[Jikanu]

And like I said, I still don't see how a dramatic shift in opinion changes anything, especially in regards to the reality of whether or not anyone was a deity.





What was the reasonable explanation?


I beg to disagree. Hah.





That's 3 options.


Why would it necessarily be correct? You discount the option of ''He had some kind of reason for believing he was the messiah, and was incorrect''





All based on assumptions and things that are impossible to verify one way or another. Yes, some were fishermen, some were certainly middle-aged but the rest is pure conjecture.

1. The majority were middleaged people of the Lower-Middle Class. A few of the Upperclassmen too.

2. The explaination it had relies on there being a deity present, so it'll be shotdown automatically, im sure, but it was that God hardened their hearts so that the act could be fufilled and sin could be overcome. but that's the only explaination that really makes much sense. in a matter of a week, you dont go from believing everything someone says to calling them a dirty liar without feesible evidence. The only crime they had against him was that he claimed to be the Messiah. People in the city had just a few days or weeks before also believed that. they just suddenly began agreeing with the opposite side, though. please explain how people go from thinking you're litterally God to thinking you're a blasphemer in days without feesible evidence.

3. Sorry, i made an error there. It doesnt make my argument any less week.

And he was a religious man. Most people back then were too. He would make sure to considerably weigh his evidence before going out and putting the souls of his self and others at risk.