A live atlas of reasons and replies

Did the AD 30 Jerusalem church accurately represent what the relevantly involved witnesses of Jesus were saying?

Trace the strongest lines of support, challenge each claim, and follow every response as far as the reasoning goes.

Orient yourself to the question
02 Reasons
supporting
00 Reasons
challenging

Before you begin

Orient yourself to the question

01 Question

The 1st church founded by the apostles in Jerusalem (AD 30) preached on Jesus. What they said about him—his life, ministry, teachings—fit within the general pool of things disciples and general witnesses of Jesus’ life in were saying. So rather than needing to invent Jesus biography and sayings, they simply drew on what the apostles etc. had actually heard and seen. So the 1st church’s preaching did not misrepresent the relevant witnesses. In recounting historical events, they flowed from and with what they perceived to be eyewitness testimony.

Current question Did the AD 30 Jerusalem church accurately represent what the relevantly involved witnesses of Jesus were saying?
Yes
No
Yes Reasons affirming the proposition Did the AD 30 Jerusalem church accurately represent what the relevantly involved witnesses of Jesus were saying?

  • 1st church rejected Jesus-bio not vetted by witnesses

    The Jerusalem church strive to reject Jesus-bio not approved (vetted) by involved witnesses.

    A full page will debates 5 arguments:

    • In AD 30, 1st church strove to adopt only witnesses' Jesus-bio.
    • Christians strove to protect true Jesus-bio.
    • 1st church was the nexus of witness knowledge.

    This is relevant IF the Jerusalem church was continually circulating the message that Jesus appeared to various persons.

    But so what? Plausibly...

    • The Jerusalem church wasn't saying Jesus appeared to witnesses. (forthcoming)