I have been thinking about our recent exchanges, and it occurred to me that our discussion would be more productive if we began afresh and by following a different line of reasoning. Therefore, I beg your indulgence and ask that you listen to my defense.
As you yourself can attest, Aractus, Paul, writing from Ephesus around the year AD 55 or 56, addresses the believers at Corinth as follows:
Surely it does not escape your attention that Paul wants to “remind” the Corinthians of things he had already told them. Well, if he is writing his first letter to them in AD 55 or 56, then he must have first told them these things when he visited them in person back in AD 51-52. This date for Paul’s visit to Corinth is established by the archaeological discovery of an inscription in stone bearing the name of Gallio, Proconsul of the Province of Achaia in Greece. Greek proconsuls served one-year terms, and Gallilo was elected in AD 51; therefore, the date of Paul’s appearance before Gallio is beyond question.
This means that Paul had first taught the Corinthians all of the information found in 1 Co 15:3-8 as early as AD 51. And what facts did Paul teach?
This passage clearly illustrates that Paul was preaching the bodily resurrection of Jesus within 20 years of Jesus’ crucifixion.
But wait…you will have noted further that Paul wrote, “For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance…” (v.3). Paul tells us that the information he passed on to the Corinthians during his visit there in AD 51 was first "received" by him from others. Who taught Paul these things? And when? The first clues to this puzzle is found in Paul’s Letter to the Galatians (ca. AD 55) where he wrote:
From this we learn that after Paul’s conversion, he went immediately into Arabia and stayed there for three years. When did Paul become a Christian? According to Acts 9, Paul saw the Lord on the road to Damascus sometime after the stoning of Stephen (ca. AD 31-32). Putting these pieces together, we can conservatively estimate that:
Paul continued the narrative of his travels:
From these two passages, we learn that Paul met privately with Peter, James and John in Jerusalem in order to verify that he was accurately preaching the same message that the apostles in Jerusalem were preaching. Note that Paul stressed the doctrinal unity of the Early Church 1 Corinthians 15:11 when he wrote, “Whether, then, it is I or they, this is what we preach, and this is what you believed.”
“This is what we preach.” Paul made sure that the message he preached was one and the same as that of the original apostles who were companions of Jesus, and Paul’s own words debunk the false idea that Paul somehow taught a different form of Christianity than that being taught in Jerusalem.
And when did this occur? As we saw previously, Paul made one trip to Jerusalem around AD 35-36 when he met with Peter and James the first time, and he made a second journey fourteen years later around AD 49-50.
Would it be reasonable to think that Paul discussed not only the details of Jesus’ teaching, crucifixion and resurrection but also his own conversion experience with Peter, James and John? Would this conversation have occurred for the first time on Paul’s second visit nearly twenty years after his conversion? Or is it more reasonable to think that Paul was eager to learn all that he could about Jesus during his 15-day visit to Jerusalem in AD 35? If the latter seems more likely, then this means that the proto-creed found in 1 Corinthians 15, which includes a clear proclamation of the resurrection of Jesus, would have been handed on to Paul from the original apostles within five years of Jesus’ resurrection.
With all due respect to those advocates of the “Telephone Game” theory such as Bart Ehrman or to those who believe that the resurrection of Jesus is the result of mythology which developed over time…five years is inadequate for the type of distortion that is alleged.
The authors of the New Testament are clear that many eye-witnesses of the events that occurred on Easter morning were still alive and available for consultation. Anyone doubting the truth of the gospel message only had to ask those who were present and saw the risen Lord Jesus with their own eyes.
+++
Now, why, Aractus, have I taken the time to put all of this together?
Well, in brief, I think it is because you are going about your attempt to understand the Bible and God completely backwards. You are focused on the Old Testament and troubled by many “dark passages” that you find there. This is understandable; anyone reading the accounts of apparent genocide, murder, rape, etc. must be concerned about them, because these are grave matters. However, I think what you are lacking is a proper context or frame of reference.
It seems to me that you need to answer one question first and foremost: Who is Jesus Christ? Is he a legend? You have said no to mythicism. Is he a lunatic? Most people, skeptics included, can agree that Jesus was a brilliant ethicist and a gifted teacher. Was he a liar? Or was he lord?
The resurrection of Jesus, if true, settles the question definitively. If Jesus was raised from the dead, then He is God. And He died for the sins of the world because of God's great love for the world. This is a far cry from the "malevolent", "psychopathic" God that many insist upon.
It is for this reason that I have focused on providing this brief overview of the undisputed evidence for the historicity of the resurrection of Jesus. There is much more that could be said and many more questions that need to be answered.
But your questions, Aractus, will be answered when you come to grips not with the God of the Old Testament but with the God of the New: Jesus of Nazareth. Only then will you have the proper foundation for understanding all that came before.
As you yourself can attest, Aractus, Paul, writing from Ephesus around the year AD 55 or 56, addresses the believers at Corinth as follows:
Quote: Wrote:1 Corinthians 15:1-8
Now, brothers and sisters, I want to remind you of the gospel I preached to you, which you received and on which you have taken your stand. 2 By this gospel you are saved, if you hold firmly to the word I preached to you. Otherwise, you have believed in vain.
3 For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, 4 that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, 5 and that he appeared to Cephas,3-8 and then to the Twelve. 6 After that, he appeared to more than five hundred of the brothers and sisters at the same time, most of whom are still living, though some have fallen asleep. 7 Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles, 8 and last of all he appeared to me also, as to one abnormally born.
Surely it does not escape your attention that Paul wants to “remind” the Corinthians of things he had already told them. Well, if he is writing his first letter to them in AD 55 or 56, then he must have first told them these things when he visited them in person back in AD 51-52. This date for Paul’s visit to Corinth is established by the archaeological discovery of an inscription in stone bearing the name of Gallio, Proconsul of the Province of Achaia in Greece. Greek proconsuls served one-year terms, and Gallilo was elected in AD 51; therefore, the date of Paul’s appearance before Gallio is beyond question.
This means that Paul had first taught the Corinthians all of the information found in 1 Co 15:3-8 as early as AD 51. And what facts did Paul teach?
- Jesus died for our sins in accordance with prophecy found in scripture;
- Jesus was buried;
- Jesus was raised on the third day as foretold in scripture;
- Jesus appeared to individuals and groups of disciples including one group of more than 500 people;
- Jesus appeared to Paul personally.
This passage clearly illustrates that Paul was preaching the bodily resurrection of Jesus within 20 years of Jesus’ crucifixion.
But wait…you will have noted further that Paul wrote, “For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance…” (v.3). Paul tells us that the information he passed on to the Corinthians during his visit there in AD 51 was first "received" by him from others. Who taught Paul these things? And when? The first clues to this puzzle is found in Paul’s Letter to the Galatians (ca. AD 55) where he wrote:
Quote: Wrote:Galatians 1:13-20
13 For you have heard of my previous way of life in Judaism, how intensely I persecuted the church of God and tried to destroy it. 14 I was advancing in Judaism beyond many of my own age among my people and was extremely zealous for the traditions of my fathers. 15 But when God, who set me apart from my mother’s womb and called me by his grace, was pleased 16 to reveal his Son in me so that I might preach him among the Gentiles, my immediate response was not to consult any human being. 17 I did not go up to Jerusalem to see those who were apostles before I was, but I went into Arabia. Later I returned to Damascus.
18 Then after three years, I went up to Jerusalem to get acquainted with Cephas and stayed with him fifteen days. 19 I saw none of the other apostles—only James, the Lord’s brother. 20 I assure you before God that what I am writing you is no lie.
From this we learn that after Paul’s conversion, he went immediately into Arabia and stayed there for three years. When did Paul become a Christian? According to Acts 9, Paul saw the Lord on the road to Damascus sometime after the stoning of Stephen (ca. AD 31-32). Putting these pieces together, we can conservatively estimate that:
- Jesus was crucified around AD 30
- Stephen was stoned around AD 31-32
- Paul was converted around AD 32-33
- Paul was in Arabia for three years and returned to Jerusalem around AD 35-36 when he spent 15 days with Peter and James.
Paul continued the narrative of his travels:
Quote: Wrote:Galatians 2:1-2, 8-9
Then after fourteen years, I went up again to Jerusalem, this time with Barnabas. 2 I went in response to a revelation and, meeting privately with those esteemed as leaders, I presented to them the gospel that I preach among the Gentiles. I wanted to be sure I was not running and had not been running my race in vain.
8 For God, who was at work in Peter as an apostle to the circumcised, was also at work in me as an apostle to the Gentiles. 9 James, Cephas [Simon Peter] and John, those esteemed as pillars, gave me and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship when they recognized the grace given to me. They agreed that we should go to the Gentiles, and they to the circumcised.
From these two passages, we learn that Paul met privately with Peter, James and John in Jerusalem in order to verify that he was accurately preaching the same message that the apostles in Jerusalem were preaching. Note that Paul stressed the doctrinal unity of the Early Church 1 Corinthians 15:11 when he wrote, “Whether, then, it is I or they, this is what we preach, and this is what you believed.”
“This is what we preach.” Paul made sure that the message he preached was one and the same as that of the original apostles who were companions of Jesus, and Paul’s own words debunk the false idea that Paul somehow taught a different form of Christianity than that being taught in Jerusalem.
And when did this occur? As we saw previously, Paul made one trip to Jerusalem around AD 35-36 when he met with Peter and James the first time, and he made a second journey fourteen years later around AD 49-50.
Would it be reasonable to think that Paul discussed not only the details of Jesus’ teaching, crucifixion and resurrection but also his own conversion experience with Peter, James and John? Would this conversation have occurred for the first time on Paul’s second visit nearly twenty years after his conversion? Or is it more reasonable to think that Paul was eager to learn all that he could about Jesus during his 15-day visit to Jerusalem in AD 35? If the latter seems more likely, then this means that the proto-creed found in 1 Corinthians 15, which includes a clear proclamation of the resurrection of Jesus, would have been handed on to Paul from the original apostles within five years of Jesus’ resurrection.
With all due respect to those advocates of the “Telephone Game” theory such as Bart Ehrman or to those who believe that the resurrection of Jesus is the result of mythology which developed over time…five years is inadequate for the type of distortion that is alleged.
The authors of the New Testament are clear that many eye-witnesses of the events that occurred on Easter morning were still alive and available for consultation. Anyone doubting the truth of the gospel message only had to ask those who were present and saw the risen Lord Jesus with their own eyes.
+++
Now, why, Aractus, have I taken the time to put all of this together?
Well, in brief, I think it is because you are going about your attempt to understand the Bible and God completely backwards. You are focused on the Old Testament and troubled by many “dark passages” that you find there. This is understandable; anyone reading the accounts of apparent genocide, murder, rape, etc. must be concerned about them, because these are grave matters. However, I think what you are lacking is a proper context or frame of reference.
It seems to me that you need to answer one question first and foremost: Who is Jesus Christ? Is he a legend? You have said no to mythicism. Is he a lunatic? Most people, skeptics included, can agree that Jesus was a brilliant ethicist and a gifted teacher. Was he a liar? Or was he lord?
The resurrection of Jesus, if true, settles the question definitively. If Jesus was raised from the dead, then He is God. And He died for the sins of the world because of God's great love for the world. This is a far cry from the "malevolent", "psychopathic" God that many insist upon.
It is for this reason that I have focused on providing this brief overview of the undisputed evidence for the historicity of the resurrection of Jesus. There is much more that could be said and many more questions that need to be answered.
But your questions, Aractus, will be answered when you come to grips not with the God of the Old Testament but with the God of the New: Jesus of Nazareth. Only then will you have the proper foundation for understanding all that came before.
