@RichardCCarrier has an excellent hypothesis:
-Paul writes first
-sources his information: "scripture and revelation", "not from any man"
-also: follow Jesus's example
-Mark, our second source, is that example written out
-Barabbas; and buried after being crucified; not historic
-
-
Replying to @onnlucky @Melbajapan and
This only works by ignoring what Paul means by ‘the gospel’ and the time he spent with Jesus’ top boys.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Meadowsesq @Melbajapan and
Why? For example, last supper, sounds like a historic event Paul should know through the people who were there, but instead: 1 cor 11:23 "For I received from the Lord what I also passed on to you: The Lord Jesus, on the night he was betrayed, took …" — not from the disciples.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @onnlucky @Melbajapan and
It is common sense to try to understand what someone means and take account of the people they have met. Yes?
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @Meadowsesq @Melbajapan and
Sure. But what information do we have from Paul's account of meeting Peter, James and the other apostles? Gal 1 & 2: 1. his version of gospel was the same as theirs *before* meeting them; 2. they disagree on circumcision, but neither party refers back to teachings of Jesus.
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @onnlucky @Melbajapan and
We no not know the content of his conversations. But common sense tells us they were not about the weather. We do know he checked his message. And he would know Jesus died and was buried from those he had persecuted,
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @Meadowsesq @onnlucky and
You make a lot of assertions Peter that is back up by nothing
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @RealityRevInc @onnlucky and
Backed up by common sense. Paul says he spent time with those who had spent time with Jesus in including Jesus' brother. It seems indefensible to claim that he did not learn about the life and person of Jesus from them.
3 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @Meadowsesq @onnlucky and
Since what I keep telling you that the mythicist hypothesis is not countered because they could simply have talked about what they believed and the brother reference claim is not convincing enough for distinction of your claim So no
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @RealityRevInc @onnlucky and
You have missed my point - which is that this shows Paul got info from other than revelation. You and I can argue about what tha info was but this does not change the fact that he got it without revelation.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
Except that you are making another assertion and nothing else If Paul disagreed with them about circumcision, then he wasnt even listening to them and felt their words compared to his revelations were worthless Plus there is Galatians 1:11-12
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.