Why does Paul never mention any of the specific details about the life of Jesus?

[BrainInJar]

The Apostle Paul is one of the (if not the) most famous Christian authors of all time. He wrote 80,000 or so words about Christianity. Supposedly, he lived at about the same time as Jesus. Yet, he doesn't mention ANY specific details about the life of Jesus. His birthplace, his parents, the place he died, his teachings, ext.

Why is that?

 

[Deren]

The Apostle Paul is one of the (if not the) most famous Christian authors of all time. He wrote 80,000 or so words about Christianity. Supposedly, he lived at about the same time as Jesus. Yet, he doesn't mention ANY specific details about the life of Jesus. His birthplace, his parents, the place he died, his teachings, ext.

Why is that?

Ah, here we go again with another atheist asking questions about something that, if he was really consistent, wouldn't be asking.

BIJ, when you sat down to ask your misleading questions, why didn't you provide historical details about who you were, where you live, your occupation, and whether or not you were married, or had children? Moreover, why didn't you provide information about your medical history, where you went to school (if indeed you did), and what flavor of ice cream you like? And while you were at it, why didn't you let us know the last time you flew on a jet plane, when the last time it was that you stood under a starry sky and looked for the Big Dipper, or who your best friend is?

I hope you get my point. If not, then you in all likelihood would never get any answer given in respect as to why Paul didn't include all these details you're feigning to want to know.

 

[BrainInJar]

Ah, here we go again with another atheist asking questions about something that, if he was really consistent, wouldn't be asking.

Hmm... consistent eh? So then. Paul should NEVER mention the life or teachings of Jesus, even for comparisons or when it will help his arguments? There are several places where Paul could have mentioned the teachings or the life of Jesus to his benefit, yet chose not to. That is something that you need to explain. You can't just accuse Atheists of being incosistent and act as if you just answered the question and made the gigantic problem disappear.

BIJ, when you sat down to ask your misleading questions,

What is misleading about the question? Did I miss a verse where Paul DOES mention specific details about the life of Jesus?

why didn't you provide historical details about who you were, where you live, your occupation, and whether or not you were married, or had children? Moreover, why didn't you provide information about your medical history, where you went to school (if indeed you did), and what flavor of ice cream you like? And while you were at it, why didn't you let us know the last time you flew on a jet plane, when the last time it was that you stood under a starry sky and looked for the Big Dipper, or who your best friend is?

There is a gigantic difference between your rediculous point and the thrust of mine. In my case, mentioning all of those things would have been pointless. However there are PLENTY of cases where Paul could have mentioned the details of Jesus' life in order to benefit his case. He doesn't.

A huge example is 1 Thessalonians 4:9, where Paul says "Now, about brotherly love we do not need to write to you, for you yourselves have been taught by God to love each other."

Jesus' teachings of love were a centerpiece of his ministry. He taught the commandment to love eachother. Paul doesn't even touch upon that here. It would have surely helped his case, and was worth mentioning. He didn't point it out. He ignores the focus of Jesus' ministry, and just says that God was the teacher of such a doctrine.

I just gave you one example at first, simply because until you explain this one, there's no need to continue with more.

I hope you get my point. If not, then you in all likelihood would never get any answer given in respect as to why Paul didn't include all these details you're feigning to want to know.

So. Let's see here. You may feel that I was rather rude, in this post, but in comparison to your blatant insult-infested post, mine was quite mild. J.P. Holding would be proud.

 

[calidog]

The Apostle Paul is one of the (if not the) most famous Christian authors of all time. He wrote 80,000 or so words about Christianity. Supposedly, he lived at about the same time as Jesus. Yet, he doesn't mention ANY specific details about the life of Jesus. His birthplace, his parents, the place he died, his teachings, ext.

Why is that?

I've wondered that too. And Peter and John could have also. And what about His brother James? He could have said plenty. Here's the answer:


2Ti 3:16 All Scripture is God-breathed, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness,
2Ti 3:17 that the man of God may be perfected, thoroughly furnished to every good work.

It was God Himself Who left out those details.

 

[WashedClean]

Actually Paul did not know Jesus personally when he was on earth, so it doesn't surprise me that his words of Jesus are more spiritual than historical.

Jesus revealed himself to Paul after he was resurrected and ascended to heaven. He then guided Paul and revealed things to him spiritually so he could in turn teach others, particularly Gentiles.

Paul speaks of love many times, but his focus with Jesus was on his death and resurrection, and why he died. It wasn't limited to his earthly ministry.

Hope this helps.

 

[ebia]

The Apostle Paul is one of the (if not the) most famous Christian authors of all time. He wrote 80,000 or so words about Christianity. Supposedly, he lived at about the same time as Jesus. Yet, he doesn't mention ANY specific details about the life of Jesus. His birthplace, his parents, the place he died, his teachings, ext.

Why is that?

Perhaps because he doesn't see that as his place. Much of his writing is written before the gospels were written down, and he didn't experience Jesus' pre-easter life first hand, so he doesn't feel its his role to quote to heavily on his teachings. He certainly won't have been as familar with (say) the gospel stories as he was with the OT stories.

It's also clear that he sees Jesus' ministry far more in terms of what he did on the cross and the vindication of that in the resurrection than about his teaching. He probably saw Jesus' teaching as setting straight misconceptions about what the OT had taught all along, rather than anything new, and so he returns to the OT (and other Jewish texts like the Wisdom of Soloman) to make his arguments - texts he knew inside out and expected his audience to know - rather than texts that were only just being put into written form.

 

[Digit]

The Apostle Paul is one of the (if not the) most famous Christian authors of all time. He wrote 80,000 or so words about Christianity. Supposedly, he lived at about the same time as Jesus. Yet, he doesn't mention ANY specific details about the life of Jesus. His birthplace, his parents, the place he died, his teachings, ext.

Why is that?

Heya BIJ,

I think Deren's point is that atheists come here and say, "God did this, but not that, why not?". The idea here, is that they understand God did this one thing, yet they don't believe He did the other. They are atheists, they don't believe in God period so why is there even a question here?

It just seems a little insincere. Anyhow, we are called not to judge so in this respect we can still answer your question. The fact, is however, that you are asking why someone chose to do something one way and not another? I mean, why for example did you decide to start your post in a very formal manner, rather than - "Hey hows it going!" and so on. You just did. The same as Paul focusses on certain areas that he felt important and not on talking about Jesus' background information which by and large would have no effect on how people live.

Also as Calidog points out, scripture is God-breathed, that is, from
the mout of God. It does not mean 'inspired', that was our translation of the word, to convey it's effect, yet it literally means from God's mouth, just as words come from my mouth, so does scripture come from His.

Hope that helps!

Digit

 

[WarEagle]

The Apostle Paul is one of the (if not the) most famous Christian authors of all time. He wrote 80,000 or so words about Christianity. Supposedly, he lived at about the same time as Jesus. Yet, he doesn't mention ANY specific details about the life of Jesus. His birthplace, his parents, the place he died, his teachings, ext.

Why is that?

Same reason Shelby Foote didn't write much about Jesus: that wasn't the topic he was addressing.

Paul's focus wasn't on the biography of Jesus, but instructing the fledgling NT church on matters of doctrine.

 

[Secundulus]

The Apostle Paul is one of the (if not the) most famous Christian authors of all time. He wrote 80,000 or so words about Christianity. Supposedly, he lived at about the same time as Jesus. Yet, he doesn't mention ANY specific details about the life of Jesus. His birthplace, his parents, the place he died, his teachings, ext.

Why is that?

Because they were already commonly known by the people he was writing to. He was writing to people who were already Christians in established Churches. He didn't need to repeat things they already knew.

 

[Deren]

Hmm... consistent eh?

Yeah, consistent. And your question is not worth answering, given that I've already addressed it in my previous response.

What is misleading about the question?

Because you're not sincere. You're baiting your audience for the express purpose to confuse. Hence, you're being misleading, if not also inconsistent.

There is a gigantic difference between your rediculous point and the thrust of mine.

No, there is not. My questions thoroughly refute whatever it is that you're asking, simply by pointing out that you supplied nothing by way of personal information about yourself, because it had nothing to do with you're asking your question in the first place. The same principle applies to why Paul does not talk about the finer points of Jesus' life. That is not why he wrote his letters, and hence it was not necessary to even discuss. Besides, he was writing to Christians who already knew who Jesus was, and what he did.

So. Let's see here. You may feel that I was rather rude, in this post, but in comparison to your blatant insult-infested post, mine was quite mild. J.P. Holding would be proud.

Oh, I didn't think you were rude. I thought you were merely being disingenuous and misleading, that's all. And if you've already done rounds with J. P. Holding on this, then that only further serves to prove that what I said about your post is true. So, why not just move along to your Infidels board, and quit trying to trick those who are genuinely seeking answers to legitimate questions?

 

[Deren]

Heya BIJ,

I think Deren's point is that atheists come here and say, "God did this, but not that, why not?". The idea here, is that they understand God did this one thing, yet they don't believe He did the other. They are atheists, they don't believe in God period so why is there even a question here?

Exactly, thank you.

 

[Deren]

Same reason Shelby Foote didn't write much about Jesus: that wasn't the topic he was addressing.

Paul's focus wasn't on the biography of Jesus, but instructing the fledgling NT church on matters of doctrine.

Again, you're right on the mark! Well done.

 

[BigNorsk]

The Apostle Paul is one of the (if not the) most famous Christian authors of all time. He wrote 80,000 or so words about Christianity. Supposedly, he lived at about the same time as Jesus. Yet, he doesn't mention ANY specific details about the life of Jesus. His birthplace, his parents, the place he died, his teachings, ext.

Why is that?

I would suggest looking a bit harder.
Rom 1:2-4 NET.
(2) This gospel he promised beforehand through his prophets in the holy scriptures,
(3) concerning his Son who was a descendant of David with reference to the flesh,
(4) who was appointed the Son-of-God-in-power according to the Holy Spirit by the resurrection from the dead, Jesus Christ our Lord.
First chapter of Romans. Jesus was descended from King David. Jesus was resurrected from the dead.

That's two specific details of Jesus' life.

Marv

 

[Stinker]

I think Bible skeptics believe that Saul/Paul picked up on the Christian concept, and meshed it with the Mithra concept. Since we have no other writings from him other than those addressing specific 'problems' within certain congregations. Some of those 'problems' being women asserting themselves, which would definitely be a no no in the Mithra religion if by itself.

Another skeptic argument is that Saul/Paul was denied the opportunity of marrying the daughter of the High Priest. Driven by the rage of being denied by the Jewish High Priest, Saul/Paul took the Christian religion and planted it all over the then known world, to spite the leaders of the Jewish religion.


We see by reading through the New Testament, that Saul/Paul was an excellent choice by God as one who could explain the difference between the Law of Moses from this new law of liberty. This was the greatest hurdle that had to be cleared in order for Christianity to succeed for those trying to come out of the Jewish religion.

 

[Merlin]

Paul wrote letters to various churches about their day-to-day lives as christians, instructing them.
Those letters exist today and are included in what we call the Bible.

 

[heron]

Saul/Paul was from Tarsus in Cilicia --> Jerusalem.
Jesus was from Bethlehem --> Nazareth --> Jerusalem.
Cilicia is quite a bit north of where Jesus was.

Ac 21:39
But Paul said, "I am a Jew of Tarsus in Cilicia, a citizen of no insignificant city; and I beg you, allow me to speak to the people."
Acts 9:11
And the Lord said to him, "Get up and go to the street called Straight, and inquire at the house of Judas for a man from Tarsus named Saul, for he is praying

Ac 11:25
And he left for Tarsus to look for Saul.

Acts 21-22
21:15 And after these days, having made ready, we went up to Jerusalem.... Indeed I am a man, a Jew having been born in Tarsus of Cilicia, but having been brought up in this city (Jersualem) at the feet of Gamaliel, having been trained according to the exactness of the ancestral law, being a zealous one of God, even as you all are today.

(Probably did not have a lot of exposure to Jesus' street teachings.)

 

[mpok1519]

The Pharisee did their part to try and strike Jesus from the known record. There was LOTS written about Jesus, but much of it was lost or destroyed by the powers at hand who wished to destroy Jesus' name, a practice quite common throughout history; anyone who went against the norm and gained wide support and acknowledgement was usually stricken from history as a heretic, doing their best to wipe them from history as we know it.

thats part of the reason, I believe, we really don't see alot of Jesus' life, but, I believe it was His teachings that were important rather than the details of his life.

many heirarchies have destroyed peoples' existence since the days of the Egyptions. Many Pharoahs didn't exist until now when we could piece the evidence and pieces together that they were stricken from history itself.

Thats a piece of the truth concerning the matter I believe.

 

[OldChurchGuy]

The Apostle Paul is one of the (if not the) most famous Christian authors of all time. He wrote 80,000 or so words about Christianity. Supposedly, he lived at about the same time as Jesus. Yet, he doesn't mention ANY specific details about the life of Jesus. His birthplace, his parents, the place he died, his teachings, ext.

Why is that?

I would agree with the post stating that Paul did not know Jesus while Jesus was on earth so wouldn't be privvy to a lot of details. That jives with my current understanding.

If I may be bold, what prompted the question?

Curiously,

OldChurchGuy

 

[PhilosopherD]

The Apostle Paul is one of the (if not the) most famous Christian authors of all time. He wrote 80,000 or so words about Christianity. Supposedly, he lived at about the same time as Jesus. Yet, he doesn't mention ANY specific details about the life of Jesus. His birthplace, his parents, the place he died, his teachings, ext.

Why is that?

My own personal idea on your question is drawn from 2 Corinthians 5:16, where Paul says, "16 So from now on we regard no one from a worldly point of view. Though we once regarded Christ in this way, we do so no longer. 17 Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation; the old has gone, the new has come!

It seems to me that embedded in this text is the general trend in the early church to see Jesus as the emboddied Word of God. If this was the trend, especially among Paul and his entourage, it would not be surprising that Paul would not be too interested in 'earthly, human details', other than Christ's identity and His fulfillment of O.T. scripture. In other words, once you know that Christ is not just a man, but the Son of God, his pre-ministry life in its minutae, like His possible carpentry job or His everyday doings as a teenager, are moot points.

 

[TheCanvas]

Simple, he never met Jesus in physical form.