J. Warner Wallace responds to the charge that the Gospel writers lied about the life of Jesus. What was their motivation? Do they fit the necessary conditions for a conspiracy?
Rapid Response: “I Think the Disciples Lied About the Resurrection” | J. Warner Wallace
Haden Clark 
I gotta tell you. I misread this the first time and I was getting a little hot under the collar, but I bit my tounge and read. Man what an argument, but it’s true. That’s the exact reason the religious leaders wanted the tomb guarded so they didn’t take a resurrection. Here’s the thing, where’s the tomb? Modern scientists cannot with 100% accuracy pinpoint the tomb (or noah’s ark or arc of the covenant, but i look forward to finding out about those in paradise). And he’s right, why martyr for a Our? Hung, decapitated, and exiled. Those don’t sound like rewards, but blessed are they who are persecuted for his name sake 🙂
LikeLike
I don’t think the gospels are a conspiracy theory but I do understand that some people share that view point. My main issue with the gospels is that it presents the same issue for the Christian faith as the Jewish Talmudic teachings do for Jews. People take traditional approaches or new views and misconstrue them in ways that do not fit the original intent of God’s word because they are more convenient for their personal agenda in today’s modern age. They will largely base their reasons on faith alone, especially when it doesn’t fit the scriptures and there’s no other proof to base it on. Yeshua based every teaching, allusion, and parable off of the “Old Testament”. The attempt to create a new branch of religion is silly and directly in contrast to what his teachings inspired. To attempt to keep the original faith holy, or set apart, is another thing entirely which is what I believe the original purpose of the gospels was intended to do. The “New Testament” is often misinterpreted from a theological standpoint and poorly translated from a Hebraic perspective, partly because it is translated into English from the Greek. Greek and Hebrew do not share all the same linguistic sounds or even ideas, an attempt to understand the “messianic teachings” as a doctrine or theology based on an English interpretation of a Greek translation of the Hebrew thought is misguided.
I believe the man existed, I believed he might have been martyred, but I do not stand by the Greek thought patterns that assume a man turned into a God, portraying the creator as some sort of fallen entity taking human form, sharing too many similarities with Greek and Roman myths and legends of their gods. Somewhere the original intent was lost in translation because these ideas are not indicated in any of the original text of the Hebrew Tanakh nor in any traditional beliefs. What this thinking does is force a whole religion to have to do damage control and create reasons why human sacrifice became an acceptable method for the atonement of sin. Which in turn makes all believers in this Messiah to appear foolish because not all make this claim but still follow his teachings. Though the Passover sacrifice presents a beautiful metaphor for the cleansing of original sin, it just doesn’t fit the bill. Quite frankly, it’s not even necessary for your own salvation, which is the whole premise of the martyred messiah theology.
The Christian religion and it’s theology could be what are the actual conspiracy but not the man and his teachings, history shows proofs his life did happen. Something is a miss and I think it might have something to do with the high ups in politics, particularly those seated in the highest positions of the most powerful religions in today’s modern age. After all religion is what can truly control the fate of men and offer those in power the reigns. This has a certain allure to those seeking power and the “New Testament”, as it has been understood in this century, is a way to tap into that power with the face of an angel no matter what your intentions are.
LikeLike