Steefen
Well, it looks like I better use my Dale Carnegie Sale Training and listen to this guy’s objection.
From what I read last night, I want to start with “the list of earthly Jesus according to Paul.”
- He was born of a woman (Gal 4,4)
- Born as a Jew (Gal 4,4)
- He had brothers (1 Cor 9,5),
- One of whom was named James (Gal 1,19)
- He ministered among the Jews (Rom 15,7)
- He had twelve followers (1 Cor 15,5)
- He instituted the Lord’s Supper on the night he was handed over (1 Cor 11,23-25)
- He was crucified (1 Cor 2,2 and innumerable other passages) and that Judeans had some role in killing him (1 Thes 2,15)
- In terms of Jesus’ teachings, in addition to the words at the Last Supper, Paul may refer to two other sayings of
Jesus, to the effect that believers should not get divorced (1 Cor 7,10-11) and that they should pay their preachers (1 Cor 9,14).
= = =
Steefen
#6 does not count. After being raised on the third day, he appeared to the Eleven, not the Twelve. Taking Cephas out of the count: he appeared to Cephas and the Ten
#6 does not count because he goes on to say he appeared to 500 hundred brothers but the gospels do not say this. Paul knows something that happened in the 40 days before Ascension that the Eleven did not witness? IF, big IF, that happened, did that inspire him to claim he was 501?
#6 does not make Jesus earthly, natural. Jesus is as supernatural as an archangel high priest.
I do not think Paul thought to keep copies of his letters and carried them around until he could deposit them with a library or a church.
Who was the executor of his estate?
Paul was not poor.
How could 2 Peter say there was a collection of Pauline letters? Who collected them and where we they housed?
Did Josephus take an interest in the letters of Paul, especially Romans?
With the 9 minus 1 = 8 instances above, and if Paul wrote letters before AD 64 and not as Jarek said professional writers wrote them, and if Paul is not an alter ego of Josephus (both of whom had an audience with Nero after being shipwrecked), is that enough for an archangel high priest to not need euhemerism?
Wait a second, those 8 points are insufficient for evangelism for sex, money, and political allies. Again, Paul does not use Jesus healing the Roman centurion’s slave or Jesus’ conversation with the Samaritan woman, or the parable of the Good Samaritan as a lead in to evangelizing to Gentiles.
Obviously, IF the Pauline letters were all written before AD 64 and the 8 points are what can be gleaned of the earthly biography of this archangel — no baptism, no John the Baptist — … 1 Timothy mentions Pilate but Paul does not … we do not have enough from Paul to anchor Jesus to 27-30 CE.
Earl J. Doherty (born 1941)[1] is a Canadian author of The Jesus Puzzle (1999), Challenging the Verdict (2001), and Jesus: Neither God Nor Man (2009). Doherty argues for a version of the Christ myth theory, the thesis that Jesus did not exist as a historical figure. Doherty says that Paul thought of Jesus as a spiritual being executed in a spiritual realm.
Doherty has stated he has a bachelor’s degree in Ancient History and Classical Languages,[3] but no completed advanced degrees.[4][5][6] His undergraduate studies gave him knowledge of Greek and Latin, to which he has added a basic knowledge of Hebrew and Syriac.[6]
In Fall 1997, the Journal of Higher Criticism published his article, “The Jesus Puzzle: Pieces in a Puzzle of Christian Origins.”[10]
Reception:
Among authors sympathetic to the view that Jesus never existed, Doherty’s work has received mixed reactions. The Jesus Puzzle has received favorable reviews from fellow mythicists Robert M. Price and Richard Carrier.[15] Frank Zindler, former editor of American Atheist, in a review of The Jesus Puzzle described it as “the most compelling argument against the historical Jesus published in my life-time”.[16]
George Albert Wells, who now argues a more moderate form of the Christ myth and who rejects Doherty’s view that the mythical Jesus of Paul did not also descend to Earth,[17] has nonetheless described The Jesus Puzzle as an “important book”.[18] R. Joseph Hoffmann considers that there are “reasons for scholars to hold” the view that Jesus never existed, but considers Doherty “A ‘disciple’ of Wells” who “has rehashed many of the former’s views in The Jesus Puzzle (Age of Reason Publications, 2005) which is qualitatively and academically far inferior to anything so far written on the subject”.[19] Doherty has responded that his work owes very little to Wells.[20]
Writers who do not necessarily support the hypothesis that Jesus did not exist have found merit in some of Doherty’s arguments. Hector Avalos has written that “The Jesus Puzzle outlines a plausible theory for a completely mythical Jesus.”[21]
Bart Ehrman, an expert on textual criticism of the NT and Early Christianity, has dismissed Jesus, Neither God nor Man as “filled with so many unguarded and undocumented statements and claims, and so many misstatements of fact, that it would take a 2,400-page book to deal with all the problems… Not a single early Christian source supports Doherty’s claim that Paul and those before him thought of Jesus as a spiritual, not a human being, who was executed in the spiritual, not the earthly realm.”[2]
In a book criticizing the Christ myth theory, New Testament scholar Maurice Casey describes Doherty as “perhaps the most influential of all the mythicists”,[22] but one who is unable to understand the ancient texts he uses in his arguments.[23]
Bart D.E.
Did Jesus Exist? pp. 252-258
[The book is] “filled with so many unguarded and undocumented statements and claims, and so many misstatements of fact, that it would take a 2,400-page book to deal with all the problems…
Not a single early Christian source supports Doherty’s claim that Paul and those before him thought of Jesus as a spiritual, not a human being, who was executed in the spiritual, not the earthly realm.”
Steefen
Oh well, Price and Carrier vs. Bart Ehrman, again.
= = ==
This thread started with what the Pauline letters knew of the earthly Jesus.
Earl Doherty
There is a great divide between the world of the Gospels and the world of the epistles.
Encyclopedia Britannica
Matthew and Luke both share a good deal of material, sayings, attributed to Jesus that is absent from Mark. This led biblical scholars to hypothesize the existence of an undetermined source from which the shared material was drawn: Q.
Google Result
Scholars have proposed a date as early as 60 AD or as late as 140 AD, depending upon whether the Gospel of Thomas is identified with the original core of sayings, or with the author’s published text, or with the Greek or Coptic texts, or with parallels in other literature. – Wikipedia
Earl Doherty
The Q document and the gospel of Thomas say nothing about Jesus going to Jerusalem or about anything that happened to him when he got there. Q and Thomas does not speak of death and resurrection.
Steefen
Before Earl makes his next statement, let’s look at the earthly Jesus list:
- He was born of a woman (Gal 4,4)
- Born as a Jew (Gal 4,4)
- He had brothers (1 Cor 9,5),
- One of whom was named James (Gal 1,19)
- He ministered among the Jews (Rom 15,7)
- He had twelve followers (1 Cor 15,5)
- He instituted the Lord’s Supper on the night he was handed over (1 Cor 11,23-25)
- He was crucified (1 Cor 2,2 and innumerable other passages) and that Judeans had some role in killing him (1 Thes 2,15)
- In terms of Jesus’ teachings, in addition to the words at the Last Supper, Paul may refer to two other sayings of
Jesus, to the effect that believers should not get divorced (1 Cor 7,10-11) and that they should pay their preachers (1 Cor 9,14).
Earl
The epistles attribute no teachings [except divorce and paying preachers] or miracles to Christ Jesus.
The epistles focus on the believer’s relationship to the [now] heavenly Son and on his redeeming sacrificial death and resurrection.
So, let me return to the divide between the epistles-Q-Thomas and the gospels. The divide is artificially joined in the Gospel of Mark.
Steve Campbell, Author of Historical Accuracy
So, with Mark adding Homeric Epics, Mark was also adding Paul to his creation.
Earl
Paul got his ideas about crucifixion and resurrection from the Hebrew Bible [not from a historical event involving Pontius Pilate who had the Samaritan Redeemer slain/crucified].
During the time of Paul, there was the pervasive “intermediary Son” concept: the idea of a spiritual emanation from God that served as a channel of contact between Deity and humanity, which philosophers [including Philo] made so much effort to understand.
Steefen
Jesus’ greatest teachings are not about divorce and paying preachers.
Paul has a vision of Jesus. He neither runs to Jesus’ disciples nor to Galilee.
What have I possibly learned?
The epistles attribute no teachings [except divorce and paying preachers] or miracles to Christ Jesus.
The epistles focus on the believer’s relationship to the [now] heavenly Son and on his redeeming sacrificial death and resurrection.
The divide between the epistles-Q-Thomas and the gospels is artificially joined in the Gospel of Mark which incorporated Homeric epics to a Jesus in Jerusalem Holy Week narrative and before that a Jesus who does miracles–possibly. That gospel Jesus is a creation that competes with the biography of Julius Caesar in the religious cult of Caesar and Augustus.
Yes, but you will say, the epistles DO speak of Jesus in Jerusalem–the Last Supper.
Bart just wrote a post how part of the Last Supper was an interpolation in the gospel of Luke.
The last Supper could have been an interpolation in 1 Cor. Paul does not even speak of what happened less than five minutes earlier with Judas.
Reception:
Among authors sympathetic to the view that Jesus never existed, Doherty’s work has received mixed reactions. The Jesus Puzzle has received favorable reviews from fellow mythicists Robert M. Price and Richard Carrier.[15] Frank Zindler, former editor of American Atheist, in a review of The Jesus Puzzle described it as “the most compelling argument against the historical Jesus published in my life-time”.[16]
George Albert Wells, who now argues a more moderate form of the Christ myth and who rejects Doherty’s view that the mythical Jesus of Paul did not also descend to Earth,[17] has nonetheless described The Jesus Puzzle as an “important book”.[18] R. Joseph Hoffmann considers that there are “reasons for scholars to hold” the view that Jesus never existed, but considers Doherty “A ‘disciple’ of Wells” who “has rehashed many of the former’s views in The Jesus Puzzle (Age of Reason Publications, 2005) which is qualitatively and academically far inferior to anything so far written on the subject”.[19] Doherty has responded that his work owes very little to Wells.[20]
Writers who do not necessarily support the hypothesis that Jesus did not exist have found merit in some of Doherty’s arguments. Hector Avalos has written that “The Jesus Puzzle outlines a plausible theory for a completely mythical Jesus.”[21]
Bart Ehrman, an expert on textual criticism of the NT and Early Christianity, has dismissed Jesus, Neither God nor Man as “filled with so many unguarded and undocumented statements and claims, and so many misstatements of fact, that it would take a 2,400-page book to deal with all the problems… Not a single early Christian source supports Doherty’s claim that Paul and those before him thought of Jesus as a spiritual, not a human being, who was executed in the spiritual, not the earthly realm.”[2]
In a book criticizing the Christ myth theory, New Testament scholar Maurice Casey describes Doherty as “perhaps the most influential of all the mythicists”,[22] but one who is unable to understand the ancient texts he uses in his arguments.[23]
Earl Doherty
It should come as no surprise that the “no historical Jesus” theory is unpopular in many circles.
( continued at: ** you do not have permission to see this link ** )
Steefen said
Earl Doherty
The Q document and the gospel of Thomas say nothing about Jesus going to Jerusalem or about anything that happened to him when he got there. Q and Thomas does not speak of death and resurrection.
Q 13,34-35:
“Jerusalem, Jerusalem, the city that kills the prophets and stones those who are sent to it! How often have I desired to gather your children together as a hen gathers her brood under her wings, and you were not willing! See, your house is left to you. And I tell you, you will not see me until the time comes when you say, ‘Blessed is the one who comes in the name of the Lord.’”
In Q 4,9 Jerusalem is also the site of one of the mythical temptations of Jesus.
Jesus’ death by crucifixion is implied in Q 14,27, the saying that ‘the one who does not take one’s cross and follow after me cannot be my disciple.’
= = =
That is a response but it is not persuasive. Q mentions Jesus gathering his disciples and going to Jerusalem?
The implication is also not persuasive. Take a cross and follow me is not a Christian lesson of bear your burdens to the death: follow me into defeat.
The last Supper could have been an interpolation in 1 Cor.
There is no important textual evidence and convincing text-critical arguments that the Last Supper was an interpolation in 1 Cor.
Steve Campbell, author of Historical Accuracy
I disagree.
I am not trusting Paul on this issue because he was not there.
No gospel text puts him there.
Second, there is no gospel text showing the disciples taught Paul how to remember Jesus with a Last Supper ritual.
Westminster Theological Seminary
textual criticism means thinking critically about manuscripts and variations in the biblical texts found in those manuscripts, in order to identify the original reading of the Bible.
For example, what do we do when we find differences in 1 Corinthians 13:3 in ancient manuscripts? Some Greek manuscripts read “if I give up my body to be burned” (see ESV; KJV), whereas others read “if I give up my body that I might boast” (see CSB; NIV). The English translations differ because they are translating different Greek words: some manuscripts have a word for boast and others include some form of burn. The terms look similar in Greek; they both make sense in context. But which word did Paul use?
This is the task of textual criticism, which uses tightly honed methods to test variant (or divergent) readings that are encountered in manuscripts. The goal is to find the most ancient—and most accurate—reading.
Having an account written by an eye-witness can be a factor in textual criticism, but only one factor. Even eye-witnesses can be subject to issues of memory, external influence and even private agendas. One thing I discovered in my studies of E. A. Poe is that even people who actually knew Poe and left us recollections (many years after the fact) were clearly “refreshing” their memories by referring to other published accounts. Often, you can see the influence in the phrasing and the way events are described, with a similar sequence or focus on details. There may not be a direct correlation to ancient accounts that greatly pre-date the greater availability of such material to consult.
Robert said
Since Paul makes no claim whatsoever to having been an eye-witness of this event (quite the contrary), this has no bearing on the purely text-critical question of whether or not the passage is authentic (ie, was originally written by Paul) or is a latter interpolation.
I fully understand that; I was just making a related observation, which I hope was of interest.
Robert said
Steefen said
Earl Doherty
The Q document and the gospel of Thomas say nothing about Jesus going to Jerusalem or about anything that happened to him when he got there. Q and Thomas does not speak of death and resurrection.
Q 13,34-35:
“Jerusalem, Jerusalem, the city that kills the prophets and stones those who are sent to it! How often have I desired to gather your children together as a hen gathers her brood under her wings, and you were not willing! See, your house is left to you. And I tell you, you will not see me until the time comes when you say, ‘Blessed is the one who comes in the name of the Lord.’”
Earl Doherty
1 Q does not say anything about Jesus going to Jerusalem.
2 Q does not say anything that happened to him when he got there.
3 Q does not speak of death and resurrection.
Reply
Q 13: 34-35
See: your house is left to you.
Matthew 23:38
Look: your house is left to you desolate.
Steve Campbell, author of Historical Accuracy
That is a prophecy.
Jesus: See what I am seeing in prophecy: The Temple will become desolate. That is what you will have. That is what will be left to you after you have responded to me and my love for Jerusalem the way you have–with rejection.
Judgement on This Issue
The reply does not mention Jesus turning over tables in the Temple at Jerusalem.
The reply does not mention Judas going to the enemies of Jesus.
The reply does not mention Jesus’ agony in the Garden of Gethsemane.
The reply does not mention Jesus’ arrest.
The reply does not mention Peter’s denials of having known Jesus.
Significant details of Jesus at Jerusalem during Holy Week are not mentioned in Q.
Jesus was rejected at Jerusalem.
BDEhrman
FreedomBen
evgendob
Robert