Paul denies that Jesus appeared non-physically (e.g. intra-mentally), insisting instead that what appeared to him was quite physical and extra-mental; it was Jesus in the flesh, and so externally perceptible. It was not a mere vision or epiphany.
This article analyzes these 6 evidences:
• 1 Cor 9:1 (“I've seen”) denotes normal sight.
• 1 Cor 15 (“buried-appeared”) = physical appear.
• 1 Cor 15:6 (“most remain”) meant witnesses.
• Paul: “Jesus-appearances and visions differ.”
• Paul: “Jesus resurrected physically.”
• An overtly immaterial visit'd not persuade.
• Acts: “Paul says Jesus’ visit hit his group.”
• Acts: “Jesus physically appeared to Paul.”
This is relevant because there nothing “merely epiphany-like” about Jesus physically appearing in the flesh before your eyes.
[Brackets] mean forthcoming.
• Paul was psychologically prepared to convert.
Galatians 1:12 (“I received it [the gospel] through a revelation”) indicates that Paul believed the “appearance” of Jesus was an intra-mental revelation at his conversion.
This full article debates two evidences...
• “ἀποκάλυψις,” by definition, is purely non-physical.
• If physical, Paul could’ve used better verbiage.
This is relevant because Paul is an authority on what he experienced here, and if it is instrumental then it is not physical.
• The author of Acts accurately represents Paul.
• “Revelation” sounds non-visual, but Paul had a visual experience.
In Galatians 1:16, when Paul says that God “revealed His son in me,” is Paul intending to communicate that the Jesus appearance he received was mystical, ecstatic, or vision-like (perhaps even psychological).
• Gal 1:16 says “IN me,” not “TO me”
This is relevant because if Paul felt Jesus only was revealed intra-mentally during the appearance, then he would not have simultaneously thought it was a physical appearance.
But so what?
• “in me” sounds non-visual, but Paul had a visual experience.
In 2 Corinthians 4:1-6, when Paul says Jesus “shone in our hearts,” is he referring to some epiphany-like subjective illumination that constituted his experience of Jesus’ appearing to him?
A forthcoming article outlines at least 2 evidences:
• “Face” refers to Paul’s recognizing Jesus on Damascus.
• Pauls’ Damascus road experience also involved light.
This is relevant because “shown in our hearts” is straightforwardly subjective (not physically perceptible to others).
• When Paul says “our,” he includes Timothy etc.
• In Acts, Jesus’ visit was not simply in Paul’s “heart”
• Paul’s conversion was shocking (not warm)
• Context: it’s the “light of the gospel” that “shone”
• This sounds non-visual, but Paul had a visual experience.
And so what?
• In Acts, the light from heaven was extra-mental.
• It would be a miracle in its own right if such an “insight” could do the things this one did!
If Paul’s experience were extra-mental, then he would’ve outlined what precisely he saw in 1 Corinthians 15. [Forthcoming]