Loading...I continue to receive very good questions from blog readers and would like to devote a couple of posts to ones that I get repeatedly (in different words) for broader distribution. Here are three I’ve received recently and my posted responses to them, all on the apostle Paul.
QUESTION: [This one will be about whether the Cephas, James and other apostles in Jerusalem agreed with Paul on every point when he went to visit them in the course of his missionary work]
I was wondering how scholars look at situations like Galatians 2:6-10 , specially the part of the text that states “they added nothing to my message” or “all they asked is we should continue remembering the poor”. My primary question is do scholars like yourself believe that the early disciples & James/Jerusalem Church saw eye to eye with Paul on all matters? As a secondary, why does Paul go into disputes later in Galatians 2 if they agreed on everything as mentioned in Gal 2 earlier?
The passage of “adding nothing to my message” makes it seem like Paul had some gospel and read every single point to the disciples of which they agree with it all, large and small, and then lived happily ever after. What is the historical context?
Get access to Dr. Ehrman's library of 4,000+ articles plus five new articles per week about the New Testament and early Christianity. It costs as little as $2.99/mth and every cent goes to charity!
Unlock 4,000+ Articles Like This!
QUESTION: What do you make of Matthew 16 — on this rock I will establish my church?
If Jesus was an apocalyptic prophet, he wasn’t looking to establish a church for the long haul. Is there evidence that this was a later addition? Were people thinking long haul by the time Matthew was written?
Good observation. It is almost certainly evidence that Matthew (or his sources) are putting words on Jesus’ lips that would hav emade no sense in his own original context.
Someone is quoted as having said:
Jesus preached the Kingdom
We got the church…..
“ Paul actually never says that he encountered Jesus…”
Just a side note, Paul does not say the name “Jesus” in this passage. He only says Christ. I think that is one of Paul’s points is that while the other apostles may have been with Jesus, he was the only one who had seen Christ and received a revelation from Christ. Do you agree?
He does use the name Jesus in his other reference to his vision in 1 Cor. 9:1.
Paul’s letters preceded the Gospels, the latter taking a less positive/neutral view of Jews than the former. It’s as though Paul opened the faith to Gentiles, then the authors of the Gospels closed the door for Jews. Paul was a Jew, and even though we don’t know the identity of the authors of the Gospels, it’s highly unlikely they were Jews. In the case of both Paul’s letters and the Gospels, Jesus as a rebel against the Roman occupiers was erased from history; indeed, Rome became the center of Christianity. Some Jews collaborated with the Roman occupiers for their mutual benefit (economic in the former case, order in the second). Power and religion have a long history of collaboration, right up until today. I know the story is more complicated than my comment suggests, but how an observant Jew with followers all of whom were observant Jews became the basis for a religion that is anti-Judaism requires a leap of faith.
Hi Bart, I always interpreted that the 1 Corinthians 15:8 reference of Jesus appearing to Paul was the manifestation of light and voice while Paul was on the road to Damascus to persecute Christians. Do you disagree with that interpretation? If yes, why? Thank you!
The canonical inventory of the post-crucifixion appearances of Jesus are intriguing. Each of the four canonical gospels lists at least one resurrected/raised appearance of Jesus (if we include the long ending of Mark) plus the beginning of Acts and 1 Corinthians. The appearance to the “500” is the most unusual for me due to the size of the audience (a gathering of disciples, or potential converts, including some Gentiles??), lack of a venue (where did this occur? Jerusalem? Antioch? Damascus? Corinth?), lack of a time scope (was this all at once or a repeated events of over some period of days/weeks — like a mass baptism sequence?) and the absence of other written attestations. The “creedal statement” seen in 1 Corinthians 15:3-7 is glaringly absent in the gospels. Could Jesus be said to of “appeared” to many people without them actively realizing it at the time? I tend to lean toward this mention of the 500 being loosely tied to the Pentecostal events in Acts 2:1-41. Paul not giving any credit to Peter’s sermons would not be surprising and 500 seems to be a much more reasonable number of converts than the 3000 mentioned in Acts.
Are our oldest copies of Paul’s letters written without word spacing and punctuation?
Bart, regarding Paul and agreement among the Apostles: At least in conservative Christian circles, much is made of the Holy Spirit being with the Apostles and early Christians. The argument goes it wasn’t just for them to perform miracles, but to guide them “in the truth.” So to me, apparent differences and arguments between the Apostles especially, and early Christians too perhaps, make it clear there was no supernatural power at work guiding them. Or maybe the Apostles were the right ones and Paul a pretender not really with the HS. How do you see those arguments with your conservative early background? Thanks
In 2 Corinthians 5:2-3 Paul describes resurrection as being “clothed with our heavenly dwelling” after which we will no longer be a “naked” spirit. Presumably this re-clothing of the naked spirit doesn’t require taking any material from the trillions of atoms all over the earth and atmosphere that came from the decomposed body?
I’m afraid Paul didn’t know about atoms or how the material world works.
Professor, is it fair to pick a nit (given the original Greek vs English) and point out that “adding nothing to my message” does not necessarily convey agreement….. Maybe Paul really was a Lawyer!
I was wondering about why the NRSV and NRSVUE in Galatians 1:13 say: “You have heard, no doubt, of my earlier life in Judaism.” Other translations do not have “no doubt” and it makes me think that Paul didn’t tell the Galatians about that former life of persecuting Jesus followers, leaving it something for his enemies to exploit. Where did “no doubt” come from in the translation process, and is it possible that Paul covered up his past and is now having to come clean to the Galatians about it?
It’s a good questoin. “No doubt” is not in the Greek. It literally says: “For you have heard of my behavior formely in Judaism…” They are translating the “For” as a simply continuation of the discussion in idiomatic English, but there is no need of it. Even so, it’s clear he is reminding them what they arleady know about him and his persecutions of the Christians.
Concerning the first Question and Response.
People could have the same question today. If there are people who feel the need to only eat kosher, then the question becomes: where to eat, or who does the cooking? I don’t see why non-Jewish people should object to eating kosher once in a while, even once a week, or however often they are getting together for meals.
I don’t think that one form of eating is better than the other, but people should be able to keep their traditions if they want to.
Bart: I’m sure you’ve written about this question before, but I’m having trouble finding it. My question is this: How do you respond to the argument that Saul’s conversion, after encountering Jesus, appears to be evidence of the transformational power of Jesus?
The impetus for my question is this: I just listened to Ross Douthat’s interview of you on his “Interesting Times” podcast. During that interview, you told the story about your early born again experience and subsequent time as an evangelical Christian. Later, after wrestling with the Problem of Evil (you may refer to it by a different name), you changed your mind (“lost your faith”) regarding the existence of God and the truth of Christianity. I won’t bore you with details, but my life is similar to yours regarding years of faith, followed by doubt and, eventually, a loss of faith. However, I’m now wondering why the story of Paul’s life may not be a compelling argument that Jesus really is who Christians claim he is. Have you posted on this question? Does one of your books address it?
Thank you
I’d say there are millions of people who have been converted to a variety of religions and had their lives transformed both at conversion and after (and from then on are completely convinced their views are right and shown to be right by God himself), so I’m not sure a single case of it is evidence of the truth claims of that one religion?