The Rationale Of Jesus's Mates

[SacredBishop]

For the sake of this post, let's assume the New Testament is unreliable. Let's abandon dogmas, doctrines, apologetics, and Christianity altogether. Why would Jesus's mates say "he was the Son of God who rose from the dead on the third day"? What possible train of events could account for them mistakenly believing " the Son of God " wasn't dead anymore on the third day? If they fabricated the whole thing, then what possible motive could they have for this? I look forward to reading your theories.

[SacredBishop]

Let me say this,...

Jesus led his sheep into the lions den.
In the early days after his death, they are an endangered species without protection. Where can they go. The fear of Rome was there for all non citizens of the empire. They were harsh times.

Eventually these people dispersed with their shared recollections of an inspirational preacher and his revolutionary concept of Hope through God's Kingdom. They were either shanghaied or robbed along their journeys. That's my gut feeling.

Imagine for a minute that I go on a 3 day 'pub crawl' in Chicago with my 12 mates. I have a sheet of paper in my hand all the time. We are celebrating the fact that i have just invented an efficient engine concept, that will use water instead of conventional fuel. I am waiting for the patent office to open after a long weekend.
Will i amass a crowd? Will I be robbed, kidnapped or murdered? In 2023, I would bet on all three.(no offence to Chicago)

Ha ha, Jesus certainly led them to the lion's den, they seemed to abandon him altogether for a while. Days, weeks, months? Far longer than 3 days I assume. It seems his mates found confidence and conviction back in the safety of Galilee as only Mark and Matthew affirm. Though they insist he rose on the third day in hindsight. Curious detail with no Biblical basis. No prophecy of a 3 day resurrection. Jonah's 3 day fish belly episode, and Hosea's " in 2 days yada yada, but in three days yada yada don't cut it for me. I don't know where the three day thing came from. It took longer than 3 days to go back to Galilee after all. Seems Mary Magdalene was the catalyst for that. I see no reason to take it from her, as Paul did.

[Thomas123]

'Oh what a tangled web we weave when first we practice to deceive…'

They say that if you are going to become a good liar, you should first acquire a good memory...

It is impossible to commit the perfect crime....

It's complicated!

Thanks SB

[SacredBishop]

The Gospel web is indeed tangled, however I must admit a soft spot for it. Sometimes I wish I could be a fundamentalist and let Peter be a fisher of man, so to speak, and reel me in. The NT calls Jesus a stumbling stone, and I often trip over it repeatedly. I wish I could just kick it out the way with logic, but I find myself tripping over it with my theories, time and time again.

[Thomas123]

Buddha could speak and influence people without a light show. A reformist Jewish preacher from the 1st Century is capable of even more, in my opinion.
It is as simple or as complicated as it is made.

Unfortunately, the NFT belongs to Rome, while the original reality dissipates into obscurity.

Why does the Kremlin want Zelensky gone?

[Thomas123]

It is not my intention to deflect your OP enquiry but you have inspired me to write more.

This is how it played out.

It was politics.

The Temple Authorities overreacted to a perceived threat to their status quo. This guy was a serious problem for them that they dealt with via stealth.

They walked the tightrope of public righteousness and support while unquestionably having fraternized with the Roman's during the course of their joint administrative roles. We see this in the narrative. This collusion was the worst kept secret in Jerusalem and it was an aspect of Jesus's undoubted popularity among ordinary folk. Public opinion and popularity is a fickle commodity, SB.

Make no doubt about it, SB, Jesus was seriously radical.

Look at the flowers, Look at the birds, etc,etc, harks back to the God of David and the Psalms and teases the Accountant God of a 1st Century Temple.

Watch the film, Amadeus , SB,...jealousy is a powerful emotion.
Thanks!

[TRANSPONDER]

The Gospel web is indeed tangled, however I must admit a soft spot for it. Sometimes I wish I could be a fundamentalist and let Peter be a fisher of man, so to speak, and reel me in. The NT calls Jesus a stumbling stone, and I often trip over it repeatedly. I wish I could just kick it out the way with logic, but I find myself tripping over it with my theories, time and time again.

There's no doubt that I have spent more time on the NT than many a believer. And i do indeed have a 'soft spot' for it, and even reckon there is a genuine figure there. But the point of the Op is really': The disciples would not die for a lie'apologetic, in different words, and there is really no valid reason to think the disciples died from anything unusual. The stories are dubious claims if not fanciful martyrdom stories of the early church. i doubt that the stories of James in Josephus and Hegesippus (1) are actually about the 'Lord's brother' at all or even the same person. The assumptions that Paul (or indeed Peter) were in Rome to be caught up in Nero's persecutions are just assumptions, and i suspect that the death of the James Boanerges in Acts is Luke tying up the loose end of the sons of Zebedee 'drinking from the same cup' with a simple killing by the character already lifted from Josephus - Herod Agrippa. Luke couldn't also have John killed off as he was supposed to go on to teach Christianity to this or that church father, so you can't have him wiped out.

So one way or another, I don't buy that the Gospels are reliable, Paul was even teaching Christian (mainstream) beliefs about Jesus or that the disciples were anything other than regular Jews with a messianic belief. Just sayin' as they say, that discussions that Interpret what this or that Gospel saying or miracle really means is pointless for me as I can't credit half the stories anyway.

(1)I think it was Hegesippus relates the story of James being chucked off a tower.

[1213]

...If they fabricated the whole thing, then what possible motive could they have for this?

I think that is a good question. The teachings of Jesus makes it not suitable for to get money and power, so there must be some other motive. I don't think the people would have done it just to get persecuted and killed either. So, if anyone has some other motive, I would like to hear that.

[Thomas123]

Matthew 23:27
'Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye are like unto whited sepulchres, which indeed appear beautiful outward, but are within full of dead men's bones, and of all uncleanness.'

This is radical, These guys sit on the seat of Moses and attempt to regulate access to God. This actual quote looks like retro fit anti-semitic jargon but nevertheless it conveys the probable animosity that was there.

I included a link earlier that explored the history of the apostles,TRANSPONDER(post 11)
Thanks!

[TRANSPONDER]

Matthew 23:27
'Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye are like unto whited sepulchres, which indeed appear beautiful outward, but are within full of dead men's bones, and of all uncleanness.'

This is radical, These guys sit on the seat of Moses and attempt to regulate access to God. This actual quote looks like retro fit anti-semitic jargon but nevertheless it conveys the probable animosity that was there.

I included a link earlier that explored the history of the apostles,TRANSPONDER(post 11)
Thanks!

I do not buy into the opinions of the author of Q document (1) so I'm unlikely to be swayed by an exploration of the history of the apostles if (as I suspect) based on unquestioning acceptance of the NT as reliable, even without Church traditions.

(1) Matthew and Luke material and that you and other mainstream Gospel - experts will not go along with that is a reason I don't go along with your post.

[JehovahsWitness]

To fabricated risen Christ, ( especially one that died in such circumstances) would not only require an imagination second to none but, if it was done to convince Jewish potential converts, would be entirly counterproductive.

Although the Jews had the notion of resurrection from their own scripture, to try and convince them of a man that died a human and returned as a completely different lifeform, invisible to humans, is a story far beyond that which any logical human would atrempt, if they wanted to be believed. As has been suggested, it would be more logical to say one of their current leaders was said Christ reincarnated, for at least then there would be something to see

The gentile pagans had stories of the gods visiting men in human (or animal) form, but these were gods. Jeus of Nazareth was a human, born in the normal way of a woman, supposedly alive and well at the time of said claimed resurrection. Even to the gentiles, such a story would be considered so laughingly preposterous, so incredibly outlandish, nobody in their right mind would invent it. And if they did, outside of there being rock solid evidence and eye witness testimony to support it, nobody would believe it.



It puts us in mind of the governor Festus' letter to King Agrippa, saying how he (Paul) kept refering to one Jesus of Nazareth, who was dead but Paul kept assering was alive. The implication being that as nice as Paul was, he was clearly quite mad.

That the story of the risen Christ, a miracle working human (not a god or a demi-god), a carpenter from the backwoods of Galilee, died but returned to life and is currently in heaven, not only was believed by a significant number of his Jewish compatriots, but stuck to become a history changing force worldwide, indicates it was based in evidence with enough force to counteract the natural arguments against it.

JW

To learn more please go to other posts related to

"BAD JESUS" , "FARICATED JESUS" and ... JESUS OF NAZARETH