Before anyone says "but what about the empty tomb," post #47 here shows that the empty tomb story in the gospels fits the established literary trope of the "miraculous missing body" which was common in fictional literature and so the story by itself is not sufficient to serve as evidence for its own historicity. There is no evidence of the story until Mark's gospel which most scholars date around 70 CE and due to it fitting the literary theme so well, it is equally likely explained as being entirely fictional.
Now onto the plausible sequence of events that explain the origin of the Resurrection belief, henceforth the Naturalistic Hypothesis (NH):
Step 1: The tradition found in 4Q521 tells us the time of the Messiah will coincide with "wondrous deeds," one of which was raising the dead. So this establishes a connection (in some form or another) of the Messiah with the end times Resurrection. This tradition actually ends up being quoted in Lk. 7:22 and Mt. 11:2-5 so we know the Jesus sect had this expectation. https://jamestabor.com/a-cosmic-messiah ... lls-4q521/
Step 2: Jesus was a Messianic figure who preached and predicted the Resurrection according to the gospels*. This shows that the idea would have been implanted in his followers minds and influenced their beliefs.
Step 3: Both Jesus and his followers believed they were living in the end of times which is exactly when the Resurrection was thought to take place. This is supported by the gospels themselves, Paul's letters and other apocalyptic literature that we can compare the gospels to.
Step 4: Jesus was suddenly executed.
Step 5: Cognitive dissonance takes care of the problem "but the Messiah wasn't supposed to die." This phenomenon has been empirically observed in other religious groups when their expectations are falsified.** All Christianity needed was a little bit of theological innovation, a biased reading of the Old Testament looking for an answer and voila! It was "foretold" all along - 1 Cor 15:3-4, Rom. 16:25-26! Thus, we can now see how the Jesus sect applied their already anticipated belief in the Resurrection to Jesus and he became the "firstfruits" of it - 1 Cor 15:20.
Step 6: Soon some of his followers claimed to have visions or spiritual experiences of Jesus which is supported by the fact that Paul calls his experience a "revelation" (Gal. 1:16) and a "vision from heaven" (Acts 26:19) which he does not distinguish in nature from the "appearances" to the others in 1 Cor 15:5-8. This provides a proof that physical experiences on earth with a resurrected body were not required in order to believe a person had been resurrected. This link downloads the paper Visionary Experience and the Historical Origins of Christianity by H.J. De Jonge - https://scholarlypublications.universit ... 31993/view
Steps 5 and 6 may be interchangeable. If the imminent anticipation of the end times Resurrection was already part of Jesus and his followers background beliefs then it's no wonder some came to the belief Jesus had been resurrected just a "tad bit early." It's straightforward logic - expecting the Resurrection to occur any day now -> Jesus was preaching the Resurrection -> Jesus suddenly dies -> Jesus must have been resurrected!
There are many other examples where religious/apocalyptic groups have their expectations falsified but then somehow reinterpret the events and update their beliefs in order keep on believing. See Festinger's book "When Prophecy Fails" as well as the origin of the Seventh Day Adventists (The Millerites), Sabbatai Sevi, and the Lubavitch. https://www.westarinstitute.org/resourc ... ion-jesus/
*The most reasonable treatment is probably Dale's Allison's on pages 196-201 of The Resurrection of Jesus: Apologetics, Polemics, History. While Allison does not think the predictions were as explicit as the gospels depict, he still thinks they would have influenced the disciples thought process.
** "Cognitive dissonance theory is one of many social science theories that have been used as heuristic tools for understanding human values and behaviors in the ancient world. Since the 1970s, biblical scholars have used a wide variety of models from the social sciences to illuminate early Christianity." - David Aune, Jesus, Gospel Tradition and Paul in the Context of Jewish and Greco-Roman Antiquity p. 149"The passion predictions had their origin, in my view, in prophecies about the final affliction and eschatological salvation, about the messianic woes and the general resurrection." - p. 198
"if Jesus believed that the kingdom of God in its fullness was near, then he believed that the general resurrection of the dead was near. The one belief entailed the other, as in Daniel 7"12 and 1 Thessalonians." - p. 199
Now let's see how well the naturalistic hypothesis satisfies these six historical criteria:
1. Explanatory Scope
- Jesus' Death: This is the starting point and the catalyst for the subsequent events.
- Disciples' Belief: A combination of pre-existing eschatological beliefs, the severe cognitive dissonance caused by the execution of their hoped-for Messiah, and visionary experiences led to their new, powerful conviction.
- Conversion of Skeptics: James and Paul were part of the same cultural and religious milieu. They were not immune to the same psychological and sociological forces, including the possibility of having their own powerful visionary experiences.
- Early Proclamation: The creed in 1 Corinthians 15 is the result of this process of theological innovation under the pressure of cognitive dissonance. It represents the finalized, rationalized belief system created to resolve the crisis of the crucifixion.
The naturalistic hypothesis has greater explanatory power because it explains the origin and specific character of the belief. It doesn't just say "the disciples believed because they saw Jesus," but details a plausible psychological and historical process:
- The Content of the Belief: The pre-existing Jewish expectation that the Messiah would be associated with the resurrection of the dead provided the raw material for their new belief. A Dead Sea Scrolls fragment, 4Q521, establishes a pre-Christian link between the Messiah and raising the dead and even ends up in the gospels - Lk. 7:22 and Mt. 11:2-5.
- The Motive for Belief: Cognitive dissonance theory explains the immense psychological pressure on the disciples to resolve the contradiction between their belief in Jesus as the Messiah and his shameful execution. Reinterpreting the crucifixion as a prophesied sacrifice and the resurrection as his vindication was a powerful solution.
- The "Proof" for Belief: Visionary experiences, which Paul himself describes his experience as (Gal. 1:16, Acts 26:19), provided the subjective confirmation. As scholar H.J. De Jonge argues, the early belief in the resurrection was based on visionary experiences, which presuppose, rather than cause, faith in his resurrection. The belief that God vindicates the righteous who suffer gave rise to the conviction, which was then confirmed by visions.
It is more plausible from the standpoint of historical methodology because it relies on known and observable phenomena. It fits squarely within the historical context of Second Temple apocalyptic Judaism and utilizes documented psychological principles. The history of messianic and apocalyptic movements, such as those of the Millerites and Sabbatai Sevi, shows that followers often reinterpret failed prophecies in extraordinary ways to preserve their core faith. The case of the Lubavitch movement in the 1990s is particularly striking, as a large number of followers came to believe their deceased leader would be resurrected as the Messiah, demonstrating that such a belief can arise without a supernatural event.
4. Is Not Ad Hoc or Contrived
Proponents of the NH would argue that the Resurrection Hypothesis is profoundly ad hoc. It requires not just the existence of God, but a specific kind of God who intervenes in this unique way at this specific moment. The NH, in contrast, is not built on new hypotheses invented for this case. It applies existing, independently studied models - cognitive dissonance, visionary experiences, and the history of religious movements - to the known facts. These are tools used by historians and social scientists in many other contexts.
5. In Accord with Accepted Beliefs
The NH is in perfect accord with the accepted belief that people do not rise from the dead. It explains the origin of the belief in a resurrection without requiring an exception to this widely accepted principle. It provides a natural explanation for an extraordinary claim, which is the standard goal of historical inquiry.
6. It Far Outstrips Any Rival Theories
The NH provides a comprehensive and causally connected sequence of events that is more plausible, less ad hoc, and more in line with accepted historical and psychological principles than a hypothesis requiring a supernatural, and therefore historically unverifiable, event.
