I have an old collection of threads that I can update so that people can review these sorts of things. It's only up to January 2006 at the moment.GakuseiDon wrote:But is it fair to leave it at that? Do we conclude, even if provisionally:Peter Kirby wrote:You've got a nice collection of references there, Bernard. Thank you for taking the time to compile them.
1. There is good evidence that Paul thought Jesus was crucified in Jerusalem
2. There is fair evidence that Paul thought Jesus was crucified in Jerusalem
3. There is arguably evidence that Paul thought Jesus was crucified in Jerusalem
4. There is no evidence that Paul thought Jesus was crucified in Jerusalem
Because this topic will come up again. And again. It struck me when I recently read Ben C Smith's convincing refutation of Doherty's view on Ascension of Isaiah back in 2006 that lots of arguments get raised and lost on this board and her predecessors. It won't be long before someone states "Paul didn't even believe that Jesus was crucified on earth!" Or, as on another thread, "Justin Martyr's Trypho character claimed that Jesus was an invented figure!" It might be good to have a sub-board where these arguments are kept for future reference, so that the wheel doesn't keep spinning.
I'd also say that "D" has a nice collection of references on his website and that he did a service in compiling them.
Provisionally speaking, I'm not convinced that Paul wrote the letters yet. May I be allowed to bracket the question of what a historical Paul may have believed?
Provisionally speaking, I'm torn between the idea of layers in the Pauline letters, the idea that the Pauline letters are indeed Gospel-tinted fictions (the Dutch radical idea), the idea that Paul wrote them (the traditional account), and even the idea that "D" might have been right after all this trouble.
Maybe that's a copout, but my personal wanderings through this subject are just not that important.
Currently I am reading Munroe's book regarding a pastoral stratum.
One of the reasons I don't want to provision a premature judgment is that I'd like to form a hypothesis that I prefer that explains all the evidence elegantly, before getting drawn into a Socratic dialectic examining the potential contradictions in this or that half-considered idea. I haven't been able to do that yet.