Jesus Puzzle: Chapter 4

Chapter 4 Critiqued:

Doherty wrote: “Does Paul give us any evidence of the “twelve” apostles as the Gospels present them? The term appears once in his letters, when he lists those who had visions of the Christ (1 Corinthians 15:5-7): ‘…he was seen by Cephas, and afterward by the Twelve….then he was seen by James and afterward by all the apostles.’ From this, one might conclude that Peter (Cephas) is not a member of ‘the Twelve’ and that the group known as ‘the apostles’ is larger than the Twelve and may not include them. What this body actually constituted in Paul’s time remains a mystery. Paul’s account in Galatians of his first visit to Jerusalem following his conversion makes no mention of them as a group, and the only names of apostles from Jerusalem which he records anywhere in his letters are Peter, John and James, the latter being the head of the Jerusalem church, not the James of the twelve in Gospel tradition” (TJP:42).

Anthony C. Thiselton wrote: “Paul uses the term the Twelve only here, preferring the term the apostles, which (as we have noted) confirms the pre-Pauline origin of this tradition. Since Paul regularly cites apostolic traditions (see above, esp. Eriksson), it is quite unconvincing to argue that these verses cannot be Pauline on the ground of his claims about direct revelation in Gal. 1:1, 11, and 12. These are not competing truth claims”(AP:31) and (TFEC:1205).
In other words, Thiselton argues that the phrase “the Twelve” only appears in Paul’s letters in this instance, because the concept of “the Twelve” is a pre-Pauline tradition that Paul passed on.
Thus, “the Twelve” is strongly indicative of apostolic tradition.

Doherty wrote: “When records of bishops and other appointees were found not to exist, they were simply constructed” (TJP:43).

Doherty provided no evidence from the ancient world in support of this assertion.
Evidence from the ancient world, in fact, from the late first century, does mention bishops and the appointing of bishops, and the document which references the bishops and their appointment, 1 Clement (ca. 95 CE), mentions that the appointing of bishops predated the composition of 1 Clement.

1 Clement 42.4-5 states: “And as they (the apostles of Jesus Christ) preached throughout the countryside and in the cities, they appointed the first-fruits of their ministries as bishops and deacons of those who were about to believe, testing them by the Spirit. And this was no recent development. For indeed, bishops and deacons had been mentioned in writings long before. For thus the Scripture says in one place, ‘I will appoint their bishops in righteousness and their deacons in faith.’ (Isaiah 60:17)” (LS:177-178).

Doherty is also familiar with this passage from 1 Clement. Doherty wrote the following regarding 1 Clement on his web site, seemingly contradicting Doherty’s claim that “when it finally developed in the second century, the concept of apostolic tradition served important needs for the growing Christian movement” (TJP:42).
- Doherty wrote:

Thus, Doherty unintentionally provided a rebuttal to his own claim that the concept of apostolic tradition developed in the second century.

Doherty wrote: “That this ‘apostolic tradition’ was missing earlier can be seen from several documents. Chapter 11 of the Didache contains instructions to the community on how to judge the legitimacy of wandering apostles, both in their teaching and their charismatic activities. Yet no part of this judgment is based upon the principle of apostolic tradition; there is no question of tracing authority or correctness back to Jesus or even to earlier apostles” (TJP:43).

Contrary to Doherty’s claim that the information contained in the Didache cannot be traced “back to Jesus or even to earlier apostles,” there is textual evidence within the Didache itself that testifies to the contents of the Didache originating with Jesus and the earlier apostles.
New Testament scholar Dr. Bart D. Ehrman indicated that the word “Didache” translates “literally, ‘The Teaching’ of the Twelve Apostles’ (LS:211).

Doherty wrote the following regarding Paul's comments in 1 Corinthians 11:23-26: 1 Corinthians 11:23-26: “But here too, if he means that this information came to him through revelation, he is unlikely to be referring to an historical event. In the Corinthians’ eyes, it would be ridiculous for Paul to say he got it from the Lord if the Supper and the words spoken there were an historical incident well-known to Christians” (TJP:45).
- Why is it unlikely that Paul claimed to receive historical information about Jesus through revelation?
- The Hebrew Bible contains many examples of claims of historical information being obtained through revelation. The prophets in the Hebrew Bible (Isaiah, Jeremiah, Daniel, etc.) all claimed to receive information about historical events.
- Therefore for Paul, who possessed an Apocalyptic Pharisee background, it would not be ridiculous to conclude that Paul claimed to receive historical information about Jesus “through revelation.”