This is what Robert Price had to say about mistaken identity:
Is The Bible True? White vs Price 5/6/2010
Go to 16:58
** you do not have permission to see this link **
Price says:
Skeptics have suggested that on Easter morning, the disciples did not see Jesus himself, but only chance passersby, whom, in their desperation, they later inferred must have been Jesus alive again–even though it did not look like him! In other words, a false belief in resurrection stemmed from cases of mistaken identity abetted by wishful thinking. Is this scenario some contrived, modern fabrication, alien to the gospels? Maybe not. According to Mark 6:16 and 8:28, there are joyful reports among the disciples of the martyred John the Baptist that their master has been raised from the dead and seen by many witnesses! But Mark says it was all a case of mistaken identity: it was really Jesus these people were seeing. They only thought it was their much-missed master. Keep this in mind when you read the Easter stories where Mary or Peter or the Emmaus disciples first think they are seeing someone else and later “realize” that it must have been Jesus.
@Porphyry:
“Primed with their prior speculation about the Messiah being killed and not suffering decay, being still deeply traumatized and in denial, and both having had the same vivid experience, they concluded it was indeed Jesus they had just eaten with.”
“Is that what actually happened? No idea. But I think something like that could very well have happened.”
Yeah I think something like that could have happened…
“…Finally, I doubt something like that could explain an appearance to 500 at once. If something like an appearance to 500 did happen, I suspect it was more that one or two people thought they saw something, and in the retelling their experience ended up getting attributed to the entire group…”
Or it could be like the 1988 event where someone (e.g. Mary Akatsa) tells the crowd that there will be an appearance of Jesus…
It’s similar to Mark 13:6 – “Many will come in My name, saying, ‘I am He!’ and will mislead many.”
So it could be a hoax… but it is still a case of mistaken identity.
So, here is a quotation from an article still available on the web from LiveScience:
“The first-century gospel is one of hundreds of new texts that a team of about three-dozen scientists and scholars is working to uncover, and analyze, by using this technique of ungluing the masks, said Craig Evans, a professor of New Testament studies at Acadia Divinity College in Wolfville, Nova Scotia.”
“‘We’re recovering ancient documents from the first, second and third centuries. Not just Christian documents, not just biblical documents, but classical Greek texts, business papers, various mundane papers, personal letters,’ Evans told Live Science.”
** you do not have permission to see this link **
The reason I think this is relevant is that none of this report is true, even though the source of the quotation is a Biblical Scholar with PhD. The so-called “first-century gospel” was not first century, was not uncovered in a mummy mask, and “three-dozen scientists and scholars” were not recovering “Christian documents” from mummy masks, because – to date – no Christian documents have ever been found in papyrus mummy masks.
Craig doesn’t appear to be a liar. Rather he put a whole array of misinformation, assumptions, and wishful thinking together into a report that is completely false in nearly every detail.
I have little doubt that the apostle Paul’s even more vague “appearance” report was concocted in the same way.
Since Paul is pre-Trinitarian Nicene doctrine, and if you read his non-capitalized Greek referring to “christ’ and “spirit” without the editorial capitalizations of later languages, could Paul sometimes be referring to just his idea of the risen Jesus or visions of Jesus’ spirit, and since Paul is Pre-Acts, have any scholars developed the idea that the “Appearance to the 500” is possibly juat a pre-Acts Pauline reference to what “Luke” later describes as the “Pentecost” event?
Welcome fvhaven!
I agree. When Paul talks about Jesus Christ he is almost always referring to the figure of his vision(s). He never claims to have known Jesus the man. And you quickly notice that Paul frequently argues with just those who did know Jeus the man – his closest disciples!
I’ve always thought it is disingenuous for modern translators to always treat the ‘spirit’ or the “holy spirit” as a proper noun when it is debatable whether it even refers to a person. The ‘spirit of god’ and ‘the Holy Spirit’ are not the same thing. But if someone translated it accurately you would be able to hear the howls of pious outrage on the moon.
There are many modern Pentacostal believers who think Jesus is present in their services every Sunday morning. But I’ve always thought the most fantastic aspect of the appearance of Jesus to the ‘500’ is the number itself. It’s real hard to believe Jesus had that many followers so early on.
“I’ve always thought the most fantastic aspect of the appearance of Jesus to the ‘500’ is the number itself. It’s real hard to believe Jesus had that many followers so early on.”
Yeah, or that those 500 could have all been assembled at once in a single venue.
Under what plausible circumstances might we have found 500 Christians together before or during Paul’s life? Where would they have assembled? Why would they all have been assembled there?
BDEhrman
FreedomBen
evgendob
Robert
1 Guest(s)