It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

1 Corinthians 15, Where Does Paul Get His Info?

page: 1
13
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 18 2016 @ 04:19 PM
link   
Where did Paul, AKA Saul of Tarsus, get his information when he wrote the following.


1 Corinthians 15
Moreover, brethren, I declare unto you the gospel which I preached unto you, which also ye have received, and wherein ye stand;

2 By which also ye are saved, if ye keep in memory what I preached unto you, unless ye have believed in vain.

3 For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures;


To what scripture is Paul referring?


And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures:


Again! To what scripture is Paul referring?

I can find nothing in the Old Testament that sets Jesus' death apart from normal Hebrew expectation of resurrection, like we find in Hosea:
"Come, let us return to the LORD. For He has torn us, but He will heal us; He has wounded us, but He will bandage us. 2"He will revive us after two days; He will raise us up on the third day, That we may live before Him.


And that he was seen of Cephas, then of the twelve:


One can only suppose that "Cephas" is Simon Peter. But, isn't Simon Peter one of the 12? If so, who is Cephas?

If we are to believe the Gosples, Simon Peter was not the first to see the risen Jesus Christ.


Luke 24:12
Then arose Peter, and ran unto the sepulchre; and stooping down, he beheld the linen clothes laid by themselves, and departed, wondering in himself at that which was come to pass.


In Luke, Simon Peter left the scene, departed and wondering. So, who is Cephas and why is he omitted from the Gospels?


Luke 24:13
And, behold, two of them went that same day to a village called Emmaus, which was from Jerusalem about threescore furlongs.

14 And they talked together of all these things which had happened.

15 And it came to pass, that, while they communed together and reasoned, Jesus himself drew near, and went with them.

16 But their eyes were holden that they should not know him.

17 And he said unto them, What manner of communications are these that ye have one to another, as ye walk, and are sad?

18 And the one of them, whose name was Cleopas, answering said unto him, Art thou only a stranger in Jerusalem, and hast not known the things which are come to pass there in these days?


Who is Cleopas? Not one of the 12, that's for sure.


Smith's Bible Dictionary
Cleopas
(of a renowned father), one of the two disciples who were going to Emmaus on the day of the resurrection. (Luke 24:18) Some think the same as Cleophas in (John 19:25) But they are probably two different persons. Cleopas is a Greek name, contracted from Cleopater, while Cleophas, or Clopas as in the Revised Version, is an Aramaic name, the same as Alphaeus.
biblehub.com...



12 Apostles List:
Bible Promises

Andrew
Bartholomew or Nathanael
James, the Elder
James, the Lesser or Younger
John
Judas
Jude or Thaddeus
Matthew or Levi
Peter or Simon Peter
Philip
Simon the Zealot
Thomas


No Cleophas!

We keep reading the account in Luke.....


Luke 24:33
And they rose up the same hour, and returned to Jerusalem, and found the eleven gathered together, and them that were with them,

34 Saying, The Lord is risen indeed, and hath appeared to Simon.


Simon? Simon Peter or Cephas? When did this appearance happen?

According to the account of Matthew, Simon Peter didn't see Jesus first either, the women did!


Matthew 28:5
But the angel said to the women, “Do not be afraid, for I know that you seek Jesus who was crucified. 6 He is not here, for he has risen, as he said. Come, see the place where he[a] lay. 7 Then go quickly and tell his disciples that he has risen from the dead, and behold, he is going before you to Galilee; there you will see him. See, I have told you.” 8 So they departed quickly from the tomb with fear and great joy, and ran to tell his disciples. 9 And behold, Jesus met them and said, “Greetings!” And they came up and took hold of his feet and worshiped him. 10 Then Jesus said to them, “Do not be afraid; go and tell my brothers to go to Galilee, and there they will see me.”


According to Mark, Mary Magdalene was the first to see the risen Jesus.


Mark 16:9
Now when Jesus was risen early the first day of the week, he appeared first to Mary Magdalene, out of whom he had cast seven devils.

10 And she went and told them that had been with him, as they mourned and wept.

11 And they, when they had heard that he was alive, and had been seen of her, believed not.

12 After that he appeared in another form unto two of them, as they walked, and went into the country.


According to John, "Mary" was the first to see the risen Jesus.


John 20:11 But Mary stood without at the sepulchre weeping: and as she wept, she stooped down, and looked into the sepulchre,

12 And seeth two angels in white sitting, the one at the head, and the other at the feet, where the body of Jesus had lain.

13 And they say unto her, Woman, why weepest thou? She saith unto them, Because they have taken away my Lord, and I know not where they have laid him.

14 And when she had thus said, she turned herself back, and saw Jesus standing, and knew not that it was Jesus.

15 Jesus saith unto her, Woman, why weepest thou? whom seekest thou? She, supposing him to be the gardener, saith unto him, Sir, if thou have borne him hence, tell me where thou hast laid him, and I will take him away.

16 Jesus saith unto her, Mary. She turned herself, and saith unto him, Rabboni; which is to say, Master.

17 Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God.


So, to sum it up....

What scripture was Paul considering when he said "Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures", and "that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures"?

Why doesn't Paul seem to know anything about the women at the tomb and why does he claim that the Risen Jesus Christ appeared to Cephas first, when all the Gospels say otherwise?

Why should we believe Paul over the supposed apostles accounts, as he insists that we should, again and again?


By which also ye are saved, if ye keep in memory what I preached unto you, unless ye have believed in vain.


So, we're saved if we believe in the Gospel According to Paul?





posted on Feb, 18 2016 @ 04:40 PM
link   
*Chris Crocker voice* Leave Paul alone! *Chris Crocker voice*

Paul never lied! He says so himself on multiple occasions.


Galatians 1
20 I assure you before God that what I am writing you is no lie.



1 Timothy 2
7 And for this purpose I was appointed a herald and an apostle--I am telling the truth, I am not lying--and a true and faithful teacher of the Gentiles.



Romans 9
1 I speak the truth in Christ--I am not lying, my conscience confirms it through the Holy Spirit--


He said it, we should believe it. He wasn't a human so that he should lie, he was sent by God to preach HIS gospel.

Oh wait, I think I'm confusing him with Jesus, that seems to be a common misconception within the church and with believers.

On a serious note, there is nothing other than what is in the OT that was considered scripture at the time of Paul writing his letters.

There are a few other instances where he claims scripture says something it doesn't, most notably this one:


1 Corinthians 14
34 Women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the law says.


Where does the law say anything about women staying silent in church? You won't find it, Paul made it up.
edit on 2/18/2016 by 3NL1GHT3N3D1 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 18 2016 @ 04:42 PM
link   
a reply to: windword

You can't be shocked that theres holes in the story...

Paul wanted a following, and he got exactly that by using the name of Jesus to push his doctrine


So, we're saved if we believe in the Gospel According to Paul?


Nah... I would say you're just another Paulian if you believe his doctrine

The man never met Jesus, nor did he teach anything we can find that's written about him

Though its quite possible Jesus warned the world of paul

And Jesus answered and said unto them, Take heed that no man deceive you.

5 For many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and shall deceive many.

now of course Jesus was actually talking about "the end of the world"... but perhaps he actually was speaking of the end of their world as they know it?

the whole chapter in Matthew 24 speaks of a time when many are deceived by those claiming to be Christ, and will even deceive the very elect.

Ironically Paul meets someone claiming to be Christ on the road to Damascus... and he was struck blind... yet he regained his sight... Or did he?

perhaps it was an allegorical reference to his "spiritual blindness" which he retained?




posted on Feb, 18 2016 @ 05:21 PM
link   
a reply to: windword


What scripture was Paul considering when he said "Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures", and "that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures"?

Supposedly, he was referring to the gospels, and Jesus own words...
24 Therefore I said to you that you will die in your sins; for if you do not believe that I am He, you will die in your sins.

Oops. Forgot to add the rest. Paul MIGHT have read Mark before he was beheaded, but not Matthew, Luke, and John, which were likely written after his death. It is more likely Paul was going on his understanding of the OT, and on what he heard straight from Peter and the others. Which Paul would have considered "gospel" even if it weren't written yet.

I quoted John above because it is the clearest, but John wrote it after Paul's death.
edit on 2/18/2016 by Klassified because: eta and spacing



posted on Feb, 18 2016 @ 05:33 PM
link   
a reply to: Klassified

Or this...

25 But Jesus called them unto him, and said, Ye know that the princes of the Gentiles exercise dominion over them, and they that are great exercise authority upon them.

26 But it shall not be so among you: but whosoever will be great among you, let him be your minister;

27 And whosoever will be chief among you, let him be your servant:

28 Even as the Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many.

The problem with this idea though, is that these books were not "scripture" when Paul was writing...

Theres a good possibility that the gospels weren't even written yet...




posted on Feb, 18 2016 @ 06:28 PM
link   
a reply to: Akragon
I didn't state that first sentence correctly, so I clarified in an eta...

There's a good possibility none of the gospels as we know them today existed before Paul died, but I would think there would have been bits and pieces, partial books, or early versions, during his day. Nevertheless, he would have had to rely on verbal witness from the disciples, and the OT, more than anything else.

Really, I don't see any harm in reading or not reading Paul. No one really understands the bible anyway. They just think they do. There are men who have spent their whole lives studying that book, and even they can't agree with each other as to what it says or means.

So Paul, Apollos, or Jesus. Pick your poison, and run with it.



posted on Feb, 18 2016 @ 06:30 PM
link   
a reply to: windword



Where did Paul, AKA Saul of Tarsus, get his information when he wrote the following. 1 Corinthians 15 Moreover, brethren, I declare unto you the gospel which I preached unto you, which also ye have received, and wherein ye stand; 2 By which also ye are saved, if ye keep in memory what I preached unto you, unless ye have believed in vain. 3 For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures;Text


He didn't. Saul/Paul did not pen 1st Corinthians.

1st Corinthians is a Pseudepigraphal Cepher to the Corinthians. It was penned from Philippi by Stephanas, Fortunatus, Achaicus and Timotheus.



posted on Feb, 18 2016 @ 06:36 PM
link   
a reply to: windword

Sorry about the above post windword.

Saul/Paul did not write 1st Corinthians.

1st Corinthians was Pseudepigrapha work and was penned from Philippi by Stephanas, Fortunatus, Achaicus and Timotheus.



posted on Feb, 18 2016 @ 06:40 PM
link   

originally posted by: Seede
a reply to: windword

Sorry about the above post windword.

Saul/Paul did not write 1st Corinthians.

1st Corinthians was Pseudepigrapha work and was penned from Philippi by Stephanas, Fortunatus, Achaicus and Timotheus.

I don't remember 1 Corinthians being listed as pseudipigrapha...and upon looking just now it isn't. Where did you get that from?

The disputed letters...
2 Thessalonians, Colossians, Ephesians, 1 and 2 Timothy, and Titus.



posted on Feb, 18 2016 @ 06:58 PM
link   
a reply to: Klassified

Im gonna have to agree with that...

Never heard 1 Corinthians labeled Pseudo before this thread...

Personally I have no problem reading Paul, or the OT... just those that take such things as "Gods absolute word" gets my goat... so to speak lol




posted on Feb, 18 2016 @ 09:55 PM
link   
a reply to: windword

between the time he sees the Lord on the Road to Damascus and he goes to Jerusalem with Barnabas this took place.


Ga 1:17 Neither went I up to Jerusalem to them which were apostles before me; but I went into Arabia, and returned again unto Damascus.


Maybe there Jesus had spoke to him. and there may be plenty of times Jesus spoke to Paul but are not recorded also. when Paul needed to be taught something may be an Angel appeared by him and gave him the answer

Ac 27:23 For there stood by me this night the angel of God, whose I am, and whom I serve,
, just because it is not recorded does not mean he didn't get it from the Lord.

For example Paul received this from the Lord but we have no Idea when. It could have been Arabia it could have been anywhere. But this we can trust he received it of the Lord.

1Co 11:23 ¶ For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you, That the Lord Jesus the same night in which he was betrayed took bread:
24 And when he had given thanks, he brake it, and said, Take, eat: this is my body, which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of me.
25 After the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me.
26 For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do shew the Lord's death till he come.
27 Wherefore whosoever shall eat this bread, and drink this cup of the Lord, unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord.
there is no reason for a person of faith in God's word to even question but to trust that God has preserved it for us today.

Faith is need in accepting the word of God as truth.


edit on 18-2-2016 by ChesterJohn because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 18 2016 @ 10:46 PM
link   
a reply to: ChesterJohn

The verses I cited are not the "word of God", They're a narrative of supposed events that just so happen to conflict with the narratives in the Gospels.

Can you tell me what scriptures Paul was referring to in 1 Corinthians 15:3?




edit on 18-2-2016 by windword because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 18 2016 @ 10:55 PM
link   
wild thread but to answer the title.....he spent three years in the desert....I suppose outside Damascus...

edit on 18-2-2016 by GBP/JPY because: our new King.....He comes right after a nicely done fake one



posted on Feb, 18 2016 @ 11:45 PM
link   
Law (Torah) includes the Oral Torah, and Paul's opinions predominantly accord with the Gemara (the commentary on the Oral Torah that makes rulings as to which halachic interpretation is the correct one). Deviating not to the left or to the right means not subscribing to just the teachings of Shammai or Hillel, but walking the narrow middle path of majority opinion on which of the two schools of thought was correct in each instance. You could easily Google commentary on the epistles and have answers to all of your questions, but you clearly *want* to believe Paul was evil, and no amount of argumentation is going to change what you *want* to believe. The early church didn't embrace Paul because they were easy to deceive (the top 1/3 of Pharisees and laiety who recognized Messiah in the first place were the elect Jews who had the Holy Spirit!); people and saints throughout *all* the generations have affirmed Paul because the Holy Spirit told them that Paul also had the Holy Spirit. If you don't have the Holy Spirit, and you can't be convinced that a perfect Creator could only create a perfect Creation wherein the majority religion has a perfect book to hold fast to as a Tree of Life, well, you're stuck just grasping in the dark.

You may arrive at the correct interpretations of Jesus' words on your own without Paul's help, but their intentional ambiguity may lead you to walk the broad path to destruction, "for the time [has] come when they [do] not endure sound doctrine; but having itching ears, they heap to themselves teachers in accordance with their own lusts."



posted on Feb, 18 2016 @ 11:54 PM
link   
a reply to: SarMegahhikkitha




You could easily Google commentary on the epistles and have answers to all of your questions


I have Googled and Googled, and I still can't find a reference to any scripture that match those that Paul uses to validate his assertions in 1 Corinthians 3. If you have that information, please share it.



You may arrive at the correct interpretations of Jesus' words on your own without Paul's help......


Jesus' words are not the subject of the OP. The Gospels, according to Matthew, Mark, Luke and John and their narrative is in conflict with Paul's narrative, Holy Ghost or not!




edit on 18-2-2016 by windword because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 19 2016 @ 12:25 AM
link   
a reply to: windword

This is the best I could find...

Come, and let us return unto the Lord: for he hath torn, and he will heal us; he hath smitten, and he will bind us up.

2 After two days will he revive us: in the third day he will raise us up, and we shall live in his sight.

Hosea 6

probably need to read the previous chapter for a bit of context though... its a stretch




posted on Feb, 19 2016 @ 12:47 AM
link   
a reply to: Akragon

Yes, it's a beautiful passage. I believe it comes from the belief that God takes the soul of the faithful, for the sake of its dignity, before the degradation of the body, by the 2nd day. We live again, with God, on the 3rd day.



posted on Feb, 19 2016 @ 01:32 AM
link   
a reply to: windword

Im not sure how beautiful it is...

the book is pretty dark... most commentaries say that it can be seen as an example of God's love

Im not really sure about that either honestly




posted on Feb, 19 2016 @ 09:01 AM
link   
a reply to: Klassified


TextI don't remember 1 Corinthians being listed as pseudipigrapha...and upon looking just now it isn't. Where did you get that from?

My source is from "Eth Cepher" -
CEPHER QORINTIYM RI'SHON - the first pseudepigraphal cepher to the Corinthians -
The first cepher to the Qorintiym was written from Philippi by Stephanas, Fortunatus, Achaicus and Timotheus.
Source - www.cepher.net...



posted on Feb, 19 2016 @ 09:20 AM
link   
a reply to: windword


Jesus' words are not the subject of the OP. The Gospels, according to Matthew, Mark, Luke and John and their narrative is in conflict with Paul's narrative, Holy Ghost or not!

Just curious. Where do you personally see the conflict?

My mind was mush yesterday, so let me try this again. The scriptures Paul was likely referring to were old testament passages regarding sacrifice and atonement. And as you well know, this has been a common religious theme historically. The narrative of Jesus life, death, resurrection, and even his teachings mirror old testament allusions, and ancient pagan stories of the god/man giving his life as a payment for sins, so that humans can be reconciled to god/himself.
Paul's words in verse 3 are not intended to be a direct quote. They are the crux of what Christ did as the "lamb of god". Christ himself alluded to his role in several passages. It isn't so hard to see it all through the gospel narratives.

As to the women seeing Jesus first. Peter was allegedly the first "DISCIPLE" to see Jesus. Not the first person.

ETA: I've said this before, but it bears repeating. Unless one has done extensive study of the OT, and understands the finer points and nuances of its theology and law, there is much that will be misunderstood in the NT, especially in the epistles of Paul, who was a pharisee, and a highly educated man. Even leaving Paul aside though.

The new testament is a work that has the old testament intricately woven into it. Whoever wrote it, was a mad genius. The only way to truly get a grasp on everything after Malachi, including Paul, is to use the encryption key, which is the OT. Without a good understanding of OT law, doctrine, and covenants, Paul's epistles won't make a lot of sense to you, since that was Paul's main source apart from the verbal gospel.

Everyone can reject Paul's epistles all they want, but whoever wrote them was brilliant, and they embody the perfect hybrid of Judaism, and the Christian faith.
edit on 2/19/2016 by Klassified because: eta and clarity




top topics



 
13
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join