After AD 30, did the Jerusalem Church fall for a lie that Mary witnessed Jesus's tomb empty?

“Yes, after all…

  • The church was not susceptible

    The Jerusalem church was such that it was not inherently susceptible to falling for such a lie. After all,

    • They would not have seen sufficient reason to believe the lie. (for example, “Who are you and/or your source to teach us?”).1
    • They would have seen compelling reason to refrain from believing the lie: It was flagrantly suspect.
    1. Those reasons are as follows:
      • It is unacceptably late (e.g. “If that were true, we'd have heard about it long ago!”); this is accentuated by their straightforward awareness of the fact that Mary was a well-known member of their church.
      • It's enticingly falsifiable (for example, “We'll get Mary's feedback before accepting this, much less endorsing it!”). After all, the Jerusalem sought/lionized relevant eyewitness testimony, and Mary and her feedback were overtly accessible to them

      Paul Althaus (Theology professor at Göttingen): “In Jerusalem, one could not think of the grave as empty without being certain, without there being testimony, that it had been found empty.” [Die Wahrheit des kirchlichen Osterglaubens (Bertelsmann, 1940), 23.] (As cited/translated by Dale Allison).

  • No one would attempt such a lie

    No early Christian would even try to spin such a lie (this is especially true of anyone lying to the Jerusalem church). One reason we know this is that the Jerusalem church is famously more informed than any would-be informer.1

    1. Any would-be liars would be hyper-aware of the following:
      • Such a lie would clearly be unacceptably late (E.g. “If that were true, we'd have heard about it long ago!”); this is accentuated by any would-be liar's straightforward awareness of the fact that Mary was a well-known member of their church.
      • Such a lie would be enticingly falsifiable (E.g. “We'll get Mary's feedback before accepting this, much less endorsing it!”). [See footnote 1 above.] After all, the Jerusalem church sought/lionized relevant eyewitness testimony, and Mary and her feedback were overtly accessible to them.

  • Their belief came from Mary

    The Jerusalem church's belief was actually grounded in Mary's testimony. (After all, the Mk 16:1-8 report that “Mary saw Jesus's tomb empty” had already originated/formed from _within _the Jerusalem church, specifically in c. AD 30, and specifically by Mary Magdalene1). This is relevant because Mary's autobiographical report that she discovered Jesus's tomb empty was not a lie.

    1. We know Mary formed it for three reasons:
      • Mk 16 cites her as its ultimate accessible eyewitness source[Forthcoming],
      • The church was not susceptible to such a lie,
      • Insofar as it was common knowledge that the church was not susceptible, it is unlikely that a liar exist there who would even try.