Replies

So, ... what you're proposing is that Paul, ... a relative outsider, ... successfully realigned the original belief system of those that followed JESUS ... even to the extent that the two Apostles which wrote Gospel accounts (Matthew and John) were led astray ?

Apostles which had had intensive interaction with JESUS for three years before Paul ever came on the scene ?

Despite the fact that Paul/Saul was originally a well-known persecutor of the followers of the WAY ?

So, then, you propose that the Apostles came to believe in the Resurrection as a result of Paul's persuasion ... and that the gospels, which were written after Paul's influence, reflect that persuasion ?

What of the first-hand testimony of the Apostles interaction with the risen JESUS ?

It is possible that Paul could have persuaded the Apostles that JESUS had been resurrected, but, there is no way that he could have convinced the eleven of them that these post-resurrection interactions (with them) occurred if they had not. For this theory to be true, the Apostles would have had to make up the accounts.

I think that this is a bit of a stretch.

It is possible that Paul could have persuaded the Apostles that JESUS had been resurrected, but, there is no way that he could have convinced the eleven of them that these post-resurrection interactions (with them) occurred if they had not. For this theory to be true, the Apostles would have had to make up the accounts.

I think that this is a bit of a stretch.

Or they could of been smoking some of that stuff from the BIG BAG too! :)

BigMack

So, ... what you're proposing is that Paul, ... a relative outsider, ... successfully realigned the original belief system of those that followed JESUS ...

Yes.

even to the extent that the two Apostles which wrote Gospel accounts (Matthew and John) were led astray ?

We don't know that Matthew and John wrote those accounts. That is tradition! ;o) We also don't know if they were edited after they were written, another possibility. I wouldn't say it was a matter of being "led astray". I'd say there were competing interpretations of the meaning of Jesus, and Paul's interpretation carried the day.

So, then, you propose that the Apostles came to believe in the Resurrection as a result of Paul's persuasion ...

NO! I think the belief in the resurrection goes back to the earliest days of the Jerusalem church. It was one of the primary beliefs distinguishing them from other Jews.

What of the first-hand testimony of the Apostles interaction with the risen JESUS ?

We know of this testimony only through the recorded gospel accounts, which were set down many years later. We only know what the gospel writers tell us. The resurrection accounts even differ in details from gospel to gospel. Something happened, and it made Jesus's followers believe that he had been resurrected. Perhaps this experience was of a vision of Jesus sitting at the right hand of the Father, as is reported of Steven in Acts. I would hesitate to accept the gospel resurrection accounts literally.