Can the resurrection of Christ be explained as a case of mistaken identity?

[Unknown Soldier]

The Gospel of Thomas begins by saying: “These are the hidden words that the living Jesus spoke. And Didymus Judas Thomas wrote them down.” Maybe Jesus had a twin, or an apostle who looked like Jesus' twin...

How do you conclude that Jesus had a lookalike based on his dictating to Thomas?

 

[Unknown Soldier]

Or there was more than one Jesus. Nobody knows the real name and identity of te real Jesus. The tag Jesus is an assignment by later writers.

I see possibly multiple persons in the gospels. It could have been a movement.

I think that Jesus may have been a composite figure who represents all those "Jesuses" who got crucified by the Romans.

And Thomas saying he wrote down the words of Jesus could just be fabrication to present his own self serving version of events. You have to include human nature and self interest as things evolved.

How is this relevant to the issue of a case of mistaken identity of the supposedly risen Jesus?

 

[Unknown Soldier]

I think we should compile two stacks of empirical evidence--one pile for identical twins being a real thing, and one for dead people coming back to life being a real thing--and after examining those two piles, we decide what's "absurd" and what isn't.

Most Christians would opt for the resurrection stack. It would no doubt be very light and easy to carry while they would need a forklift to hoist the documentation of cases of mistaken identity.

 

[Elixir]

Now you have me wondering if the Davidians have a sect that worships David Koresh. He was recognized as "the final prophet" by his Branch Davidian group. Maybe they celebrate his birthday as "Koreshmas". I can imagine that in a thousand years they could be a major world religion.

OMG
I wonder if they have a Santa equivalent.

 

[Politesse]

The Gospel of Thomas begins by saying: “These are the hidden words that the living Jesus spoke. And Didymus Judas Thomas wrote them down.” Maybe Jesus had a twin, or an apostle who looked like Jesus' twin...

How do you conclude that Jesus had a lookalike based on his dictating to Thomas?

'O Didymos: "The Twin", in Greek.

 

[DBT]

People looked for signs and wonders in the events of the world, For the Greeks, an owl hooting may be seen as a sign from Athena.

For the first Christians, someone speaking with 'spiritual authority' may have been taken to come from the risen Christ.

If Satan could be taken to speak through people, so could Christ. Saul's conversion was his subjective experience of Christ.

 

[Thomas II]

The Gospel of Thomas begins by saying: “These are the hidden words that the living Jesus spoke. And Didymus Judas Thomas wrote them down.” Maybe Jesus had a twin, or an apostle who looked like Jesus' twin...

How do you conclude that Jesus had a lookalike based on his dictating to Thomas?

'O Didymos: "The Twin", in Greek.

Exactly...

 

[Unknown Soldier]

People looked for signs and wonders in the events of the world, For the Greeks, an owl hooting may be seen as a sign from Athena.

A Christian once told me she saw a miraculous sign from God. It was a halo around the moon. I did a little bit of research and soon found that such halos are caused by ice crystals in the air. So any Greek seeing a sign from Athena in a hooting owl would be to most of us including modern Christians to be a silly superstition, yet Christians seeing signs from God around the moon is a miraculous event!

For the first Christians, someone speaking with 'spiritual authority' may have been taken to come from the risen Christ.

If Satan could be taken to speak through people, so could Christ.

I've had curious experiences of getting the idea that what a Christian is telling me is God speaking through that person. That feeling is especially pronounced when that Christian is male. I think that the first Gods were strong, dominant men, and my experiences with God seemingly speaking through such men is indicative of an evolutionary behavior trait that exists even in the nonreligious. We bow to alpha males thinking we bow to alpha Gods!

Saul's conversion was his subjective experience of Christ.

According to the story in Acts, Saul was converted forcibly. He could not resist a powerful Jesus in the sky in the same way that a young male gorilla cannot resist the powerful alpha-male gorilla looming over him.

 

[steve_bank]

The Abrahamic god is made in the image of the human male patriarch, not the other way around.

Back in the 70s r-80s a Chrtian TV show faded a cross in an out of the picture, viewers thought that they witnessed a miracle.

 

[bilby]

Resurrection stories are fiction.

In fiction, anything the writers can imagine is possible.

The OP describes a debate between fanfic aficionados over what is or is not canon; As the original authors are long dead, such debates can never be resolved, and are just a lot of hot air.

That at least one party doesn't even accept that the stories are fiction is embarrassingly dim, particularly as they describe events that are known to be impossible.

WLC is like an adult who is convinced that his Hogwarts letter will definitely arrive by the next owl. It's pointless to engage with him; The options are ridicule or pity, depending on how charitable you feel like being.

 

[Unknown Soldier]

Resurrection stories are fiction.

I don't know of any that are factual.

In fiction, anything the writers can imagine is possible.

I think you mean possible in the story. I can imagine traveling faster than light, but I don't think it's possible to actually travel faster than light.

The OP describes a debate between fanfic aficionados over what is or is not canon;

No, the debate I cited in the OP was over the historicity of Christ's resurrection.

As the original authors are long dead, such debates can never be resolved, and are just a lot of hot air.

But hot air can sway a lot of people.

That at least one party doesn't even accept that the stories are fiction is embarrassingly dim, particularly as they describe events that are known to be impossible.

I don't know if resurrections are impossible, but if they do happen, I'm unaware of them.

WLC is like an adult who is convinced that his Hogwarts letter will definitely arrive by the next owl. It's pointless to engage with him; The options are ridicule or pity, depending on how charitable you feel like being.

I would love to debate Craig in particular over his claim that he objectively knows right and wrong. I would point out that while I'm free to repudiate all genocides, and I do repudiate all genocides, his morality does not allow him to repudiate God's genocides as described in the Bible. So how then can his objective morality be superior to my admittedly subjective morality when his morality results in a lot more people being killed? I think he would respond by saying that God's killing people wasn't genocide or that God can kill anybody he wants to because he gave them life.

 

[bilby]

Resurrection stories are fiction.

I don't know of any that are factual.

That's because it's by definition impossible for any to be factual.

If someone appears to be dead, but is later found to be alive, then we know with certainty that they were not dead. Because the difference between 'dead' and 'comatose' is that the former is irreversible.

In fiction, anything the writers can imagine is possible.

I think you mean possible in the story.

Yes. Hence the phrase "In fiction...".

I can imagine traveling faster than light, but I don't think it's possible to actually travel faster than light.

The OP describes a debate between fanfic aficionados over what is or is not canon;

No, the debate I cited in the OP was over the historicity of Christ's resurrection.

Which is as I said, a debate amongst fanfic aficionados over what is or is not canon.

There's no possibility that anyone has ever been resurrected, so all discussions of resurrection are necessarily discussions about fiction.

As the original authors are long dead, such debates can never be resolved, and are just a lot of hot air.

But hot air can sway a lot of people.

Sure. But those people are idiots for being swayed by it.

That at least one party doesn't even accept that the stories are fiction is embarrassingly dim, particularly as they describe events that are known to be impossible.

I don't know if resurrections are impossible, but if they do happen, I'm unaware of them.

I do, and they are. I explained why above.

It comes down to the simple fact that 'alive' and 'dead' are arbitrary linguistic categories with only a passing relevance to reality.

In reality, there's a lot of grey area between 'alive' and 'dead' for any definition of these words; One of the few things that people do agree on, though, is that 'dead' is permanent.

WLC is like an adult who is convinced that his Hogwarts letter will definitely arrive by the next owl. It's pointless to engage with him; The options are ridicule or pity, depending on how charitable you feel like being.

I would love to debate Craig in particular over his claim that he objectively knows right and wrong. I would point out that while I'm free to repudiate all genocides, and I do repudiate all genocides, his morality does not allow him to repudiate God's genocides as described in the Bible. So how then can his objective morality be superior to my admittedly subjective morality when his morality results in a lot more people being killed? I think he would respond by saying that God's killing people wasn't genocide or that God can kill anybody he wants to because he gave them life.

I would consider it uncharitable to engage in a battle of wits against an unarmed opponent. And you can't change his mind - which coincidentally is why he is so wrong about so many things.

 

[excreationist]

There are many reasons why I think it definitely was mistaken identity. As you will see in Jesus' time the person didn't need to look the same as the other person - so an identical twin isn't required.

BTW Bishop Spong and the minister Martin Luther King Jr didn't believe in a physical resurrection....

Can you question the Resurrection and still be a Christian?

The Resurrection is interpreted is the source of some of the deepest rifts in Christianity -- and a stumbling block for some Christians and more than a few skeptics.

www.ncronline.org

Mark 6:14-16
King Herod heard about this, for Jesus’ name had become well known. Some were saying, “John the Baptist has been raised from the dead, and that is why miraculous powers are at work in him.”

Others said, “He is Elijah.”

And still others claimed, “He is a prophet, like one of the prophets of long ago.”

But when Herod heard this, he said, “John, whom I beheaded, has been raised from the dead!”

Obviously John the Baptist would look different to Jesus yet King Herod was convinced that John the Baptist had been raised from the dead!

Luke 9:18-19
Once when Jesus was praying in private and his disciples were with him, he asked them, “Who do the crowds say I am?”

They replied, “Some say John the Baptist; others say Elijah; and still others, that one of the prophets of long ago has come back to life.”

Remember that sightings of Jesus after his death were always short - maybe a couple of hours at the most. If he really did rise he wouldn't be disappearing a short while later every single time.

The gardener and on the road to Emmaus could be mistaken identity because they didn't originally recognise "Jesus". The walking through walls happened in John which means it is less likely to be based on real events. In the story Jesus kind of breaks the fourth wall: "blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed". I think it was just a story rather than all of the disciples having the same vision.

There is also this event where 6000 people believed they saw Jesus:

V: Jesus in Nairobi, Kenya, 1988

________________________________________________________________________ Compare the photos of Jesus and me to see the resemblance! My previous self, Jesus, was briefly sent to Earth in 1988 &#8211…

stigdragholm.wordpress.com

It doesn't look like Jesus in the photos but for the 500 witnesses there is no photo so we don't know whether it looked like Jesus either.

Note I'm not aware of anyone else ever using any of the arguments I've given about mistaken identity.

 

[TomC]

Obviously John the Baptist would look different to Jesus yet King Herod was convinced that John the Baptist had been raised from the dead!

Even 2000 years ago people were capable of figurative language. "Dammit, we just got rid of JtB and already there's another one!"

Honestly, I don't see how anybody could be definite about this subject. Mistaken identity doesn't even seem the most plausible, to me. I still wouldn't rule it out, though.
Tom

 

[steve_bank]

Obviously John the Baptist would look different to Jesus yet King Herod was convinced that John the Baptist had been raised from the dead!

Even 2000 years ago people were capable of figurative language. "Dammit, we just got rid of JtB and already there's another one!"

Honestly, I don't see how anybody could be definite about this subject. Mistaken identity doesn't even seem the most plausible, to me. I still wouldn't rule it out, though.
Tom

There is Roman graffiti an Egyptian graffiti left inside pyramids by workers. Us humans today have not changed all that much in 2000 years.

In movies the people 2000 years ago are depicted as stoic wooden humorless characters.

Like the images of Pharaoh and Moses in the movie 10 Commandments. Charleston Heston and Yul Bryner.

 

[Politesse]

There are many reasons why I think it definitely was mistaken identity. As you will see in Jesus' time the person didn't need to look the same as the other person - so an identical twin isn't required.

BTW Bishop Spong and the minister Martin Luther King Jr didn't believe in a physical resurrection....

Can you question the Resurrection and still be a Christian?

The Resurrection is interpreted is the source of some of the deepest rifts in Christianity -- and a stumbling block for some Christians and more than a few skeptics.

www.ncronline.org

Mark 6:14-16
King Herod heard about this, for Jesus’ name had become well known. Some were saying, “John the Baptist has been raised from the dead, and that is why miraculous powers are at work in him.”

Others said, “He is Elijah.”

And still others claimed, “He is a prophet, like one of the prophets of long ago.”

But when Herod heard this, he said, “John, whom I beheaded, has been raised from the dead!”

Obviously John the Baptist would look different to Jesus yet King Herod was convinced that John the Baptist had been raised from the dead!

It is worth noting than many in the Hellenistic world were believers in reincarnation and/or theurgy (ie spirit possession), at least of the virtuous and heroic; bodily resurrection was not the only way for a dead hero to "come back".

 

[Politesse]

Note I'm not aware of anyone else ever using any of the arguments I've given about mistaken identity.

You are not by any means the first to posit mistaken identity with respect to the end of Jesus' life. That's actually Muslim doctrine, though they place the time of the "switch" earlier, before he had even been crucified. And the Muslims almost certainly picked up this idea from Gnostic communities that likewise believed Jesus had "ascended to the pleroma" before any sort of execution could have occurred. From the Holy Qu'ran:

˹They [The Jews] were condemned for breaking their covenant, rejecting Allah’s signs, killing the prophets unjustly, and for saying, “Our hearts are unreceptive!”—it is Allah Who has sealed their hearts for their disbelief, so they do not believe except for a few—and for their denial and outrageous accusation against Mary, and for boasting, “We killed the Messiah, Jesus, son of Mary, the messenger of Allah.” But they neither killed nor crucified him—it was only made to appear so. Even those who argue for this ˹crucifixion˺ are in doubt. They have no knowledge whatsoever—only making assumptions. They certainly did not kill him. Rather, Allah raised him up to Himself. And Allah is Almighty, All-Wise. Every one of the People of the Book will definitely believe in him before his death. And on the Day of Judgment Jesus will be a witness against them."

That's all the Perfect Message has to say on the matter, but most Muslim scholars have used an explanation similar to yours in order to explain how the Jews might have come to believe that Isa/Jesus had been killed rather than ascending to Heaven as per the word of God.

 

[excreationist]

Note I'm not aware of anyone else ever using any of the arguments I've given about mistaken identity.

You are not by any means the first to posit mistaken identity with respect to the end of Jesus' life. That's actually Muslim doctrine, though they place the time of the "switch" earlier, before he had even been crucified. And the Muslims almost certainly picked up this idea from Gnostic communities that likewise believed Jesus had "ascended to the pleroma" before any sort of execution could have occurred. From the Holy Qu'ran:

I'm talking about the specific verses I mentioned (like about Herod, etc) and the example of the 6000 in response to the 500. And I'm saying in each example there would be a different person rather than it always being the same person. Similar to in Elvis sightings it doesn't necessarily always involve the same person.

 

[excreationist]

Obviously John the Baptist would look different to Jesus yet King Herod was convinced that John the Baptist had been raised from the dead!

Even 2000 years ago people were capable of figurative language. "Dammit, we just got rid of JtB and already there's another one!"

See also:
Luke 9:18-19

Once when Jesus was praying in private and his disciples were with him, he asked them, “Who do the crowds say I am?”
They replied, “Some say John the Baptist; others say Elijah; and still others, that one of the prophets of long ago has come back to life.”

I think the crowds literally thought that Jesus were those people come back from the dead.

Honestly, I don't see how anybody could be definite about this subject. Mistaken identity doesn't even seem the most plausible, to me. I still wouldn't rule it out, though.
Tom

I gave an example of 6000 people believing they saw Jesus and it was mistaken identity....

V: Jesus in Nairobi, Kenya, 1988

________________________________________________________________________ Compare the photos of Jesus and me to see the resemblance! My previous self, Jesus, was briefly sent to Earth in 1988 &#8211…

stigdragholm.wordpress.com

The usual explanation of the sighting involving the 500 is there being a group hallucination - but I think that example of the 6000 makes more sense.

 

[Unknown Soldier]

Resurrection stories are fiction.

I don't know of any that are factual.

That's because it's by definition impossible for any to be factual.

I wouldn't say that resurrections are impossible by defining them to be impossible. To do so is a tautology. Can you make a case that resurrections are impossible?

If someone appears to be dead, but is later found to be alive, then we know with certainty that they were not dead. Because the difference between 'dead' and 'comatose' is that the former is irreversible.

Again, asserting that resurrections are impossible is not good logic. Anything can be asserted whether it's right or wrong.

In fiction, anything the writers can imagine is possible.

I think you mean possible in the story.

Yes. Hence the phrase "In fiction...".

Thanks for the clarification.

I can imagine traveling faster than light, but I don't think it's possible to actually travel faster than light.

The OP describes a debate between fanfic aficionados over what is or is not canon;

No, the debate I cited in the OP was over the historicity of Christ's resurrection.

Which is as I said, a debate amongst fanfic aficionados over what is or is not canon.

What do you mean by "canon"? Are you referring to the canon of the New Testament or some general rule?

There's no possibility that anyone has ever been resurrected, so all discussions of resurrection are necessarily discussions about fiction.

As the original authors are long dead, such debates can never be resolved, and are just a lot of hot air.

But hot air can sway a lot of people.

Sure. But those people are idiots for being swayed by it.

A person can be very bright and yet be swayed by rhetoric if that person is desperate or vulnerable for some reason or has some other reason(s) to be convinced. You are swayed by arguments against the resurrection, but you are not an idiot. So why be so uncharitable toward those who disagree with you?

That at least one party doesn't even accept that the stories are fiction is embarrassingly dim, particularly as they describe events that are known to be impossible.

I don't know if resurrections are impossible, but if they do happen, I'm unaware of them.

I do, and they are. I explained why above.

You didn't explain why resurrections are impossible.

It comes down to the simple fact that 'alive' and 'dead' are arbitrary linguistic categories with only a passing relevance to reality.

In reality, there's a lot of grey area between 'alive' and 'dead' for any definition of these words; One of the few things that people do agree on, though, is that 'dead' is permanent.

In some ways, yes, it may be difficult to discern between what is alive and what isn't alive. In other cases, it's not so obvious. In any event, people do not always agree that death is permanent. If they did agree that death is permanent, then nobody would be debating the issue!

WLC is like an adult who is convinced that his Hogwarts letter will definitely arrive by the next owl. It's pointless to engage with him; The options are ridicule or pity, depending on how charitable you feel like being.

I would love to debate Craig in particular over his claim that he objectively knows right and wrong. I would point out that while I'm free to repudiate all genocides, and I do repudiate all genocides, his morality does not allow him to repudiate God's genocides as described in the Bible. So how then can his objective morality be superior to my admittedly subjective morality when his morality results in a lot more people being killed? I think he would respond by saying that God's killing people wasn't genocide or that God can kill anybody he wants to because he gave them life.

I would consider it uncharitable to engage in a battle of wits against an unarmed opponent. And you can't change his mind - which coincidentally is why he is so wrong about so many things.

With all due respect, you've demonstrated yourself wrong at least once in this post. I don't believe Jesus rose from the dead, but just arbitrarily saying he couldn't have is no better than a Christian out of blind faith saying he did rise.