fallingblood
Agnostic Theist
As with the last thread I posted, this one deals with the three pillars that Robert Price has constructed for the Jesus-myth. His second pillar claims that none of the Epistle writers are aware of a recent historical Jesus. Others have claimed that the Epistle writers didn't even seem to be aware that Jesus ever was a human being. My argument is that Paul knew that Jesus had died recently and recognized him as a human being.
Price's second pillar, that the Epistle writers show no evidence for a recent historical Jesus, is probably the weakest of his pillars. Before moving into whether or not the Epistles give evidence for Jesus, a brief examination of the Epistles are needed.
There are thirteen letters credited to Paul (at one time, Hebrews was also credited to Paul, but scholars have now abandoned the idea of it being of Pauline origin). Of those thirteen letters, seven are now deemed to be undisputedly genuine; three are debated; and the last three are doubtful. Outside the letter now included in the New testament, we know that Paul had written other letters as well. For instance, in 1 Corinthians 5:9, Paul refers to a previous letter he had written to that church.
The reason for Paul writing his letters, for the most part, was to deal with problems that had arisen with particular churches, and were often produced in haste. Because of that, there was little reason for Paul to impart initial knowledge of jesus, especially since that sort of information was presumed to have been known. Interestingly, as many scholars have noted, if Paul had not found a problem with how the Corinthians were practicing the Lord's Supper, we would have never known that Paul supported or even knew of it. What is important to remember here is that Paul was either addressing Churches he had already visited or were already Christians. Thus, there is little reason to assume that Paul would have had any reason to mention much about the life of Jesus, as those churches would have already been introduced to that knowledge.
Further though, Paul, who believed that the end of this earthly kingdom was near, was more interested in the death and resurrection of Jesus. So it is of little surprise that Paul is rather silent, in general, about jesus. Especially when we considered that Paul is also relatively silent about himself, the other apostles, as well as his meeting with the Risen Christ. However, this is somewhat expected as we see this to also be true with much of the Christian literature during the first few centuries.
However, there are certain things we can learn about jesus from Paul, showing that he did in fact know something about Jesus. According to Paul, like himself (Romans 11:1), Jesus was of the see of Abraham (Galatians 3:16). In addition, Paul tells us that jesus was his countryman, and Israelite (Jew) and that he was born according to the flesh (Romans 9:3-5). If there were any doubt of that, Paul had voiced that idea previously as well, stating that jesus was born of a woman, born under the law (Galatians 4:4). More so, we are told tat he is a descendant of David (Romans 1:3). So we can be sure that Paul believed Jesus to have been an actual human being.
Yet, that is not all we are told about Jesus. We see the suggestion that Jesus had been living not to far in the past. In Galatians 1:18-19, Paul tells us that he had met Cephas (Peter) who he identifies as an apostle, as well as James, who Paul calls the brother of the Lord. The Greek, in this case, gives us additional information.
Verse 18, as most scholars agree, tells us that Paul went to Peter not to just visit, but for the purpose of inquiry, to gain information about Jesus' ministry. The very fact that Peter, who was one of the disciples of Jesus, visited with Paul, makes it inconceivable to assume that Jesus had died in the distant path.
Turning to James, a brother of Jesus, we secure the fact that Jesus had died relatively recently. Now, there has ben some debate as to what exactly Paul meant when he called James Jesus' brother; however, the Greek makes it quite clear. The word used here is adelphos, which in classical and Hellenistic Greek meant blood brother. Thus, there is no reason to assume Paul meant anything else except that James wand jesus were brothers, which is supported as well in the Gospels and Josephus.
The final information that we will examine about jesus, that Paul tells us, is about his death. Most importantly, Paul tells us that Jesus was crucified (1 Corinthians 1:23; Galatians 3:1). This is important as we know that crucifixion was a Roman political method of execution reserved primarily for rebels and slaves. This is important as it places Jesus in a relative time and location.
Yet, this is not a full examination of Paul, such as his reference to Jesus command concerning divorce (1 Corinthians 7:10), but does show us beyond a doubt that Paul saw jesus as a human being who had lived recently.
Price's second pillar, that the Epistle writers show no evidence for a recent historical Jesus, is probably the weakest of his pillars. Before moving into whether or not the Epistles give evidence for Jesus, a brief examination of the Epistles are needed.
There are thirteen letters credited to Paul (at one time, Hebrews was also credited to Paul, but scholars have now abandoned the idea of it being of Pauline origin). Of those thirteen letters, seven are now deemed to be undisputedly genuine; three are debated; and the last three are doubtful. Outside the letter now included in the New testament, we know that Paul had written other letters as well. For instance, in 1 Corinthians 5:9, Paul refers to a previous letter he had written to that church.
The reason for Paul writing his letters, for the most part, was to deal with problems that had arisen with particular churches, and were often produced in haste. Because of that, there was little reason for Paul to impart initial knowledge of jesus, especially since that sort of information was presumed to have been known. Interestingly, as many scholars have noted, if Paul had not found a problem with how the Corinthians were practicing the Lord's Supper, we would have never known that Paul supported or even knew of it. What is important to remember here is that Paul was either addressing Churches he had already visited or were already Christians. Thus, there is little reason to assume that Paul would have had any reason to mention much about the life of Jesus, as those churches would have already been introduced to that knowledge.
Further though, Paul, who believed that the end of this earthly kingdom was near, was more interested in the death and resurrection of Jesus. So it is of little surprise that Paul is rather silent, in general, about jesus. Especially when we considered that Paul is also relatively silent about himself, the other apostles, as well as his meeting with the Risen Christ. However, this is somewhat expected as we see this to also be true with much of the Christian literature during the first few centuries.
However, there are certain things we can learn about jesus from Paul, showing that he did in fact know something about Jesus. According to Paul, like himself (Romans 11:1), Jesus was of the see of Abraham (Galatians 3:16). In addition, Paul tells us that jesus was his countryman, and Israelite (Jew) and that he was born according to the flesh (Romans 9:3-5). If there were any doubt of that, Paul had voiced that idea previously as well, stating that jesus was born of a woman, born under the law (Galatians 4:4). More so, we are told tat he is a descendant of David (Romans 1:3). So we can be sure that Paul believed Jesus to have been an actual human being.
Yet, that is not all we are told about Jesus. We see the suggestion that Jesus had been living not to far in the past. In Galatians 1:18-19, Paul tells us that he had met Cephas (Peter) who he identifies as an apostle, as well as James, who Paul calls the brother of the Lord. The Greek, in this case, gives us additional information.
Verse 18, as most scholars agree, tells us that Paul went to Peter not to just visit, but for the purpose of inquiry, to gain information about Jesus' ministry. The very fact that Peter, who was one of the disciples of Jesus, visited with Paul, makes it inconceivable to assume that Jesus had died in the distant path.
Turning to James, a brother of Jesus, we secure the fact that Jesus had died relatively recently. Now, there has ben some debate as to what exactly Paul meant when he called James Jesus' brother; however, the Greek makes it quite clear. The word used here is adelphos, which in classical and Hellenistic Greek meant blood brother. Thus, there is no reason to assume Paul meant anything else except that James wand jesus were brothers, which is supported as well in the Gospels and Josephus.
The final information that we will examine about jesus, that Paul tells us, is about his death. Most importantly, Paul tells us that Jesus was crucified (1 Corinthians 1:23; Galatians 3:1). This is important as we know that crucifixion was a Roman political method of execution reserved primarily for rebels and slaves. This is important as it places Jesus in a relative time and location.
Yet, this is not a full examination of Paul, such as his reference to Jesus command concerning divorce (1 Corinthians 7:10), but does show us beyond a doubt that Paul saw jesus as a human being who had lived recently.
