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.
We don't know that Matthew and John wrote those accounts. That is tradition!
Yes, indeed ... it is all tradition to me and you ... for neither you nor I know who wrote any of the pertinent documents. We are left to trust our sources ... or not.
How then, shall we decide what we shall believe or not believe ?
Starting at a point of commonality ... I believe that we both believe in the one God of the Old Testament.
Going on, I believe that we both believe that this God, which we have come to believe in as ... our God ... has promised to enlighten us as to His truth ... as we prayfully strive to draw near to Him and, thus, ... His truth.
So it comes down to this ... that we must trust God ... even to understand His truth.
May God ever be so gracious unto us as to provide such understanding to 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.
The Gospel accounts differ slightly in detail from one to another ... as one would expect that they would ... coming as they do from four differents witnesses, ... and two of them second-hand in nature.
For them to be any more consistent ... who cause one to suspect collusion.
And ... despite such minor differences in the telling ... they all tell the same story.
As to the accounts of the resurrection ... what would cause one to doubt the literalness of all four accounts ? On what basis is such a judgement made ?
And, if so for these New Testament documents ... what of the Old Testament documents ?
I believe, once again, that it boils down to trusting God to provide us with His truth. May He do so ... as we draw near to Him.
God's Blessings. I am away for a weekend with 25 teenagers ... pray for me.
Quester