaker of the law. So Paul’s story checks out.
Paul writes to the church in Roman asking to greet some fellow Jews there who had been in the faith before he was.
What we can be certain of is that Paul himself believed he was preaching the faith he had once tried to destroy. The faith that Peter and James had been preaching before him.
Brenmcg wrote
What we can be certain of is that Paul himself believed he was preaching the faith he had once tried to destroy. The faith that Peter and James had been preaching before him.
Then why does Paul, by his own admission, keep butting heads with the Pillars, the Circumcision Party?
The Pillars aren’t the circumcision party. Cephas is afraid of the circumcision party.
“But when Cephas came to Antioch… he used to eat with the Gentiles. But after they came, he drew back and kept himself separate for fear of the circumcision faction.”
The Acts account has James write of the incident “Since we have heard that certain persons who have gone out from us, though with no instructions from us, have said things to disturb you and have unsettled your minds” and there’s nothing in Paul’s letters contradicting that.
As its described by James in acts – “certain persons who have gone out from us, though with no instructions from us”.
They came from James, but there’s nothing in Gal 2:12 to say they were sent with instructions by James.
Paul considers James to be an apostle in the church before he was. A church he had tried to destroy, driven by zealousness for the traditions of his ancestors.
The point of the letter is Paul trying to convince the Galatians that he is not just following the orders of the pillars, but truly believes in the faith himself.
“Paul an apostle sent neither by human commission nor from human authorities”
“Am I now seeking human approval, or God’s approval? Or am I trying to please people? If I were still pleasing people, I would not be a servant of Christ.”
“But my friends, why am I still being persecuted if I am still preaching circumcision?”
As proof he tells them he’s even willing to criticize the pillars to their face in front of everybody.
Although I posted this thread over two years ago some issues continue to perplex me.
Perhaps other members can offer some comment.
As I understand it, a majority of academics agree that verses 3-5 in I Corinthians 15 echo an earlier creed.
For I handed on to you as of first importance what I in turn had received: that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the scriptures4 and that he was buried and that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the scriptures
What Hebrew scripture(s) refer to a human sacrifice for collective sin? I cannot find one. Can anyone point me to a text or texts?
Nor can I find a Hebrew text that deals with an individual being buried and raised on the third day. Hosea 6 refers to Israel’s repentance and that “on the third day he will raise us up, that we may live before him.” But that is within a specific context, it is not a general reference that applies to everyone.
Robert said
Paul (and perhaps some before him) were probably thinking of the Suffering Servant of Isaish and Hosea 6. It’s not good exegesis by our modern historico-critical methodology, of course, but it is s a type of pesher exegesis that was practiced within Judaism at the time, as can be seen in the Dead Sea Scrolls (regarding their community & founder). A more obvious meaning of the text may or may not have been accepted, but a completely obscure meaning was being revealed regarding current events and people. This hidden pesher meaning could be seen as either secondary or even of primary significance in apocalyptic times. You can see Paul doing this elsewhere:1 Cor 9,8-11
Do I say this on human authority? Does not the law also say the same? For it is written in the law of Moses, “You shall not muzzle an ox while it is treading out the grain.” Is it for oxen that God is concerned? Or does he not speak entirely for our sake? It was indeed written for our sake, for whoever plows should plow in hope and whoever threshes should thresh in hope of a share in the crop. If we have sown spiritual things among you, is it too much if we harvest material things?In Galatians, Paul applies this to a combination of two texts (Genesis 16 & Isaiah 54):
Gal 4,21-27
Tell me, you who desire to be subject to the law, will you not listen to the law? 22 For it is written that Abraham had two sons, one by an enslaved woman and the other by a free woman. 23 One, the child of the enslaved woman, was born according to the flesh; the other, the child of the free woman, was born through the promise. 24 Now this is an allegory: these women are two covenants. One woman, in fact, is Hagar, from Mount Sinai, bearing children for slavery. 25 Now Hagar is Mount Sinai in Arabia and corresponds to the present Jerusalem, for she is in slavery with her children. 26 But the other woman corresponds to the Jerusalem above; she is free, and she is our mother.
For it is written,
“Rejoice, you childless one, you who bear no children, burst into song and shout, you who endure no birth pangs, for the children of the desolate woman are more numerous than the children of the one who is married.”
You seem to be suggesting that Paul had some connection with Qumran. What is the evidence for that?
BDEhrman
FreedomBen
evgendob
Robert
1 Guest(s)