where did paul get his authority and teachings?

James Tabor has a recent post entitled "Where Did Paul Get His Authority & Teachings?" Tabor asserts that the answer to this question lies in Paul's personal revelations from the exalted Jesus. Since I spend two chapters on this question (Paul's epistemic authorities) in my doctoral dissertation, I feel compelled to respond to Tabor's thesis. (And I can claim this as "dissertation research time" to boot!) There is much about Tabor's post that I find problematic, but I'll focus on a few areas.

Tabor claims that Paul's "receive" (paralambanō) language, particularly in his "reception" of the "gospel" in 1 Corinthians 15, reflects his reception of direct revelation from the exalted Jesus. But this is very difficult to maintain:

• In concluding this passage, Paul says, "Whether then it was I or they, so we proclaim and so you have come to believe" (1 Cor 15:11). In other words, the resurrection witnesses Paul has listed proclaim the same "gospel" as that which he has just outlined. So where did Peter and James get this "gospel"? From Paul, based on a direct revelation to Paul? Not likely.
• In Galatians 1:11-12, Paul does not clearly use "receive" (paralambanō) to refer to his "revelation of Jesus Christ" (apokalupsis Iesou Christou). Rather, "receive" (paralambanō) is directly connected to "from a man" (para anthrōpou). This is then paralleled with "taught" (didaskō). Thus, this seems even to speak against Tabor's argument: Paul here uses "receive" (paralambanō) language to refer to reception of tradition or teaching through human mediation.
• In fact, apart from the curious reference in 1 Corinthians 11:23 (see below), Paul consistently uses "receive" (paralambanō) and "deliver" (paradidōmi) language in "transfer of information" contexts to refer to humanly mediated teaching or tradition (Rom 6:17; 1 Cor 11:2; Gal 1:9; Phil 4:9; 1 Thess 2:13; 4:1; 2 Thess 3:6). This usage parallels contemporary Pharisaic and later Rabbinic "receive" and "deliver" language in reference to humanly mediated teaching or tradition (see e.g. Gerhardsson, Memory and Manuscript, 288-291).
• As for the "revelation of Jesus Christ" in Gal 1:12, a verb must be supplied for the phrase "but through a revelation of Jesus Christ" (alla di' apokalupseōs Iesou Christou). But it is not necessarily "receive," which is now a couple of verbs back. Rather, it is at least as likely that it is simply a commonly omitted and assumed verb like eimi or ginomai, that is, "it came through a revelation of Jesus Christ."

These points support the idea that Paul is indeed speaking of humanly transmitted tradition in 1 Corinthians 15, a tradition which most likely derives from one of the resurrection witnesses as tradents (probably the first mentioned, "Peter and the Twelve"). Naturally, this raises all sorts of interesting questions. Here are a couple that are relevant to this discussion:

• What is the relationship between this gospel tradition (1 Cor 15) and Paul's gospel revelation (Gal 1)? It must be pointed out that even in the context of Galatians 1-2 Paul acknowledges some significant contact with the Jerusalem apostles, especially Peter (1:18), and that Paul also claims his gospel was validated by these men (2:2, 6-9). Although there have been many different ways of putting all this together, I would understand it this way: 1) Paul experienced a revelation of the resurrected Jesus who had been crucified, immediately causing Paul to reflect on the significance of the crucified-resurrected Jesus and proclaim this "gospel" to others (Gal 1:11-12, 15-17); 2) Three years later Paul met with Peter for 15 days (Gal 1:18), and it was from Peter (the first resurrection witness, 1 Cor 15:5) that he learned the "gospel creed" (1 Cor 15:3-5) and other traditional material associated with Jesus and the apostles (e.g. 1 Cor 7:10-11; 9:14; 11:23-25); 3) Paul incorporated this traditional material into his missionary teaching, "delivering" that traditional material which he had "received" through human mediation as a supplement to his personally experienced "revelation of Jesus Christ."
• How are we to understand the "from the Lord" in 1 Corinthians 11:23? Since, as noted above, Paul consistently uses "receive" (paralambanō) and "deliver" (paradidōmi) language in "transfer of information" contexts to refer to humanly mediated teaching or tradition, this should be understood in the same way. The presence of parallels in other extant Jesus tradition (especially Luke's account) is secondary confirmation of this. The "from the Lord" then likely refers to the fact that this tradition was believed to originate in the life and teaching of Jesus of Nazareth, unlike the tradition of 1 Corinthians 15:3-5 which was necessarily post-resurrection apostolic tradition. This interpretation is confirmed by the fact that in both 1 Corinthians 7:10-11 and 9:14 Paul points to the "Lord" as the originator of tradition that was believed to come from the life and teaching of Jesus of Nazareth.

Another aspect of Tabor's thesis is equally problematic. He asserts that Paul had many such direct revelations from the exalted Jesus and that these revelations were crucial for Paul in his thought and discourse. However, there is very little basis for this assertion. A couple points are worth noting:

• The plural "revelations and visions" comes from the introduction to the passage Tabor refers to (2 Cor 12:1). Paul is not claiming multiple "revelations and visions," but rather moving on to the general subject of "revelations and visions," probably because the "super-apostles" were themselves claiming such revelations and visions as evidence of their apostolic authority. For Paul's part, he has to reach back 14 years to find a suitably impressive visionary experience to trump those of the "super-apostles." This doesn't sound like the sort of person who continuously had impressive "revelations and visions." Furthermore, Paul doesn't even relate or want to relate the content of this visionary experience--he couldn't even put it into adequate words--so it doesn't seem this particular experience had a profound impact on his teaching to others.
• Apart from Paul's "revelation of Jesus Christ" at his "conversion/call" (see above, and on the "Christ events" below), there are only two clear places in the undisputed Pauline epistles were Paul refers to a direct revelation as shaping his actions, his thought, or his discourse. One is Galatians 2:2, where a "revelation" of some sort (whether to Paul directly or through another) has led Paul to go to Jerusalem. While this influenced Paul's action in this instance, there is no indication that it influenced his broader thought or discourse in any way. The other instance is more promising: in 2 Corinthians 12:9 Paul quotes an aphorism of the exalted Lord directly revealed to him, "My grace is sufficient for you, for power is made perfect in weakness." This does indeed seem to have shaped his thought and the particular discourse of 2 Corinthians 10-13. However, this instance stands out as unusual, and there are other epistemic authorities at work here including his reading of Scripture (Jer 9:23-24 cf. 2 Cor 10:17).

I need to wrap up this post before I end up re-writing those two chapters of my dissertation. I'll simply say that the answer to Tabor's question and the question of my post title is much more complex than simply, "Direct revelation from the exalted Jesus." In fact, Paul's primary epistemic authorities seem to have been the Christ events (especially Jesus' death and resurrection) and Scripture, both mutually interpreting each other in an ongoing conversation. Indeed, I would suggest that nearly all of Paul's thought and discourse derives from that conversation between Scripture and the Christ events.

And as for Tabor's assertion that the "word of the Lord" in 1 Thessalonians 4:15 is a direct revelation of the exalted Jesus, I'd very much disagree, but you'll just have to wait for my dissertation to be finished. In the meantime, you can check out my recent article in JSNT on such "word of the Lord" language in Paul and early Christianity, or listen to my recent ETS presentation essentially summarizing my dissertation.