There is a difficulty when using logic, reason and evidence to reach a conclusion. You will never be able to reach one hundred percent certainty. There will always be some doubt, and so the best you can do is reach the conclusion that best fits the facts you have. You can never rule out any possibility, all you can do is realize that some options are more likely than others.
For me, that is the situation with the disciples' behavior after Jesus' death. I can look at the scenario you describe and I can accept that it is possible. However, it is simply not the most reasonable explanation available.
There are a few problems with this scenario.
First, we can't ignore the fact that Jesus said He was the Messiah. I don't think we can claim that He never said it, or that His disciples attributed this to Him after His death. If He had not said it, the Jews would not have been so eager to have Him crucified. He really ticked them off! So, for me it's clear that He made some claims of divinity for Himself during His lifetime. If His message had been a simple one of love, peace, forgiveness and so on, He would never have raised the ire of the establishment.
So now I try to imagine myself as one of His disciples immediately after His death. We all heard Him say He was the Christ. We believed Him, and now He's dead. Well then, He could not have been the Christ. Oh well, what now?
I simply cannot buy that these men and women would conspire to steal the body of a man who made such claims and then failed to back them up. If it were me, I would just walk away and cut my losses. I would be angry, bitter and confused. I would be thinking, "I don't care how positive and inspirational His messages of love and peace were -- He said He was the Christ and could not back it up!" So, for me, that's the biggest issue. I realize that Jesus was likely a VERY convincing and influential guy, but if He were just a man and and not God, I can't see Him being so persuasive that people would continue to follow Him after He made such lofty claims and then failed to back them up when it mattered most.
Another problem is the sheer immorality of such a hoax. It's not at all consistent with Christ's teaching to deceive anyone. If His disciples did this, then they did not understand much of what he taught. They would have launched Christianity on a basis that violated much of what it taught!
Next, we have to see how it worked out for them in the long run. If they had this idea that they would give meaning to other's lives by teaching a message of peace and love, it didn't work out for them. They were tortured, imprisoned and killed for it. I realized it's a double edged sword when we argue about what people will and will not die for, but can you imagine his disciples enduring such suffering in order to spread a message of peace and love from their failed messiah? At some point, I think I would turn to my brothers and ask, "Is this worth it"? It's worth dying for a risen God, but a con-man who had a decent, meaningful message of love? Hard to see.
Finally, we have to acknowledge just how much longevity Christianity has had based, primarily, on the testimony of these men. Once again, I admit this is a double-edge sword, but most religions (or cults) which purport to be based on facts do not have this kind of longevity unless the evidence is able to withstand the test of time.
When I put all this into perspective, the best explanation for the facts (especially when considered with all the other corroborating evidence which I will discuss later today) is that Jesus really did rise from the dead. I can imagine dozens of other explanations for why the disciples did what they did, but with each of these, I find I must jump through hoops to make them even barely plausible. Yet the truth is so simple and beautiful and has so much explanatory power -- it happened just like they said.
|
