I’m not saying it’s a stroke either. My point is just that it’s impossible to narrow down what it might have been beyond mere speculation. To so definitively stake a claim that it was lightning is ridiculous IMO. The more prudent tact would be to state your claim, give some evidence and admit that other factors might have caused it, but we haven’t seen any evidence discussed yet.
magpie said
Excellent HuffPo article linked in your comment 34, Greg. I may be a bit cynical here, but perhaps Paul was just calculating the way the wind was blowing? Perhaps not even consciously, but watching the politics this evening, Paul reminds me a bit of Trump, a real deal maker. First he was against the Christians, then he realized the power that would accrue to him if he changed and took control of the church. I just find that there are so many examples of this type of charismatic personality across the centuries who have grabbed authority and convinced others to follow them that I don’t think Paul would need to be struck by lightening to change his mind. He is selling something that could only be popular, no need to follow dietary laws, not need to be circumcised, etc. “Have I got a deal for you!” Now, whether or not his conversion was sincere or not I have no way of knowing, self deception is powerful too.
Mag:
I don’t think it’s cynicism so much as reading the traits of a modern “charismatic personality” into an ancient one and I’m not
real sure your post wasn’t written with your tongue firmly planted in your cheek. The problem is we know Paul told the Corinthians
that his message was anything but popular: ” we preach Christ crucified, to Jews a stumbling block and to Gentiles foolishness,”. further, I don’t see anywhere where Paul mentions these things (dietary restrictions etc) as a selling point . Not to mention he insists Jewish converts keep those laws. Further, the kind of activity your talking about changing and taking “control of the church” is rarely if ever accomplished by openly clashing with the leadership. Peter was clearly the Apostles post crucifixion leader; Jesus right hand man. If power and influence were his object, it’s more likely he would have used Peter to gain influence and loyalty while gradually undermining him in the eyes of his friends.
You are correct, spiker. I was totally equating modern motives unto a first century individual and just fantasizing about his method of selling his new found religion. However, I do not think thank it is too far-fetched to assume that the same desire to coerce others to see thing his way is totally different from other charismatic individuals throughout history.
magpie said
You are correct, spiker. I was totally equating modern motives unto a first century individual and just fantasizing about his method of selling his new found religion. However, I do not think thank it is too far-fetched to assume that the same desire to coerce others to see thing his way is totally different from other charismatic individuals throughout history.
I don’t think that this tendency has changed over time. We all fall in love with our own theory (even, or, perhaps, especially, scientists) and seek confirmation bias. It doesn’t mean that we are deliberately lying – even Mr Trump might believe his own propaganda – but maybe we are subconsciously selective with the facts. This does not have to be a mainstream theory: Fred Hoyle, for instance, went to his grave believing in ‘Steady State,’ even though the rest of the scientific world was shouting ‘Big Bang (ironically, a phrase he had invented as a term of a abuse).’ And there is no more zealous a person than a convert. Sometimes these iconoclasts are vindicated by history and, more often, they disappear without a trace – but we don’t hear much about those.
magpie said
You are correct, spiker. I was totally equating modern motives unto a first century individual and just fantasizing about his method of selling his new found religion. However, I do not think thank it is too far-fetched to assume that the same desire to coerce others to see thing his way is totally different from other charismatic individuals throughout history.
Is coerce the right word, Mags? Yea I would drop the “other charismatic individuals throughout history” line because it over simplifies a lot and the only way to hold onto it is to actually sort that all out, the figures, what they did or did not do It would be much better to talk about Paul’s own behaviour. I have to agree with Boltonian here. Self deluded people aren’t inherently insincere. To me, Paul’s behavior is objectionable…..
Blackwell said
In Paul’s time, lightning was thought to be controlled by the gods. This hypothesis explains why Paul thought he had received a special message direct from Jesus in heaven, as well as other matters which I have mentioned. Suggestions that he had a stroke, a fever, a seizure or a fevered dream do not provide any insight into his thinking. In the end, you can only choose the explanation which seems most probable. There is a saying that if it swims like a duck, flies like a duck and quacks like a duck, it probably is a duck, and in this case, if Paul was in a location (The Golan Heights) where lightning is likely, if his account (a flash of light, etc) corresponds to a lightning strike, and if his subsequent actions (belief that he had received a special message from heaven) also match, then it seems to me that it is a very probable explanation.
You say that Jews thought that divinity was a kind of spectrum.
Actually, I said nothing of the kind. Prof Ehrman(after all,that is who your disagreement is with, right?) wrote that “Both Jews and pagans … thought that divinity was a kind of spectrum, that there were different levels of divinity, that some humans had a share of divinity.”
I noticed you avoided answering the question of how a ressurection makes sense without
reference to the divine. Do people regulalry resurrect, where your from?
I see no evidence that the disciples believed a resurrected Jesus to be other than at the human end of this spectrum, whereas Paul’s Christianity puts him at the God end.
And what of the poem in Philippians, 2:6-11? Please see
** you do not have permission to see this link **
“…and for Paul, lightning strike = message from heaven.”
Really!!? Because “the gods” were thought to control lightning? Gods? Did Paul believe in Gods? Where in the Jewish scriptures, are messages from god conveyed by lightning strikes or anything resembling one? To paraphrase the philosopher, Jerry Lee Lewis, there’s a whole lot of supposition goin on! Not only supposition, but insinuation and a bit of question begging: Because people (What people?) thought lightning was divinely controlled Paul must have been almost hit by a lightning strike”!?
People convert all the time without near miss lightning strikes, seizures, epilepsy
etc
Your entire explanation is based on the belief that the accounts given in Acts are reliable, but you avoid explaining why you think Acts is in the least bit credible.
All we really have from Paul is that God was pleased “to reveal His Son in [or to] me
and that “he appeared to me”
magpie said
Excellent HuffPo article linked in your comment 34, Greg. I may be a bit cynical here, but perhaps Paul was just calculating the way the wind was blowing? Perhaps not even consciously, but watching the politics this evening, Paul reminds me a bit of Trump, a real deal maker. First he was against the Christians, then he realized the power that would accrue to him if he changed and took control of the church. I just find that there are so many examples of this type of charismatic personality across the centuries who have grabbed authority and convinced others to follow them that I don’t think Paul would need to be struck by lightening to change his mind. He is selling something that could only be popular, no need to follow dietary laws, not need to be circumcised, etc. “Have I got a deal for you!” Now, whether or not his conversion was sincere or not I have no way of knowing, self deception is powerful too.
I think you are being a bit cynical. In this case, Paul’s dispute with the disciples would be just him grabbing control rather than the result of him believing that he had received a special message from heaven (that Jesus was up there with God) which the disciples didn’t have. Also, the author of Acts must have just coincidentally made up a story which happens to correspond with a near miss by a lightning strike and the disciples must have somehow convinced people who had hardly even heard of Jesus that he had not only been resurrected but was also divine.
In the end, like a guilty or not guilty verdict in a criminal trial, there is no absolute way to determine the truth. You can only weigh all the evidence and choose the most probable explanation, and on this point there will be differences of opinion.
Greg Matthews said
I’m not saying it’s a stroke either. My point is just that it’s impossible to narrow down what it might have been beyond mere speculation. To so definitively stake a claim that it was lightning is ridiculous IMO. The more prudent tact would be to state your claim, give some evidence and admit that other factors might have caused it, but we haven’t seen any evidence discussed yet.
The evidence has been thoroughly discussed:
1. Paul says that he received a special commission/gift/message from heaven.
2. The author of Acts wrote a description of Paul’s conversion which corresponds to a near miss by a lightning strike.
3. Paul was in conflict with the disciples whereas if he had realized that they were right and he was wrong, he should have cooperated.
4. The disciples had to convince people who had hardly even heard of Jesus that he had not only been resurrected but was also divine. I can see no evidence that they did this, it is just a hypothesis.
In the end, like guilty or not guilty in a criminal trial, there is no absolute way to determine the truth. Taking everything into account, you have to choose the most probable explanation, and on this point there will be differences of opinion.
spiker said
Blackwell said
In Paul’s time, lightning was thought to be controlled by the gods. This hypothesis explains why Paul thought he had received a special message direct from Jesus in heaven, as well as other matters which I have mentioned. Suggestions that he had a stroke, a fever, a seizure or a fevered dream do not provide any insight into his thinking. In the end, you can only choose the explanation which seems most probable. There is a saying that if it swims like a duck, flies like a duck and quacks like a duck, it probably is a duck, and in this case, if Paul was in a location (The Golan Heights) where lightning is likely, if his account (a flash of light, etc) corresponds to a lightning strike, and if his subsequent actions (belief that he had received a special message from heaven) also match, then it seems to me that it is a very probable explanation.You say that Jews thought that divinity was a kind of spectrum.
Actually, I said nothing of the kind. Prof Ehrman(after all,that is who your disagreement is with, right?) wrote that “Both Jews and pagans … thought that divinity was a kind of spectrum, that there were different levels of divinity, that some humans had a share of divinity.”
I noticed you avoided answering the question of how a ressurection makes sense without
reference to the divine. Do people regulalry resurrect, where your from?I see no evidence that the disciples believed a resurrected Jesus to be other than at the human end of this spectrum, whereas Paul’s Christianity puts him at the God end.
And what of the poem in Philippians, 2:6-11? Please see
** you do not have permission to see this link **
“…and for Paul, lightning strike = message from heaven.”
Really!!? Because “the gods” were thought to control lightning? Gods? Did Paul believe in Gods? Where in the Jewish scriptures, are messages from god conveyed by lightning strikes or anything resembling one? To paraphrase the philosopher, Jerry Lee Lewis, there’s a whole lot of supposition goin on! Not only supposition, but insinuation and a bit of question begging: Because people (What people?) thought lightning was divinely controlled Paul must have been almost hit by a lightning strike”!?
People convert all the time without near miss lightning strikes, seizures, epilepsy
etcYour entire explanation is based on the belief that the accounts given in Acts are reliable, but you avoid explaining why you think Acts is in the least bit credible.
All we really have from Paul is that God was pleased “to reveal His Son in [or to] me
and that “he appeared to me”
1. There is no evidence that the disciples considered that a resurrected Jesus was equal to God. This idea originated with Paul.
2. The reference to Phillippians is also an expression of Paul’s belief.
3. Paul believed that he had received a special commission/gift/message from heaven. In Paul’s time, one of the ways that gods sent messages was by lightning.
4. It would be an unlikely coincidence if the author of Acts just happened to make up a story about Paul’s conversion which corresponds with a near miss by a lightning strike and Paul’s subsequent claim to have received a special message from heaven.
In the end, like a guilty or not guilty verdict in a criminal trial, there is no absolute way to determine the truth. Taking everything into account, you choose the most likely explanation, and on this point there will be differences of opinion.
Blackwell said
spiker said
Blackwell said
In Paul’s time, lightning was thought to be controlled by the gods. This hypothesis explains why Paul thought he had received a special message direct from Jesus in heaven, as well as other matters which I have mentioned. Suggestions that he had a stroke, a fever, a seizure or a fevered dream do not provide any insight into his thinking. In the end, you can only choose the explanation which seems most probable. There is a saying that if it swims like a duck, flies like a duck and quacks like a duck, it probably is a duck, and in this case, if Paul was in a location (The Golan Heights) where lightning is likely, if his account (a flash of light, etc) corresponds to a lightning strike, and if his subsequent actions (belief that he had received a special message from heaven) also match, then it seems to me that it is a very probable explanation.You say that Jews thought that divinity was a kind of spectrum.
Actually, I said nothing of the kind. Prof Ehrman(after all,that is who your disagreement is with, right?) wrote that “Both Jews and pagans … thought that divinity was a kind of spectrum, that there were different levels of divinity, that some humans had a share of divinity.”
I noticed you avoided answering the question of how a ressurection makes sense without
reference to the divine. Do people regulalry resurrect, where your from?I see no evidence that the disciples believed a resurrected Jesus to be other than at the human end of this spectrum, whereas Paul’s Christianity puts him at the God end.
And what of the poem in Philippians, 2:6-11? Please see
** you do not have permission to see this link **
“…and for Paul, lightning strike = message from heaven.”
Really!!? Because “the gods” were thought to control lightning? Gods? Did Paul believe in Gods? Where in the Jewish scriptures, are messages from god conveyed by lightning strikes or anything resembling one? To paraphrase the philosopher, Jerry Lee Lewis, there’s a whole lot of supposition goin on! Not only supposition, but insinuation and a bit of question begging: Because people (What people?) thought lightning was divinely controlled Paul must have been almost hit by a lightning strike”!?
People convert all the time without near miss lightning strikes, seizures, epilepsy
etcYour entire explanation is based on the belief that the accounts given in Acts are reliable, but you avoid explaining why you think Acts is in the least bit credible.
All we really have from Paul is that God was pleased “to reveal His Son in [or to] me
and that “he appeared to me”1. There is no evidence that the disciples considered that a resurrected Jesus was equal to God. This idea originated with Paul.
2. The reference to Phillippians is also an expression of Paul’s belief.
3. Paul believed that he had received a special commission/gift/message from heaven. In Paul’s time, one of the ways that gods sent messages was by lightning.
4. It would be an unlikely coincidence if the author of Acts just happened to make up a story about Paul’s conversion which corresponds with a near miss by a lightning strike and Paul’s subsequent claim to have received a special message from heaven.
In the end, like a guilty or not guilty verdict in a criminal trial, there is no absolute way to determine the truth. Taking everything into account, you choose the most likely explanation, and on this point there will be differences of opinion.
That is not a good analogy. In a criminal trial (at least in the UK) a guilty verdict can only be brought about when the evidence shows the case to be ‘Beyond reasonable doubt.’ In a civil hearing the verdict is based on ‘The balance of probabilities.’ I do not think that a lightening strike would pass either of those criteria. One can say no more than that is one possible explanation.
Blackwell said
In the end, like a guilty or not guilty verdict in a criminal trial, there is no absolute way to determine the truth. Taking everything into account, you choose the most likely explanation, and on this point there will be differences of opinion.
Then why are we still bludgeoning this dead horse? Every time I say that there are other possibilities you continue to harp on the lightning theory.
Blackwell said
1. There is no evidence that the disciples considered that a resurrected Jesus was equal to God. This idea originated with Paul.
2. The reference to Phillippians is also an expression of Paul’s belief.
Alrighty then! Thanks for ignoring the exaltaion/incarnation distinction. Avoiding yet again the question of a resurrection’s relation to the divine and just glossing over the poem, which is probably not something Paul wrote. Perhaps the reason you don’t see the evidence is that you were struck by lightning. Being struck by lightning often causes problems with perception and memory, therefore you must have been struck by lightning.
BDEhrman
FreedomBen
evgendob
Robert
1 Guest(s)