This is something I posted yesterday on the Internet Infidels discussion board:
Several months ago, I wrote a rather long post on Debunking Christianity which defended the idea that Paul never clearly speaks of Jesus as a man on earth. I just had a look at chapter 6 of JP Holding's book "Shattering the Christ Myth" which you can view here.
Holding says that the silence in Paul isn't all that surprising, given the fact that Paul lived in a "high context" society (one which assumed lots of insider knowledge in communication) while we live in a "low context" society (which is the opposite of the former).
So I'm posing the question: What do we make of Paul's silence?
Saturday, June 27, 2009
Paul's Silence
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
I'm no expert on whether the society then had more inherent cultural context, but regardless, absent evidence of widespread cultural knowledge of that specific piece of information, we can't assume it.
We therefore seem to have two possible conclusions: either Paul did not make such claims on the personhood of Christ, or that Paul did not consider it important if he did believe it true.
[from Stone; not Liz, my better -- and calmer -- half]
I too often see the careless statement made that Paul never refers to Jesus as a human being. This is just an urban myth, and I'm rather surprised to see so many people fall for this one. As one who much admired the blog post here entitled "Idiot America", I'm rather surprised to see this urban myth -- or Internet myth, now -- trotted out so carelessly here.
Not only does Paul refer to Jesus as a human being with a human history, he even quotes from Jesus. It's simply untrue that Paul never refers to anything human that Jesus ever did -- and some mythers even trump that by either implying or stating directly(!) that Paul never quotes from Jesus either! In fact, Paul _does_ quote Jesus directly -- in quotes -- cited -- referenced -- in at least one of his letters -- _1_ _CORINTHIANS_ -- and this letter is even one of those unusual half dozen or so for which Pauline authorship is generally accepted to this day.
Look, nothing in NT scholarship is certain, but _probabilities_ are definitely what _is_ entailed in the most rigorous research that's out there -- _as_ _it_ _is_ _also_ _most_ _emphatically_ _front_ _and_ _center_ _in_ _all_ _historical_ _research_ _in_ _the_ _ancient_ _world_, _period_, _both_ _outside_ _of_ _Biblical_ _research_ _and_ _within_ _it_! This is _not_ a research model specifically "dispensed" for NT research only!
I'm saying that in order to forestall the inevitable -- and typically dishonest -- moving of the goal posts that I _know_ can come up once the unusual textual consensus surrounding 1 Corinthians comes up.
We already have a goal post set up here: essentially, the statement that Paul never refers to Jesus as doing anything human. That alone is simply plain _wrong_ on the face of it. No fancy analysis is needed to address this. It is a fact: Paul talks of Jesus doing human things -- including quoting from him.
Now, I reference the current scholarly consensus on 1 Corinthians _only_ to underscore the sheer ludicrousness of such an urban myth -- particularly ludicrous when one considers just how little suspicion has ever been voiced concerning this particular letter where Jesus is quoted.
Look, probably no one here is setting out to voice a direct lie, but are there some people out there who have just been brainwashed? Too many posters thoughtlessly adopt a blatant urban myth here without checking the facts.
Sure, one can generate all the suspicions one wants about 1 Corinthians. One can even come up with fancy suppositions on what specifically Jesus is quoted in that letter as saying and why. Fine. But the bald statement here that Paul never speaks of Jesus in human terms is exactly that: a bald simple statement with no hedging, and therefore plainly wrong. It's too late now: since this statement shows no hedging, it has therefore not taken account of any possible lurking suspicions on the inner details of such human references in Paul. That "get-out" is no longer possible here. The statement is bald. So is the error, since the statement does not take account of any contextual suspicions for this or that passage or letter. That's it. No changing the goal posts now.
Bottom line: Do we have a letter where Paul speaks of Jesus as a human with a human biography? Yes -- and Paul even quotes him directly in one of his better authenticated letters! Are the dozens of other posters on the Web right, when they say repeatedly that Paul never has anything to say about Jesus's life as a human being? No, they're always wrong, and letters like 1 Corinthians aren't going to oblige by doing a disappearing act any time soon!
Sincerely,
Stone
Liz, you need to read the post that I linked to, which obviously have not (Don't bother telling me you have, as that'll only undermine your honesty).
As for the quotes from Jesus, those could easily have come from visions or dreams of Jesus as an angelic figure. After all, the Old Testament gives many quotations from Jehovah himself, but that doesn't mean Jehovah was real.
Post a Comment