The "many" former followers who turned against Christ?

[Cow Poke]

In the "Mormon Moment" thread, OC appears to be comparing the obviously false charges against Christ with the (IMO) much deserved accusations against Smith.

Jesus Christ himself is at the center of a much larger controversy in this world than Joseph Smith. And Christ had his accusers. And if Job's friends falsely accused Job, and Jesus descended below all things, it follows in my thinking that Jesus was also accused and turned upon by many of his one-time friends as well.

I'm curious. Besides Judas, who are the "many of his one-time friends" who turned on Christ? We know, in John 6:66, that many of the former followers of Christ stopped following. But they just appear to have "gone home".

Where is the evidence that "many" of Christ's former followers turned against Him? I think OC may be trying to justify the notion that some of Smith's former followers turned very violently against him, so "it must have happened to Christ, too"?

What does this even mean --- "Jesus descended below all things" --- in regards to Job's friends turning against him and, therefore many of Christ's friends turned on Him.... ????

And this, from that same thread...

It remains with each individual to make his own judgment by looking at both sides of the Joseph Smith issue, instead of just one side, and then form a judgment for himself. But I believe we will ALL be held accountable for the judgments we make, so we should make them wisely.

How bout looking at both sides of the Jesus Christ issue, OC? The LOST WORLD FALSELY accused Christ, who was without sin. And you cite this as "evidence" that Smith deserves the same consideration as Jesus? Do you REALLY want to cast your lot with the false accusers of Christ?

[Bill the Cat]

As CP stated, many did turn away from Christ because some of the things He said were too hard for them to bear.

Joh 6:66 As a result of this many of His disciples withdrew and were not walking with Him anymore.

Yet, I see no accusations from any of them..

[Sparko]

The only one I can think of is Judas.

[One Bad Pig]

There was a crowd that shouted for Jesus' crucifixion. It's unclear, however, how many of the people there were formerly His followers.

[Cow Poke]

There was a crowd that shouted for Jesus' crucifixion. It's unclear, however, how many of the people there were formerly His followers.

Possibly, yes, but that would be entirely speculation. We know for a fact that a number of Smith's former followers turned very angrily against him. And some of those who were there approving of the crucifixion got a rude awakening....

(Mat 27:54 KJV) Now when the centurion, and they that were with him, watching Jesus, saw the earthquake, and those things that were done, they feared greatly, saying, Truly this was the Son of God.
(Mark 15:39 KJV) And when the centurion, which stood over against him, saw that he so cried out, and gave up the ghost, he said, Truly this man was the Son of God.

[ZackMartin]

As CP stated, many did turn away from Christ because some of the things He said were too hard for them to bear.

Joh 6:66 As a result of this many of His disciples withdrew and were not walking with Him anymore.

Yet, I see no accusations from any of them..

The Gospels record that the scribes and priests made many accusations against Jesus - e.g. that he was a blasphemer. Of course we can't really know, but is it implausible that some of their accusations might have relied on (mis)information from disaffected former followers of Jesus?

Jesus suggests (Matt 7:21-23) that several of his own supposed followers are going to hell. So does it make sense to think there was only one Judas? Or one big Judas, and more than one little one? Might not have other (lower-ranking) disciples, other than Judas, cooperated with the priests or Pharisees just as Judas did? We can't know, but there seems to me to be nothing implausible about the suggestion.

The idea that no one accused Jesus of anything wrong is not true given what the Gospels themselves say. Matt 11:19 and Luke 7:34 both record that he was accused of being a drunkard and a glutton. In Mark 3:21, Jesus' own family thought he was insane. In Matthew 12:24, the Pharisees accuse Jesus of performing exorcisms using Satan's power. A mere accusation and a proven accusation are very different things, of course, but no doubt that Jesus was accused a plenty.

[One Bad Pig]

The Gospels record that the scribes and priests made many accusations against Jesus - e.g. that he was a blasphemer. Of course we can't really know, but is it implausible that some of their accusations might have relied on (mis)information from disaffected former followers of Jesus?

Jesus suggests (Matt 7:21-23) that several of his own supposed followers are going to hell. So does it make sense to think there was only one Judas? Or one big Judas, and more than one little one? Might not have other (lower-ranking) disciples, other than Judas, cooperated with the priests or Pharisees just as Judas did? We can't know, but there seems to me to be nothing implausible about the suggestion.

The idea that no one accused Jesus of anything wrong is not true given what the Gospels themselves say. Matt 11:19 and Luke 7:34 both record that he was accused of being a drunkard and a glutton. In Mark 3:21, Jesus' own family thought he was insane. In Matthew 12:24, the Pharisees accuse Jesus of performing exorcisms using Satan's power. A mere accusation and a proven accusation are very different things, of course, but no doubt that Jesus was accused a plenty.

By his adversaries, yes. By his followers, not so much.

[Cow Poke]

The Gospels record that the scribes and priests made many accusations against Jesus - e.g. that he was a blasphemer. Of course we can't really know, but is it implausible that some of their accusations might have relied on (mis)information from disaffected former followers of Jesus?

You have quite an active imagination. Disaffected former followers? You mean the guys who gave up and went home? It is MUCH more plausible to believe that the scribes and pharisees got their information from what Jesus ACTUALLY SAID IN PUBLIC.

Jesus suggests (Matt 7:21-23) that several of his own supposed followers are going to hell.

How do you get that from "Not everyone who says to me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven"? Quite a bit of mental gymnastics there, Zack.

So does it make sense to think there was only one Judas? Or one big Judas, and more than one little one?

If you start with a verse or two of scripture taken totally out of context, and add lots of spin and supposition, and squint just right, then ...

Might not have other (lower-ranking) disciples, other than Judas, cooperated with the priests or Pharisees just as Judas did? We can't know, but there seems to me to be nothing implausible about the suggestion.

Why would anybody else NEED to? Judas did a bang-up job himself! Pilate pronounced that he "found no fault" in Christ, and Jesus was STILL crucified. What other help was needed?

The idea that no one accused Jesus of anything wrong is not true

WHO CLAIMED THAT? How bout dealing with the actual OP instead of your own fantasy version, Zack.

given what the Gospels themselves say. Matt 11:19 and Luke 7:34 both record that he was accused of being a drunkard and a glutton. In Mark 3:21, Jesus' own family thought he was insane. In Matthew 12:24, the Pharisees accuse Jesus of performing exorcisms using Satan's power. A mere accusation and a proven accusation are very different things, of course, but no doubt that Jesus was accused a plenty.

Here is the claim, Zack... "Jesus was also accused and turned upon by many of his one-time friends as well."

Note --- not "sorta kinda lower level disciples" or "scribes and priests" or "disaffected followers".... "many of his one-time friends".

Look -- the whole point is that this comes from a thread where OC is basically calling for critics to give Joseph Smith the benefit of the doubt, then jumping right into "Jesus had BIGGER problems". You're doing the same thing, Zack... you are working HARD to manufacture support, and you're not even CLOSE to the "suggestion" that OC made.

[nrajeff]

The only one I can think of is Judas.

Peter swore up and down that he wasn't one of Jesus' disciples. That sounds almost like Peter was denying Jesus, who at one point called Peter "Satan." It is hard to believe that Peter didn't turn against Jesus, at least temporarily.

The Holy Bible also predicts more incidents of former followers turning against Christ:

Paul warned Timothy:

"For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables."[2]

and he told the Ephesian saints: "...of your own selves shall men arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away disciples after them."

Would people who hadn't turned against Jesus do those things?

[Sparko]

Peter swore up and down that he wasn't one of Jesus' disciples. That sounds almost like Peter was denying Jesus, who at one point called Peter "Satan." It is hard to believe that Peter didn't turn against Jesus, at least temporarily.

The Holy Bible also predicts more incidents of former followers turning against Christ:

Paul warned Timothy:

"For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables."[2]

and he told the Ephesian saints: "...of your own selves shall men arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away disciples after them."

Would people who hadn't turned against Jesus do those things?

Peter denied being one of Jesus' followers but he didn't speak against Jesus. Not to mention it was fear that got to him, not anger or hatred as "turning against Christ" would mean.

as for the rest of your post, that was AFTER Jesus returned to heaven and it had nothing to do with his FRIENDS turning against him. We are talking about while he was on earth and his friends turning against him... and the whole "itching ears" things sounds an awful like what you Mormons do.

[Cow Poke]

Peter swore up and down that he wasn't one of Jesus' disciples.

"up and down" is just a bit of a stretch. Yes, he denied Jesus, but he never acted against Him as far as we can tell.

That sounds almost like Peter was denying Jesus, who at one point called Peter "Satan."

There's a little more to that story than the English translation tells. Context.

It is hard to believe that Peter didn't turn against Jesus, at least temporarily.

Turn away? Sure. Turn against? I think not.

We know for a fact that Peter denied Christ -- thrice -- and was restored personally by Jesus. There is no evidence whatsoever that Peter "turned upon" Jesus.

But, if we give you that one (and I'm not ), in addition to Judas, it's still far from "many".

[master_mormon]

"it follows in my thinking that Jesus was also accused and turned upon by many of his one-time friends as well."

I personally believe this is most like was the case even though it is hard to prove. The problem is we don't know much about the day to day life of Jesus. We can read about the entire ministry of Jesus of 3 years in a day or two. We know a lot more about Joseph Smith than Jesus simply because we have well over a hundred times more information on his life to draw on. We can track Joseph Smith movements in many placed on specific days. That really can't be done with with the ministry of Jesus. Plus what we know about Jesus is written by his followers and not his critics. I am sure if we had an equivalent amount of info from his critics as we do from Joseph Smith critics that it would be easier to prove.

[lilpixieofterror]

Isn't it funny how speculation counts as evidence when somebody wants to defend their false prophet, but when it is known that pretty much all of Joseph Smiths' original followers betrayed him isn't evidence?

[OtherCheek]

Isn't it funny how speculation counts as evidence when somebody wants to defend their false prophet, but when it is known that pretty much all of Joseph Smiths' original followers betrayed him isn't evidence?

"Pretty much all"? Evidence please.

[OtherCheek]

"it follows in my thinking that Jesus was also accused and turned upon by many of his one-time friends as well."

I personally believe this is most like was the case even though it is hard to prove. The problem is we don't know much about the day to day life of Jesus. We can read about the entire ministry of Jesus of 3 years in a day or two. We know a lot more about Joseph Smith than Jesus simply because we have well over a hundred times more information on his life to draw on. We can track Joseph Smith movements in many placed on specific days. That really can't be done with with the ministry of Jesus. Plus what we know about Jesus is written by his followers and not his critics. I am sure if we had an equivalent amount of info from his critics as we do from Joseph Smith critics that it would be easier to prove.

I think we LDS draw this inference more easily due to a principle that we believe in which states:
"And thus we can plainly discern, that after a people have been once enlightened by the Spirit of God, and have had great knowledge of things pertaining to righteousness, and then have fallen away into sin and transgression, they become more hardened, and thus their state becomes worse than though they had never known these things."

If this principle is taught in the Bible, then it isn't given much attention by people.