A live map of reasons and replies

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

Trace the strongest lines of support, challenge each claim, and follow every response as far as the reasoning goes.

Start with an argument
03 Reasons
supporting
04 Reasons
challenging

Before you begin

Orient yourself to the question

01 Question

Paul proclaimed that Jesus “appeared” to him, but in doing so, did Paul mean that Jesus in some sense appeared to him non-physically—in an ecstatic or revelatory way that was close to being an epiphany, insofar as it was purely intra-mental and non-visual?

The argument field

Follow a claim. Test its reply.

Open any reason to read its case. Linked claims take you deeper into the tree.

7 arguments at this level

For

Supports this claim

3 reasons

  1. Paul: “Jesus physically appeared to me”

    01 Supporting reason Paul: “Jesus physically appeared to me” Read argument · 9 paths deeper

    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 page analyzes these 6 arguments:

    This is relevant because there nothing “merely epiphany-like” about Jesus physically appearing in the flesh before your eyes.

    Copy link

  2. [A feeling would not convert Paul]

    02 Supporting reason [A feeling would not convert Paul] Read argument

    [Brackets] mean forthcoming.




    Copy link

  3. “Ophthe” implies visuality, vision or not

    03 Supporting reason “Ophthe” implies visuality, vision or not Read argument · 1 path deeper

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

    See full page 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.

    Sources and notes
    1. 1 Cor 15:8 — ἔσχατον δὲ πάντων ὡσπερεὶ τῷ ἐκτρώματι ὤφθη κἀμοί.
    Copy link

Against

Challenges this claim

4 reasons

  1. Gal 1:12 (“revelation”) = intra-mental

    01 Challenging reason Gal 1:12 (“revelation”) = intra-mental Read argument · 3 paths deeper

    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 page debates two arguments:

    This is relevant because Paul is an authority on what he experienced here, and if it is instrumental then it is not physical.

    Copy link

  2. Gal 1:16 “His Son in me” = intra-mentally

    02 Challenging reason Gal 1:16 “His Son in me” = intra-mentally Read argument

    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.

    Copy link

  3. 2 Cor 4:1-6 (“shown in our hearts”) = Jesus’ appearance to Paul

    03 Challenging reason 2 Cor 4:1-6 (“shown in our hearts”) = Jesus’ appearance to Paul Read argument

    In writing 2 Corinthians 4:1-6 (“[Jesus] has shone in our hearts”) Paul is he referring to Jesus’ appearing to him?1 This is relevant because “shown in our hearts” is straightforwardly subjective, like an inner illumanation (rather than being physically perceptible to others.)

    Sources and notes
    1. There are two evidences in support of this claim, but interestingly they both more specifically support that the appearance was a vision (i.e. with a visual component), and this is incompatible with it simply being an epiphany. So we do not list those evidences here.
    Copy link

  4. Paul’d detail what he saw in 1 Cor 15

    04 Challenging reason Paul’d detail what he saw in 1 Cor 15 Read argument

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

    Copy link