Did Paul think that Jesus’s appearance was merely an epiphany-like revelation (exclusively non-visual and in his heart/mind)?

“No, after all…
  • Paul: “Jesus physically appeared to me”
  • [A feeling would not convert Paul]

      [Brackets] mean forthcoming.

      But no...
      • Paul was psychologically prepared to convert.

  • “Ophthe” implies visuality, vision or not

      The word translated "appeared" (ōphthē) is the passive form of ὁράω, and indicates that there was something to be seen.

      See full article here (documenting the fact that most experts agree).

      This is relevant because Paul used this word to describe Jesus's appearance to him,1 and if there was a visual component associated with Jesus appearing (being seen), then it was not simply an epiphany-like revelation or merely auditory experience.

      1. 1 Cor 15:8 — ἔσχατον δὲ πάντων ὡσπερεὶ τῷ ἐκτρώματι ὤφθη κἀμοί.
  • “Yes, after all…
  • Gal 1:12 (“revelation”) = intra-mental
  • Gal 1:16 “His Son in me” = intra-mentally

      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.

  • 2 Cor 4:1-6 (“shown in our hearts”) = Jesus’ appearance to Paul
  • Paul’d detail what he saw in 1 Cor 15

      If Paul’s experience were extra-mental, then he would’ve outlined what precisely he saw in 1 Corinthians 15. [Forthcoming]