Alternate Theories of the Resurrection

When conducting any experiment, researchers work with different hypotheses. They may have an idea or two, based on theoretical knowledge, about how a particular phenomenon will behave even before conducting the experiment. However, after conducting the experiment, if they find a different behavior, then they change their default hypothesis to adopt the new observed behavior.

When it comes to the events following the death of Jesus, the commonly accepted understanding is that He rose again from the dead. This understanding is supported by many facts (see here) and the best explanation of these facts is the bodily resurrection of Jesus. However, can there be other explanations for these facts that could be equally viable or supersede the resurrection hypothesis? If yes, should we still believe in the resurrection?

So, let’s look at some of these alternate theories and their explanatory power.

Jesus did not really die

There would be no resurrection if there was no death. Two theories are proposed that align with this argument.

It was not Jesus but someone else that was crucified. This is a common argument from followers of Islam. However, this is a very minority position among those who have studied the life of Jesus. Even critics (atheists & agnostics) have concluded that if there is anything that we can know of Jesus, it is that He lived and that He was crucified on the cross.
Jesus was still alive when He was taken down from the cross. This is commonly known as the Swoon Theory. Firstly, the Roman crucifixion was so brutal that there is no evidence of anyone surviving it. This was the conclusion reached by Martin Hengle after he studied the Roman crucifixions. Secondly, even if Jesus survived it, it is not plausible that He moved the heavy tombstone with His wounded hands and walked to meet His disciples with His pierced feet. Moreover, His disciples upon seeing a wounded Jesus would not have concluded that He rose from the dead. And, what about the appearance to Paul, who was a persecutor of the church. There was no reason for him to testify that He saw the “glorious” Jesus.

The theory that Jesus did not die on the cross is a non-starter and cannot be considered to explain away the resurrection.

The accounts cannot be trusted

Many arguments are put forward in this category.

The events took place too long ago and we cannot be certain of them. It is very dubious to take this position since the logical conclusion of this approach will question every event that took place in antiquity. Can we know if Alexander, the Great, conquered the world? Can we trust that Julius Caesar crossed the Rubicon? What about the details of various Pharaohs in Egyptian history? Anyone holding to this objection would have to be honest and reject all events and details relating to antiquity, not just the resurrection. It would be a position denying well attested historical events and could even be compared to a modern-day flat-earther.
The records were falsified by later Christians.Various manuscripts have been uncovered that date as far back as the 2nd Century AD. There are over 5,800 Greek manuscripts and when manuscripts from other languages (Latin, Coptic, Syriac, Armenian, etc.) are counted, they number in the tens of thousands. There is no other ancient text that comes even close to having these many copies. With these many copies, it is easy to know when changes were made and revert back to the original. It is unlike the Quran whose various manuscripts were burned by Uthman to maintain one version.
The accounts were embellished with nonfactual information. The accounts associated with the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus were written as early as 52-55AD. This period is within the lifetime of those who were eyewitnesses to everything Jesus said and did. The creed in 1 Cor 15:3-8 predates the Apostle Paul and is dated within a handful of years after Jesus’ death. If there were any embellishments, these would have been easily pointed out by skeptics. However, skeptics such as James and persecutors such as Paul, in fact, agreed with these accounts and were also converted.

Moreover, there is no evidence that the testimonies of Jesus’ disciples changed over time. From beginning till the end of their lives, they proclaimed that Jesus had risen from the dead.

None of the objections raised in this category seem valid to negate the resurrection of Jesus as the most plausible explanation of the facts.

Jesus’ Body was Stolen

It could be that the disciples stole the body and propagated the story that Jesus rose from the dead. Another version of this theory is to propose that someone other than the disciples stole the body. Both versions claim that the resurrection did not occur; rather His body was stolen and made to appear that the tomb was empty to support the resurrection.

Both these versions are problematic. First, most of the disciples were persecuted and even put to death because of their testimony of Jesus as the only true God. They concluded this because they claimed and truly believed that they saw the risen Jesus. People do not die for something they know is a lie. This does not prove the resurrection is true but only that they were not intentionally lying. Deceived? Maybe (see below). Liars? No!

Second, a mere propaganda does not explain the conversion of James, a skeptic, and Paul, a persecutor of Christians. The natural reaction from these skeptics would have been to suspect fraud. But the fact that they claimed to have seen the risen Jesus does not support the stolen-body theory.

Moreover, the tomb was not abandoned after Jesus’ burial but an official guard was placed to ensure that Jesus’ body could not be stolen. It is not plausible that this guard, consisting of a troop of soldiers, was overthrown and the body stolen.

The stolen body theory, if true, can only explain the empty tomb. However, it cannot explain the appearances (1 Cor 15:3-8) and the testimony of the skeptics.

They looked in the wrong place

The women who followed Jesus closely during His ministry were the ones who went to His tomb first to finish the burial preparations. However, they found that the heavy tombstone was rolled away and there was no body of Jesus; the tomb was empty. The empty tomb is a key fact to support Jesus’ resurrection. But, what if the women went to the wrong tomb while Jesus’ body was in His original tomb? This could mean that Jesus was still dead and there was no resurrection.

There are many problems with this argument. The disciples were preaching the resurrection in Jerusalem where Jesus was crucified and buried. If Jesus’ body was still in the tomb, then the simplest thing to do would have been to produce Jesus’ body from the right tomb. However, this did not happen since Jesus’ body was not found. Moreover, the appearances do not make sense if Jesus’ body was still buried in a tomb.

Therefore, this theory is not valid either.

The Disciples were honestly mistaken

In this theory, the main explanation for the appearances is attributed to hallucinations, delusions, and visions. Could it be that the disciples were so distressed that they started hallucinating and saw visions of Jesus? This is not an uncommon phenomenon. People who have lost their loved ones sometimes claim that they had visions of the deceased. However, is this what happened to the disciples?

It is important to understand that a hallucination is a false perception of something that is not there while a delusion is a false belief in spite of evidence to the contrary.

We have already seen that the disciples truly believed that Jesus rose from the dead. This was not in spite of evidence to the contrary rather because of evidence in favor of it. The empty tomb was sufficient evidence for them to believe this. Therefore, it is safe to say that the disciples were not deluded and also, they did not die for something they knew was a lie.

When it comes to hallucinations, they are not something that are shared between 2 or more people. Just as a dream is very individualistic, hallucinations are also individualistic. In the many accounts of hallucinations, there is no instance where one person has participated in another person’s hallucination. The account in 1 Cor 15:5-6 describes that multiple people saw Jesus at the same time – first all the Apostles and then 500 people at the same time. Clearly, not everyone was having the same hallucination at the same time.

Moreover, why would Paul, the persecutor of the Christians, hallucinate about the Jesus he was trying to destroy as risen from the dead? And why would James, Jesus’ brother who thought He had lost His senses (Mark 3:21) hallucinate that Jesus rose from the dead? Also, hallucinations do not explain the empty tomb.

Conclusion

We have explored many alternate theories and found that none of them have the same explanatory power as the resurrection hypothesis. In light of this, there is no reason to abandon the resurrection. In fact, there is a greater reason to believe in the resurrection; something greater than logic – God’s Word.

Paul says in 1 Cor 15:3-4 that Jesus died, was buried, and rose again from the dead “in accordance to the Scriptures.” This was predicted and prophesied ever since Adam and Eve ate from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil (see here & Is 53:1-12). God fulfilled His word, and likewise, Jesus rose from the dead as He prophesied He would (Mark 8:31). This was God’s plan all along and there was no Plan B for the salvation of humans.

Paul, the one who was persecuting those who believed in Jesus, said that if you confess with your mouth Jesus as Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved (Rom 10:9).

The resurrection is a historical fact and Jesus truly rose from the dead. In light of all this evidence, where do you stand?

Alternate Theories of the Resurrection

Further Reading