(March 17, 2019 at 3:45 pm)Vicki Q Wrote: If one drops ideas of biblical inspiration and the like in favour of mining historical data, one can go a little bit beyond mere hair splitting.
The Early Church didn't invent the story from nothing; if you're trying to persuade folk that something very strange has happened, you don't bundle it up with a ready-to-serve alternative explanation. The Xians wouldn't want to put the idea in people's heads that they had stolen the body, unless they had little option but to discuss it.
It seems far more likely that the Jews of Matthew's day actually were using the story as a counter-apologetic. The Xians were making a claim about Jesus' body, and the Jews were providing an easy alternative explanation. Justin (Dial. 108) reports that the story was still being used by Jews against Xians in the mid second century.
One thing that emerges from all this is that whatever the origin of it, the Early Church's claim was all about a physical body vanishing.
You might be correct. It's more likely that they stole/borrowed the resurrection story from other religious tall tales.
Being told you're delusional does not necessarily mean you're mental.
