The discussion considers reports attributed to Jesus’ disciples and the possibility of mistaken inference where the full facts of an event were not known. This is fundamentally a question about evaluating testimony.
Three stages assist historical assessment: identify to whom an account is attributed, distinguish what the reporter witnessed from what was heard from others, and compare the report with other relevant evidence.
The suggested possibility belongs to this particular interpretive argument. It does not support an unrestricted judgment about every disciple’s knowledge, honesty or transmission. The objective is to understand the limits of what a given report can establish.