Why didn't Paul write about the Resurrection of Jesus?

Question

Paul's letter was written around the year 58. The Gospels were written well after that. Paul never mentions Jesus having been resurrected in the flesh. He never mentions empty tombs, physical appearances, or the ascension of Jesus into heaven afterward (i.e. when Paul mentions the ascension, he never ties it to appearances in this way, and never distinguishes it from the resurrection event itself). Why wouldn't Paul write about this if it happened?

Some of you aren't reading the question. Paul never speaks of a resurrection in the flesh.

Answer 1

It appears that Saint Paul was banking on the alleged resurrection of God the Son Jesus Christ in his business of propagating the "Gospel of Jesus Christ". The Roman authorities had no idea that anybody by the name of Jesus ever resurrected. There is a story of a bribe paid to the Roman soldiers not to tell anybody that Jesus resurrected. This Roman official didn't know about Jesus resurrection, either. Jesus resurrection had no effect on the business of the Roman Empire except for the birth of Christianity. There are NO independent sources confirming the very existance of God the Son Jesus Christ outside the writings of the Early Church Fathers many years after the alleged events took place.

Acts 25:19 (NIV) Instead, they had some points of dispute with him about their own religion and about a dead man named Jesus who Paul claimed was alive.

As far as the official record of the Roman authorities goes, Jesus is still dead and over with! They only know of a dead Jesus!

Answer 2

You have actually read Paul letters have you? Seems you missed quite a bit.

1Cor 15:3-9 "For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, and that he appeared to Peter, and then to the Twelve. After that, he appeared to more than five hundred of the brothers at the same time, most of whom are still living, though some have fallen asleep. Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles, and last of all he appeared to me also, as to one abnormally born. For I am the least of the apostles and do not even deserve to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God."

Lots more where that came from. Go back and read Paul's letters!

Answer 3

Paul saw an opportunity and took up the cause of being an Apostle. He never persecuted any Christians. They weren't Christians yet - they were Nazarites - a sect of Judaism like the Sagguses and Pharisees. All got along quite well back then. It was not until the Romans got involved that anyone had a cause to fight for.

Most if not all of the New Testament is a self-serving document because the followers realized they were in a predicament or they saw an opportunity. The evidence is there if you open your eyes.

Answer 4

Of course Paul wrote about the resurrection.

Matthew, Mark and Luke were written long before any of Paul's letters.

Matthew was written within 5 years of when Jesus died.

Obviously you've never actually read the Bible yourself.

So stop telling lies and making yourself look foolish.

Pastor Art

Answer 5

In contract law, there is a principle called ejusdem generis. If the speaker names one thing in a series, other things in that series are impliedly of the same kind unless otherwise explicitly stated, and a judge will so find in a dispute over such a list of words. This principle applies to your question about the resurrection. For example, Paul preached the resurrected Christ, including the details of the resurrection event itself, including Jesus’ appearances to the disciples, in this public sermon:

“And though they found no cause of death in him, yet desired they Pilate that he should be slain. And when they had fulfilled all that was written of him, they took him down from the tree, and laid him in a sepulchre. But God raised him from the dead: And he was seen many days of them which came up with him from Galilee to Jerusalem, who are his witnesses unto the people.” Act 13:28-31

Now, you can get technical if you like, but here, an honest, straightforward reading of the above text has Paul making this contrast, not between physical death and spiritual life, but between physical death and physical life. Jesus died, was taken down from a tree, and laid in a tomb. Next thing you know, he is raised from the dead (Greek: raised from out of the dead). That is, the state he was in was "dead," and God took him “from out of” that state into a state of life. True, technically, Paul here never mentions Jesus' flesh, but that's because he doesn't have to. It is obvious to the Jewish audience he is speaking to, because that is what they themselves saw happen, Jesus in the flesh was killed. So unless Paul here introduces the mystical notion of a purely spiritual, noncorporeal resurrection, he is grossly misleading his Jewish audience, who definitely would view an unqualified reference to resurrection as being about the physical body. That is the whole sore spot between the Pharisees and the Sadducees. The Sadducees rejected physical resurrection, and Jesus called them out on it. See Luke 20:27-38, where he actually takes sides with the Pharisees on this issue.

Therefore it is clear that pressuring the text to specifically mention the “flesh” is to impose on it a theological agenda not even contemplated by the actors in the story. Thus, though your assertion is technically accurate syntactically, it is misguided semantically, as the context and conditioning of the audience and their most likely understanding of the words of Paul would clearly run in the direction of a physical, bodily resurrection, as is consistent with all the other writings of Paul on the resurrection of Jesus.

But perhaps you are thinking of 1Corinthians 15:44, Paul’s discourse on resurrection principles, where he says of our body that “it is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body. There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body.” I will grant you that there is a grand difference between the bodies we have now and the bodies we will have in resurrection, and I will further grant you that the same distinction doubtless applies with respect to the resurrection body of Christ. However, one must assume a great deal to say that an absolute barrier exists between our earthly bodies and the new body of the resurrection. The “matter-is-evil” notions of Gnostic dualism must be avoided here. Jesus still had the marks of the nails in his palms. Thomas could touch them. The substance of the resurrection body is a real substance, yet, as Paul says, incorruptible, not subject to the decay and defect of our present flesh and blood systems. Our present bodies could not withstand the intensity of the heavenly environment. Therefore, we shall receive what we need for that new condition, a spiritual body, as real as anything now is real, yet fully adapted for the heights of spiritual existence. We shall be like Him.

Answer 6

Scripture presents conclusive evidence that Jesus Christ was in fact resurrected from the dead. Christ’s resurrection is recorded in Matthew 28:1-20; Mark 16:1-20; Luke 24:1-53; and John 20:1-21:25. The resurrected Christ also appeared in the Book of Acts (Acts 1:1-11). From these passages you can gain several "proofs" of Christ’s resurrection. First, look at the dramatic change in the disciples. They went from scared and hiding in a room, to courageous and sharing the Gospel throughout the world. What else could explain this dramatic change other than the risen Christ appearing to them?

Second, look at the life of the Apostle Paul. What changed him from being a persecutor of the church into an apostle for the church? It was when the risen Christ appeared to him on the road to Damascus (Acts 9:1-6). Third, another convincing "proof" is the empty tomb. If Christ were not raised, then where is His body? The disciples and others saw the tomb where He was buried. When they returned, His body was not there. Angels declared that He had been raised from the dead as He had promised (Matthew 28:5-7). Fourth, additional evidence of His resurrection is the many people He appeared to (Matthew 28:5,9,16-17; Mark 16:9; Luke 24:13-35; John 20:19,24,26-29; 21:1-14; Acts 1:6-8; 1 Corinthians 15:5-7).

Another key truth to why the resurrection of Jesus must be true is the great amount of weight the Apostles gave to Jesus' resurrection. A key passage on Christ’s resurrection is 1 Corinthians 15. In this chapter, the Apostle Paul explains why it is crucial to understand and believe in Christ’s resurrection. The resurrection is important for the following reasons: (1) If Christ was not raised from the dead, believers will not be either (1 Corinthians 15:12-15). (2) If Christ was not raised from the dead, His sacrifice for sin was not sufficient (1 Corinthians 15:16-19). Jesus’ resurrection proved that His death was accepted by God as the atonement for our sins. If He had simply died and stayed dead, that would indicate His sacrifice was not sufficient. As a result, believers would not be forgiven for their sins, and they would still remain dead after they die (1 Corinthians 15:16-19) – there would be no such thing as eternal life (John 3:16). "But now Christ has been raised from the dead, the first fruits of those who are asleep" (1 Corinthians 15:20 NAS). Christ has been raised from the dead – He is the first fruits of our resurrection.

(3) All those who believe in Him will be raised to eternal life just as He was (1 Corinthians 15:20-23). 1 Corinthians 15 goes on to describe how Christ’s resurrection proves His victory over sin, and provides us the power to live victoriously over sin (1 Corinthians 15:24-34). (4) It describes the glorious nature of the resurrection body we will receive (1 Corinthians 15:35-49). (5) It proclaims that as a result of Christ’s resurrection, all who believe in Him have ultimate victory over death (1 Corinthians 15:50-58). What a glorious truth the resurrection of Christ is! "Therefore, my beloved brethren, be steadfast, immovable, always abounding in the work of the Lord, knowing that your toil is not in vain in the Lord" (1 Corinthians 15:58). According to the Bible, the resurrection of Jesus Christ is most definitely true. The Bible records Christ's resurrection, records that it was eye-witnessed by over 400 people, and proceeds to build crucial Christian doctrine on the historical fact of Jesus' resurrection.

Recommended Resource: Case for Faith / Case for Christ by Lee Strobel.

Answer 7

Check out 1 Corinth. 15:12-15. paul didnt talk about it alot because he was a missionary and all the letters are him writing back to the churches he started. It was assumed that the people to whom he was writing already knew about the resurrection.

Answer 8

apparently not because I have read all of Paul and he knows nothing of Jesus's actual life and does not speak of it.

Answer 9

You are factually incorrect. Read I Corinthians 15 - Paul's very direct discourse on Christ's resurrection

Answer 10

read paul again but this time with ur eyes opened!!...he did not write of the actual event because he was writing to people that already knew the specifics of jesus' resurrection...i doubt that paul realised his written word wud survive to be read by people 2000yrs later