Paul, Jesus, God, and Historical Criticism

[youngborean]

I am working from a point on another post.

Bernee51 wrote:

It is interesting that you should bring up John...

Here is a list of some of the NT writers.

Paul: 50-55
Mark: 70
Matthew: 80
Luke: 85
Gospel of Peter: 85-90
John: 95

And here is a list of the extraordinary events that appear in the respective writer's version of an incident about which they all wrote viz. the resurrection

Paul: 0
Mark: 1
Matthew: 4
Luke: 5
Peter: 6
John: 8+

Note.. the story evolved and expanded over time.

The common argument put forward is that the image of the Divine Jesus put forward in John is a theology that developed over time. Assuming that the scholarly dates are accurate (and it is a big assumption), would evidence that Paul believed in the deity of Jesus as well, change this assertion? Or are we to assume that any idea that discredits modern common theology is right?


I believe this touches a bit on our love of authority, but there is one passage I would like to discuss that I believe clearly demonstrates Paul's belief in the deity of Jesus.


Rom 14:9 For to this end Christ both died, and rose, and revived, that he might be Lord both of the dead and living.

Rom 14:10 But why dost thou judge thy brother? or why dost thou set at nought thy brother? for we shall all stand before the judgment seat of Christ.

Rom 14:11 For it is written, [As] I live, saith the Lord, every knee shall bow to me, and every tongue shall confess to God.


Paul seems to be reminding people of Isa 45 when he says "as it is written".


Isa 45:21 Tell ye, and bring [them] near; yea, let them take counsel together: who hath declared this from ancient time? [who] hath told it from that time? [have] not I the LORD? and [there is] no God else beside me; a just God and a Saviour; [there is] none beside me.
Isa 45:22 Look unto me, and be ye saved, all the ends of the earth: for I [am] God, and [there is] none else.
Isa 45:23 I have sworn by myself, the word is gone out of my mouth [in] righteousness, and shall not return, That unto me every knee shall bow, every tongue shall swear.
Isa 45:24 Surely, shall [one] say, in the LORD have I righteousness and strength: [even] to him shall [men] come; and all that are incensed against him shall be ashamed.


Now if Paul says Jesus is the Judge, and cites a passage from the OT that says the LORD (yod he vav he) is the judge, does this not imply that Paul considered Jesus and THE LORD synonymous? Otherwise, why did he quote a passage about the LORD and as the justification for Jesus as judge? Now, if the dates above are to be true (Paul 50-55), then this particular theology that Jesus was divine, would have been the earliest of all of the theologies. The same can be said of the ressurection.

[Arch]

I am working from a point on another post.

Bernee51 wrote:

It is interesting that you should bring up John...

Here is a list of some of the NT writers.

Paul: 50-55
Mark: 70
Matthew: 80
Luke: 85
Gospel of Peter: 85-90
John: 95

And here is a list of the extraordinary events that appear in the respective writer's version of an incident about which they all wrote viz. the resurrection

Paul: 0
Mark: 1
Matthew: 4
Luke: 5
Peter: 6
John: 8+

Note.. the story evolved and expanded over time.

The common argument put forward is that the image of the Divine Jesus put forward in John is a theology that developed over time. Assuming that the scholarly dates are accurate (and it is a big assumption), would evidence that Paul believed in the deity of Jesus as well, change this assertion? Or are we to assume that any idea that discredits modern common theology is right?

My research comes up with this.

The gospel of John written between 80-90 A.D.

First off according the the gosples when john met Jesus he was a fisherman right and already a follower or John the bapist. So it is most likely he was a grown man maybe even older than Jesus.

Let say he was the same age as Jesus for reference that means he wrote this gospel at somewhere the ripe old age of between 80 and 90.

Why would he wait so long to write down his EYEWITNESS account of what happened with Jesus?

Thats my first question

The second is given his old age ad time since he EYEwitnessed the events. Is it a stretch to say he might have written more about a idealic Jesus one he WISHED to remember than the actual historical Jesus?

Next paul wrote his first epistle in 50 A.D. and supposedly he met Jesus on the road to damascus in 37 A.D. This is definitely enough time to compose a DOCTRINE.

Even though I don't believe that Paul ever said Jesus was GOD. Even if he did why is it impossible that that doctrine was derived. Especially since Paul was into converting so calle dgentiles who were already into worship of Dieties that fell under the same concept. IT would seem he latered the doctrine to fit these new converts.

It definitely not impossible.

[youngborean]

Even though I don't believe that Paul ever said Jesus was GOD. Even if he did why is it impossible that that doctrine was derived. Especially since Paul was into converting so calle dgentiles who were already into worship of Dieties that fell under the same concept. IT would seem he latered the doctrine to fit these new converts.

It definitely not impossible.

If Paul is not saying that Jesus is God then how do you explain the Passage in Romans 14? My assertion is not that the doctrine is derived, but that it existed in the earliest writings of Christianity, because it is the proper interpretation of the person of Jesus to be presented as Divine from the beginning. Now whether or not he was truly divine is debatable. But my assertion remains that Paul, who was the earliest Christian writer (by modern scholarship's accont) held the belief that Jesus and God were synonymous as clearly shown in Romans 14.

[Arch]

Even though I don't believe that Paul ever said Jesus was GOD. Even if he did why is it impossible that that doctrine was derived. Especially since Paul was into converting so calle dgentiles who were already into worship of Dieties that fell under the same concept. IT would seem he latered the doctrine to fit these new converts.

It definitely not impossible.

If Paul is not saying that Jesus is God then how do you explain the Passage in Romans 14? My assertion is not that the doctrine is derived, but that it existed in the earliest writings of Christianity, because it is the proper interpretation of the person of Jesus to be presented as Divine from the beginning. Now whether or not he was truly divine is debatable. But my assertion remains that Paul, who was the earliest Christian writer (by modern scholarship's accont) held the belief that Jesus and God were synonymous as clearly shown in Romans 14.

Easy Paul clearly states in both Romans and Corinthians that all will appear before the Judgment Seat of Christ. The Judgment Seat of Christ and the Great White Throne Judgment are two separate events. The Judgment Seat of Christ is for born-again believers only. It is for reward or loss of reward (I Corinthians 3:15). The Judgement Seat of Christ is NOT to determine who is saved or lost.

The judge spoken about in the OT and the judgment spoken anywhere else in the bible is done by GOD and its not the same thing as coming before the Judgement Seat of Christ. This event is only to give reward to believers as stated above.

Furthermore the Judgement Seat of Christ is not mentioned any where else as far as I know outside of Pauls Christian theology.

You are stretching to find links between the OT GOD and Jesus however you are faulty in your connections.

[youngborean]

You are still not explaning why Paul cites an OT prophecy about the Judgement of God in Romans 14:11:

Rom 14:11 For it is written, [As] I live, saith the Lord, every knee shall bow to me, and every tongue shall confess to God.

You are stretching to find links between the OT GOD and Jesus however you are faulty in your connections.

The only evidence I put forth is Romans 14:10 to 14:12, I am simply reading the passage. It is not me who is making the connection it is Paul. There is no evidence in Romans 14 to say they are 2 seperate Judgements. Paul cites an OT passage, and equates God to Christ. Its as plain as day, all you have to do is read. Again, within the context of Romans 14, how do you come up with your conclusion. The answer is that you can't, unless you bring in a new theology (seperate judgements). Can you explain these verses with your connections?

[Arch]

You are still not explaning why Paul cites an OT prophecy about the Judgement of God in Romans 14:11:

Rom 14:11 For it is written, [As] I live, saith the Lord, every knee shall bow to me, and every tongue shall confess to God.

You are stretching to find links between the OT GOD and Jesus however you are faulty in your connections.

The only evidence I put forth is Romans 14:10 to 14:12, I am simply reading the passage. It is not me who is making the connection it is Paul. There is no evidence in Romans 14 to say they are 2 seperate Judgements. Paul cites an OT passage, and equates God to Christ. Its as plain as day, all you have to do is read. Again, within the context of Romans 14, how do you come up with your conclusion. The answer is that you can't, unless you bring in a new theology (seperate judgements). Can you explain these verses with your connections?

I already answered the Judgement at the seat of Christ issue. That was your main point as I saw it then you progressed to this point to show that the Judgements were the same.

They are not the same . As far as Paul quoting the OT I see in no way that being a correlation between Jesus and GOD. Even you saud it SEEMS LIKE he was making this correlation.

I don't see it.

Finally the two Jusgements. The seat of Christ and the White throne judgement. I expalined the seat of christ per the verses I gave you can go read them it explains that this is a event giving out rewards or loss of rewards to believers. "THOSE WHO ARE UPON THE FOUNDATION OF CHRIST" This would be believers in Christ.

If you want more information you go search the various and plentyful sermons CHRISTIANS have given on this very topic.

[youngborean]

No, I think you are missing the point all together. Paul says first we will all sit before the judgement seat of Christ. He then justifies it by saying "As it is written" implying that it is written such in the OT. He then says that all every knee will bow to GOD. This is clearly saying that Paul believes Christ and GOD are synonymous. This is the issue, there is no other issue.

[trencacloscas]

"For if the truth of God hath more abounded through my lie unto his glory; why yet am I also judged as a sinner?" (St. Paul, Romans 3:7)

"But what does it matter? The important thing is that in every way, whether from false motives or true, Christ is preached." (Philippians 1:18)

As mentioned in another thread, why trust a guy like Paul?
Doesn't he recognizes openly that he lies for God?