0
Not only did he believe in the resurection, he saw and spoke with Jesus shortly after. He recorded this in his epistle to the church at Corinth(Corinthians 14)
Wiki User
∙ 12y ago
Add your answer:
Earn +20 pts
What was Paul's central understanding of Jesus in 1 Corinthians?
Paul's central understanding of Jesus in 1 Corinthians is that Jesus is the foundation of the Christian faith and the source of unity among believers. He emphasizes Jesus' sacrificial death and resurrection as essential to the gospel message and the power of God. Paul also sees Jesus as the embodiment of wisdom and righteousness, contrasting with the wisdom of the world.
How did Paul fit the test that an apostle must be a witness of the resurrection of Jesus?
Paul claimed to have encountered the resurrected Jesus on the road to Damascus, which he considered a direct and personal witness of the resurrection. This experience was considered valid by the early church leaders, leading them to accept Paul as an apostle despite not being part of the original twelve disciples who witnessed the resurrection.
Were Jesus Christ and St Paul contemporaries?
No, Jesus Christ lived and conducted his ministry in the early 1st century AD, while St. Paul, also known as the apostle Paul, became a Christian after Jesus' death and resurrection. St. Paul's letters and teachings significantly influenced the early Christian church.
Did the apostle Paul meet Jesus?
The apostle Paul did not meet Jesus during his earthly ministry. Paul had a transformative encounter with Jesus on the road to Damascus after Jesus' resurrection, which led to his conversion and becoming an influential figure in the early Christian church.
Where was Saul when Jesus was alive?
Saul (who later became known as the apostle Paul) was in Jerusalem and played a role in the persecution of early Christians during the time Jesus was alive. He did not meet Jesus in person until after Jesus' death and resurrection on the road to Damascus.
What is spiritual and bodily resurrection?
A:In his epistles, Paul seems to have believed in a spiritual resurrection of Jesus, in other words believing that the resurrection and the ascension to heaven were one and the same. When he describes the appearances of Jesus to Cephas, James and the disciples, he makes no distinction with the presumably spiritual or even allegorical appearance to himself. Paul never seems to believe that the risen Jesus could be seen in the flesh. The New Testament gospels speak of a physical resurrection, because the body of Jesus was no longer in the tomb and they go to great pains to prove that Jesus' resurrection was real and in the flesh.
Who was not a disciple before Jesus' resurrection?
paul
Why does Paul mean that Jesus resurrection is so important?
Because if Jesus did not rise from the dead - then he did not return to send Paul on the 'road to Damascus' - this is why it is so important. No Resurrection = No commission = No Christianity!
Did Paul believe in Jesus when Peter was in charge of the church?
Paul always believed in Jesus.
What was Paul's central understanding of Jesus in 1 Corinthians?
Paul's central understanding of Jesus in 1 Corinthians is that Jesus is the foundation of the Christian faith and the source of unity among believers. He emphasizes Jesus' sacrificial death and resurrection as essential to the gospel message and the power of God. Paul also sees Jesus as the embodiment of wisdom and righteousness, contrasting with the wisdom of the world.
Did Paul understand Jesus to be the son of God?
Paul understood Jesus to be the son of God from his resurrection. Romans 1:4, "And declared to be the Son of God with power, according to the spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead:" This view evolved in later Christian writings, with Mark saying Jesus became son of God at his baptism, Matthew and Luke at his conception and John as a pre-existing Son.
Who discovered that Jesus had risen from the dead?
* Mary Magdalene == == * Paul's epistles contain the earliest accounts we have that Jesus was resurrected. However, Paul seems to have seen the resurrection as purely spiritual - not physical - and also sees the resurrection and ascension as being at the same time.Mark's Gospel was the next account to be written. In its original version, before the 'Long Ending' was added, the Gospel ended with a young man telling the women that Jesus was risen (Mark 16:6).
How did Paul fit the test that an apostle must be a witness of the resurrection of Jesus?
Paul claimed to have encountered the resurrected Jesus on the road to Damascus, which he considered a direct and personal witness of the resurrection. This experience was considered valid by the early church leaders, leading them to accept Paul as an apostle despite not being part of the original twelve disciples who witnessed the resurrection.
Which if any of the authors of the New Testament Gospels was an eyewitness to the resurrection or resurrected life of Jesus and his ascension?
In 1 Corinthians 15:5-8, Paul said that Jesus was seen by Cephas, then the twelve, then by more than 500, most of whom were still alive, then by James and all the apostles, and finally by Paul himself. However, it is clear that Paul only saw Jesus in a vision, perhaps a dream. He seems to have seen no difference between his own vision of Jesus and those of Peter, James and the others. So, Paul was not an eyewitness to these events and did not think anyone else was either. Mark's Gospel originally ended at verse 16:8, with no mention of a physical resurrection or of anyone seeing the risen Jesus. The "Long Ending" (verses 16:9-20) was not originally part of the Gospel. The author would no doubt have said so if he knew that anyone had witnessed the resurrection or had seen Jesus, so we can say that the author did not witness these events and had no knowledge of them. It has been shown that the authors of Matthew's Gospel and Luke's Gospel relied on Mark's Gospel for their knowledge of the life of Jesus. Moreover, these Gospels differ so widely in their descriptions of the resurrection of Jesus and his appearances to the disciples, that they are unlikely to be literally true. The authors of these Gospels were not eyewitnesses to the events they described, and really only elaborated on and added to Mark's Gospel. The stories about the resurrection and the resurrection appearances of Jesus, that appear in John's Gospel are elaborations of material that can be found in Luke's Gospel, and no one suggests that Luke was an eyewitness. The author of John's Gospel was not an eyewitness to the events he described. In summary, none of the gospel authors actually witnessed any of the resurrection events.
Why do you think jesus waited with the disciples forty days after his resurrection before going to heaven?
A:It is unclear just when Jesus did ascend to heaven, if this is historically correct. Acts of the Apostles tells us that he ascended after forty days, during which he was seen by many (1:3). On this account, he could have chosen to wait until enough people had seen him to prove his resurrection was real. However, Luke's Gospel, written by the same author but somewhat earlier, says that Jesus ascended to heaven on the evening of the day of his resurrection (24:51). Paul, in his epistles, seems to have believed that the resurrection and the ascension to heaven were one and the same event - in other words, that Jesus was resurrected spiritually and that there was no physical resurrection. Matthew and Mark do not mention an ascension to heaven, and Matthew's account of the appearance of the risen Jesus to the disciples seems to rule out the ascension in Acts as well as that in Luke. On these accounts we can not say that Jesus waited forty days, or even that he ascended bodily to heaven at all.
When did the Ascension take place?
A:The apostle Paul seems to have believed that the resurrection of Jesus and his ascension to heaven were the same event. For him, the risen Jesus did not appear on earth in the flesh. Luke's Gospel says that the ascension of Jesus took place on the road to Bethany on the evening of his resurrection.Acts of the Apostles, by the same author as Luke but written somewhat later, says that the ascension took place forty days after the resurrection of Jesus, at the mount of Olivetoutside Jerusalem.
How do you prove the Resurrection of Jesus never happened?
The early Church Fathers spoke of a physical resurrection rather than a spiritual resurrection. Irenaeus, as an example, was a pupil of Polycarp, who was also in turn a pupil of John the apostle who had witnessed Christ's resurrection first hand. Irenaeus , in his 'Against Heresies' affirmed his unwavering belief that the saints would rise physically, just like Christ, and be part of he new heaven and earth.Some theologians (but certainly not all) interpret Paul as thinking of Jesus' resurrection as spiritual; however this is based on just a few verses taken out of context and an ambiguous use of the word 'soma' meaning 'body'. They are easily explained away if we remember that Paul did not witness the resurrected Christ physically. The only encounter with the risen Christ that Paul had was on the Damascus Road at his conversion, when Christ appeared in the form of a blinding light. Also Paul's encounter with Christ was a long time after the resurrection and bodily ascension of Christ (Acts 1-6), so that any physical appearance of Jesus would not be possible for Paul as it was for the disciples.Paul even admits the fact in 1 Corinthians 15, where he lists the resurrection appearances he knew about, finally adding himself as the last to whom Christ appeared. Thus, for Paul, Christ appearance was not physical as it was for the disciples, nor to those on the road to Emmaus, nor to those who passed on the oral tradition in the early church as witnesses of the physical resurrection and subsequently teaching the new followers of Christ accordingly, before the Gospel message was written down. However, this does not mean that Paul did not believe in the physical resurrection.Finally, while Mark's account was indeed used by Luke and Matthew in formulating their own gospels, the Gospel of John is unique. Less than 10% of John's gospel is to be found in the other accounts of Matthew Mark and Luke, and so more than 90% is unique and independent. Moreover, most theologians regard John's gospel as written by John the apostle. Irenaeus certainly believed so and he was only one generation away from John himself. And in John's gospel the resurrection was irrefutably physical.Thus it is impossible to disprove the resurrection, or prove it. However, the evidence points clearly to its reality; evidence not only of the Gospels but of the early Church Fathers, many of whom were either the pupils of the disciples themselves, or pupils of pupils.
