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.

[Thomas123]

I believe in balance, there is alot of material out there. Paper never refuses ink.Here is an example

Answer to What historical evidence outside the Bible do we have for the 12 apostles? by Jenny Hawkins https://www.quora.com/What-historical-e ... ype=answer

[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.

Why did so many people follow Joseph Smith or David Koresh or Sun Myung Moon? What possible motives could they have had?

Might they have made such deep emotional investments in following those individuals that they found the prospect of having been wrong unbearable?

If you left your job, family, and friends, as his followers were said to have done, and your leader dies in disgrace, it'd be hard to simply go back home empty handed. Jesus lives, problem solved. Great point Athetotheist.

[Thomas123]

Hi Athetotheist
You allude to the culture within a 'cult'. This group of lads appear to have put their lives on the line for this resurrected Jesus claim, or did they?. I think the OP is a great question.

[Athetotheist]

Hi Athetotheist
You allude to the culture within a 'cult'. This group of lads appear to have put their lives on the line for this resurrected Jesus claim, or did they?. I think the OP is a great question.

It wouldn't necessarily be that hard to put your life on the line if you'd rather die than live to see your most deeply cherished beliefs invalidated.

[SacredBishop]

The early Muslims suffered immensely for their faith. Challenging the gods of Mecca, and insisting Allah was the only one, and by implication the Kaaba is hopelessly desecrated by its various priests and established religions, was risky business. Many died for their new faith, when Islam was a tiny cult surrounded by rather violent Arabian religions. People will always shock the world with the lengths they'll go through for their faith.

[SacredBishop]

At this risk of arguing with myself, I would say many Muslims risked their lives, because they were sick of the violent overlords, corrupt priests, religious squabbles etc, and grabbed the sword to improve their country rather than out of conviction to Muhammad's utterances to do so. But Jesus's immediate followers baffle me. Why say Jesus wasn't dead on the third day? It doesn't improve anything to say such. I can't find a satisfactory motive for them. Embarrassed to admit their cult was a failure? Perhaps, cults are rather proficient at explaining away their shortcomings, failed prophecies, disappointments in self-proclaimed prophets, etc, but this is unique. Jesus doesn't need to live. Peter is the new Christ, or James is the new anointed, or Jesus's last words to John were " the Father chooses you to be His son now", etc. I don't see a satisfactory reason to say Jesus rose from the dead the third day. Why not simply, true he's dead, but God will send him back one day? Very curious

[Thomas123]

Hi SB, your OP, has confronted me with my favourite question,...Why?

I am going to explore the elephant in the room which is the Messiah Prophecy of Isaiah. I will look at this early cult, schism from Judaism, and explore the early logic and impetus of same.

Here is another question for you, SB.

Why would a preacher, steeped in Jewish tradition, choose departure above reform?. I smell a rat somewhere!

In simple terms , Judaism had an awful lot of its energy invested into the hope of the Messiah. Consider the 'Last Day' investments of many of the modern Christian Sects.Try moving them ,1 inch!

I will see you in a few days, ...I'm busy thinking.

Thanks, SB! ( I think!)

[Thomas123]

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)

[Thomas123]

It is argued that the early church was totally energized by 'Resurrection Wonder' rather than being theologically driven by a revolutionary doctrine.

I would suggest that the latter scenario possesses more truth.

Ladies entering a tomb, a magician's trick locks(independant observers,ie Roman Guards). Jesus gone! A couple of guys on a road meet a Jesus guy and report back Then 2+2 subseqently becomes 100. Grand finale beam me up....sorry but no, this thing is thread bare.
It was not a conspiracy, but rather, a snowball rolling down a hill that became a snow man, many years later. Then it became a scarecrow, now it is a clown.

[SacredBishop]

Hi SB, your OP, has confronted me with my favourite question,...Why?

I am going to explore the elephant in the room which is the Messiah Prophecy of Isaiah. I will look at this early cult, schism from Judaism, and explore the early logic and impetus of same.

Here is another question for you, SB.

Why would a preacher, steeped in Jewish tradition, choose departure above reform?. I smell a rat somewhere!

In simple terms , Judaism had an awful lot of its energy invested into the hope of the Messiah. Consider the 'Last Day' investments of many of the modern Christian Sects.Try moving them ,1 inch!

I will see you in a few days, ...I'm busy thinking.

Thanks, SB! ( I think!)

I don't think Jesus sought a departure above reform, or did he? Matthew might address this for us. " Do you Jews want Jesus Barabbbas or Jesus called Christ". Christian scribes and the early church fathers hated this version, and few have survived to our day. This seems to be Matthew's midrash. Jesus Barabbas would be the ideal messiah, a warrior to force Rome back to Rome. I can't picture a Roman governor freeing " a rebel insurectionest who committed murder". I think the story is fictional, and perhaps Matthew did too and thus a midrash was in order.

We know 1st century Judaism wanted a Barabbas, and had several of them. "Jesus called Christ" was definitely a departure from Jewish expectations, or was he? 2nd Macabbees ( I believe, it's been so long since I read it) had many stories of Jewish martyrs. I believe this helped pave the way for the idea of an ultimate martyr, and yes, Isaiah 53 was in mind as well. There could have been a divided expectation: many wanted a warrior Messiah, some a suffering Messiah.

Jesus could have taken this role on. Vandalizing Roman property ( the Temple was considered Roman property) did the trick, he was crucified a couple days later for it. Distrupting Roman property was considered insurection. Its possible Jesus did indeed believe he would be the fulfillment of Isaiah 53. Personally, I believe he in fact did.

Your comment about Mark's possible misrash is interesting. I just assumed a pious Pharisee buried Jesus, Pharisees made sure every jew was properly buried ( even if they hated them). Joseph of Arimathea, might be a nod to Josephus ( though he was born a little after this, as you also mentioned and know). I always assumed the mysterious Joseph was an invention to get a rich burial like Isaiah 53. The parallel with Josephus's rescue of a couple crucifixion victims is interesting, but Mark's book is not Jewish enough to warrant a misrash at all. In my mind at least. Though the name itself might be borrowed from it. Or an actual Joseph buried Jesus, which is perfectly reasonable as well.