did the apostle paul really know jesus ?

by mP 51 Replies latest watchtower bible

• 

  tec

  mP, you said that Paul never mentions having met someone who knew Jesus personally. That is what I responded to because this is false.

  You can change it now to mean something more than what you stated, but it doesn't change what you stated, or that you were mistaken. Did you look into that revelation thing from the other thread?

  As for Paul knowing Jesus.. no, I do not believe he did. He never mentions it, he mentions his revelation of Christ in the spirit, not in the flesh. Which would eplain why his ministry is different. He learned in a different way - all through the spirit. The others had a different story to tell.

  Peace,

  tammy
• 

  mP

  @tec

  as always you give ebery possible benefit to accept the bible as truth, instead of being critical. like i said peter was almost never called cephas in the gospels or acts or even in the books he supposedly wrote. james was a very popular name back then. finding a grouip including john, cephas and james was not impossible. the jews appear to be very unoriginal and to have used a very narrow range of names. for example we several apostles with the same name, james and judas being the examples. with just three names we have no proof they are the three apostles, we also have the strange circumstance that the other apostles are ignored and not mentioned. was paul really talking to the same twelve apostles of jesus?
• 

  mP

  tec i have replied to your revelation comment?
• 

  Midget-Sasquatch

  @mP

  Ok, the passage in Galatians doesn't have any bearing on whether Paul knew Jesus or not. I believe a few of us quoted it in response to your own statement that seemed to imply that Paul never even came into contact with the apostles. Paul himself said he did meet with at least two "pillars".

  Again, I'm not saying Paul taught the exact same message of Jesus, except maybe the idea that the escatological end was very near.
• 

  Band on the Run

  Paul put his unique take on Jesus/Christ. There is a common source. Paul knows the basic narrative. He focuses on the most important issue. The Risen Christ. Jesus as a great prophet/teacher would not have started a great religion. Clearly, there many Christianities at that time. In the early days, most Christians would be Jews. Personally, I doubt that they had a very focused Christology. In Acts, the early Christians are going to the temple to worship. When the incident with Stephen occurs, all the names listed are Greek names, not Jewish ones. Something in Greek thought was merged with Jewish Christianity. Matthew writes for a vibrant jewish community.

  I tend to believe with Paul that the Risen Christ is the powerful, defining figure. The transformation from Jewish cult to universal Church is key. Crossan believes Paul did not preach primarily to all Gentiles. He states Paul must have focused on "god fearers," Gentiles who regularly attended synagogues. Pagan religion focused on immediate life problems. Judaism and Christianity offered a more spiritual, grander scheme. Circumcision as entry to Judaism prevented many from actual conversion.

  I wish Paul had written about his personal transformation. Besides the blinding light on the road to Damascus, how did he change his thoughts from Judaism to new form of Christianity. Paul's thoughts were probably not the first. He may have tapped into an existing Christian subsect.

  With the Witnesses, I despised Paul. I wanted to vomit. The Witnesses do not mention his Christology or grace, the main thrust of his letters. When I was in college, I could not read his letters as a primary source b/c I became very agitated. Exposure to academic views of Paul changed me. He is not a pig when only his actual letters are read. Crossan wrote an elegant book about Paul. I do believe it is true that Paul founded modern Christianity more than Jesus did. His take on Christianity had to be powerful for Paul to triumph over his many critics.
• 

  Philadelphia Ponos

  Paul quotes Jesus' words in 1 Corithians 11:24 & 25 so this shows that the Gospels were already written before Paul wrote his letters and that he knew of Jesus' techings.
• 

  Band on the Run

  No, every scholar I've read clearly and emphatically states Paul letters are older. His theological views were probably very important. The synoptic gospels are believe to derive from an earlier source that is now lost. James and Peter had power n/c they were intimately knew Jesus. The gospels were written after that generation. With the generation that were eyewitness to Jesus dying, gospels became necessary to memorialize the events and spin them for each gospel's intended audience.

  Paul proclaimed Christ is available to all. All Christians experience the Risen Christ. This was controversial. Extending the Christian message to Gentiles and beyond Israel was important. Paul made Christianity appealing to nonJews.

  I don't understand the importance of Paul knowing Jesus of Nazareth. He states that Christ is ever present where Jesus was tied to a historical period. This is Paul's genius. I find Paul compelling now.
• 

  transhuman68

  If you read the Christian-Greek scriptures from Romans to Revelation it is easy to see that the writers were visualizing a mythical Christ- not the Jesus who apparently walked the earth. Romans chapters 10-11 are very revealing in the complete absence of Jesus.

  The problem with scriptures like 1 Corinthians 11:24 & 25 is that these letters of Paul’s have been altered. Paul himself refers to an earlier letter to the Corinthians which has been lost, and Wikipedia says:

  First and Second Corinthians have garnered particular suspicion, with some scholars, among them Edgar Goodspeed and Norman Perrin , supposing one or both texts as we have them today are actually amalgamations of multiple individual letters. There remains considerable discussion as to the presence of possible significant interpolations.

  . in·ter·po·lat·ed, in·ter·po·lat·ing, in·ter·po·lates

  v.tr.

  1. To insert or introduce between other elements or parts.

  2.

  a. To insert (material) into a text.

  b. To insert into a conversation. See Synonyms at introduce.

  3. To change or falsify (a text) by introducing new or incorrect material.

  4. Mathematics To estimate a value of (a function or series) between two known values.

  v.intr.

  To make insertions or additions.
• 

  mP

  @Midget

  Ok, the passage in Galatians doesn't have any bearing on whether Paul knew Jesus or not. I believe a few of us quoted it in response to your own statement that seemed to imply that Paul never even came into contact with the apostles.

  MP:

  Its hard to definitively say that Paul did meet the apostles. While Galatians mentions a few names, James, John and Cephas this has problems. The gospels almost never call Peter by the name Cephas and it seems quite out of character that he be mentioned by this name in this case. Im also stating that those names were very common. We also know that the NT works were constantly edited, we cannot be sure that originally the text with the list of the 3 might have had a single name and was updated to appear more authentic. Today we have the same pious editing with the NWT where they claim they are restoring Jehovah where it often reads Lord. This later example is of course not the first time pious reasoning has changed the bible.

  Today most scholars accept that about half the letters of Paul are fakes or pseudographical. Im not saying Galatians is a fake, quite the opposite.
• 

  mP

  @Ponos

  Paul quotes Jesus' words in 1 Corithians 11:24 & 25 so this shows that the Gospels were already written before Paul wrote his letters and that he knew of Jesus' techings.

  http://www.watchtower.org/e/bible/1co/chapter_011.htm

  23 For I received from the Lord that which I also handed on to YOU , that the Lord Jesus in the night in which he was going to be handed over took a loaf 24 and, after giving thanks, he broke it and said: “This means my body which is in YOUR behalf. Keep doing this in remembrance of me.” 25 He did likewise respecting the cup also, after he had the evening meal, saying: “This cup means the new covenant by virtue of my blood. Keep doing this, as often as YOU drink it, in remembrance of me.” 26 For as often as YOU eat this loaf and drink this cup, YOU keep proclaiming the death of the Lord, until he arrives.

  @MP

  Your making assumptions in 1Cor. There are many eucharist rituals in ancient religions. Judaism itself has one. I have a previous post in this thread that gives more examples. Because it appears Paul did not know about Jesus the man and his mission, and the allusions to light talking to him, he might very well have been a solar god worshipper. Eucharist rituals like eatting bread and wine is very popular because the Sun begins dies in autum which starts in the zodiac sign Libra the sign of bread and wine. The problem is dates are often swapped but they are always around the key markers in the year, the solstices and equinoxes.