WE:
>This might be valid in discussion of Christian communities
>later on, but I think that Brian needs to show that faith in
>resurrection was a necessary attribute for messianic judaism
>for his rebuttal to hold in discussion of the faith of the
>disciples/apostles. The Sadduces, at least, appeared to feel
>their own faith to be not pointless, and they had no belief
>in resurrection.
>
>It seems that many in this discussion wish to accord to the
>disciples/apostles a mindset that incorporates all the finer
>points of modern Christian doctrine. I don't think that that
>stance bears out. The disciples/apostles were Jews, and what
>they considered to be a faith of value would be derived from
>that belief system as it existed at that time. The Peter/Paul
>rift over gentile entry into the faith is a clue that doctrine
>developed over time, and was not sprung fully into being all
>at once.
>
You've made some good points and perhaps I misunderstood
Pim's argument. Here's the way I understood it. The apostles
were motivated to lie about the resurrection because they
wanted to protect the faith of the believers. I assumed
that the motivation would be a continuance in the Christian
faith, even though I would readily agree that at this time
"Christianity" was not considered separate from Judaism.
So, I'll say instead that I assumed that the motivation was
a continuation of the believers within this sect of Judaism
which later became Christianity. If the intent is to protect
their faith *as Jews* then it seems to me the best course is to
admit the lie so that the believers could return to mainstream
Judaism.
Now, as to whether the resurrection was essential or even
central to the teachings of this new Jewish sect is an
interesting question. If it was not, then why was the story
invented and propagated through lies? What need is there of
this curiosity anyway? Surely one can have a religious sect
without having the central figure resurrected.
My concern here has been only the motivation to lie. A motivation
based on some concern about the faith of the faithful seems
really strange to me. A more reasonable approach is just to
admit that the apostles were scoundrels. They wanted to form
a new religion and for some reason (uniqueness?) they wanted
the hero to be resurrected from the dead.
Or, perhaps a political motivation, as you discuss next...
>The political dimension of the belief of the disciples/apostles
>is also something that has not been given due regard in this
>discussion, so far as I've followed it. Judas at least was
>identified as being of a revolutionary bent; Matthew was a
>collaborator of uncertain personal leanings. Was there one
>coherent political stance of the disciples? Perhaps, or
>perhaps not. However, a resurrection could serve more than
>just the purpose of establishing a faith; it could help move a
>population closer to revolt as well. Rebels are well-known for
>willingness to die in advancement of the cause. Trying to deal
>with the motivations as being rigidly applicable in only one
>domain at a time is the wrong way to approach this topic.
>
There doesn't seem to me to be any way of knowing the political
stances of the apostles. It seems to me that quite a few were
just average everyday kind of guys more interested in squeeking
out a living than in political revolutions. You mention Matthew
as a collaborator and I assume you mean he was in collaboration
with rebels. This strikes me as odd since Matthew was formerly
making a pretty good living as a tax collector. It seems his
personal interests would be advanced by maintaining the status
quo.
In any event, of the various motivations one might think of it
seems to me that one could make the strongest case for the
political or revolutionary motivation. Again, though, I have
to wonder why the invention of the resurrection? What's the
precedent for this seemingly odd approach? Wouldn't a dead
leader (Martyr) do just as well? Further, why alienate a large
group of potential wealthy and influential followers (the
Sadducees)?
Brian Harper
Associate Professor
Applied Mechanics
The Ohio State University
"Quantum physicist and Jungian analyst, when dropped from
a great height, fall at the same rate of speed, their
descent unaffected by speech or creed" -- David Berlinski