Rainbow Mage
Lib Democrat/Agnostic/Epicurean-ish/Buddhist-ish
Peace, and I hope everyone enjoyed a pleasant X-Mas,
New Testament scholars often put forth that the gospels were written using core traditional material, IE: 'Q', and that such tradition came down from the time of Jesus' life on earth.
Why do you suppose it is then that the Pauline epistles don't seem to reference such tradition at all? Paul's letters constitute the earliest literature of Christendom and appear strangely silent on any such gospel traditions scholars speculate were circulating around.
Paul rarely speaks of Jesus as a man, details of his life are very sparse, and references mention absolutely no source, unless we're to assume visions.
Why would Paul be so silent on Jesus' life and teachings if some tradition were floating around that the gospels were later written on?
New Testament scholars often put forth that the gospels were written using core traditional material, IE: 'Q', and that such tradition came down from the time of Jesus' life on earth.
Why do you suppose it is then that the Pauline epistles don't seem to reference such tradition at all? Paul's letters constitute the earliest literature of Christendom and appear strangely silent on any such gospel traditions scholars speculate were circulating around.
Paul rarely speaks of Jesus as a man, details of his life are very sparse, and references mention absolutely no source, unless we're to assume visions.
Why would Paul be so silent on Jesus' life and teachings if some tradition were floating around that the gospels were later written on?