Why I believe Jesus lives

• Messages sorted by:[ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]

In a previous article about the authenticity of Scripture, I hinted
that I would write about why I believe Jesus lives.  The article I
grabbed from soc.religion.christian is along the lines of how I came
from being an atheist to believing that Jesus Christ did indeed rise
from the dead.

Here's the theory:  a group of guys follow the Messiah Jesus.  Against
the expectations of the disciples, Jesus dies.  The disciples are
majorly bummed, run off, deny knowing Jesus, go back to fishing.

Suddenly, a few months later, these same disheartend disciples are
before the Sanhedrin, boldly proclaiming Jesus.  What happened in the
interim?

The gospels, of course, tells what happened in the interim: Christ rose
from the grave!  A while later, he ascended to heaven, then the 120
were filled with the Holy Ghost and the rest, like they say, is
history.

A hypothesis proposed by one Bishop Spong and others is that the
resurrection never actually happened, but that the Messianic
expecations of Peter and the rest were so strong that they believed
Jesus did resurrect and ascend.  The atheist in me considered this in
my pre-belief days, but even then I thought this "mass hypnosis"
hypothesis far-fetched.  I present for you consideration further
evidence that "Spong's Argument" is incorrect.

Richard M.
----

Forwarded from s.r.christian with permission
>From: mjb10@po.CWRU.Edu (Michael J. Bumbulis)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Messiahs Who Stay Dead
Date: 1 Aug 1996 23:10:15 -0400
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA)
Lines: 156
Message-ID: <4trrin$bub@heidelberg.rutgers.edu>
Reply-To: mjb10@po.CWRU.Edu (Michael J. Bumbulis)

Messiahs Who Stay Dead


How do we account for the early Christians' belief in the resurrection 
of Jesus?  Christians account for it by noting that the belief simply 
reflected reality.  That is, Jesus rose from the dead, was seen by his 
followers, and thus the belief about Jesus' resurrection was born.  The 
skeptic, on the other hand, denies the truth of Jesus' resurrection.  In 
doing so, he/she still must account for the existence of the early belief 
in Jesus' resurrection.  How is this accomplished?  Typically, the 
skeptic offers an explanation that involves the emotional state of 
Jesus' followers coupled with the development of a new perspective 
that redefined the death of Jesus.  For example, Bishop Spong argues 
that Peter suffered great anguish because of Jesus' death.  But after a 
few months, Peter began to interpret the Hebrew Scriptures in a way 
that turned Jesus' death into a victory.  He began to believe that Jesus 
had ascended to the Father.  This ascension belief then evolved into a 
resurrection belief, which in turn, evolved into a bodily resurrection 
belief.

Of course, there are many holes in this explanation.  But instead of 
going through all of them, I would rather focus on one particular 
problem that doesn't receive much attention.

One of the features of Spong's argument [1] is that it need not be 
particular to Jesus.  That is, if the argument has a basis in reality, we 
would expect that this type of dynamic would not be uncommon when 
dealing with religious figures who die a sudden death and leave 
distraught followers behind.  Put simply, the sudden death of Messiah-
figures should give rise to resurrection beliefs among the Messiah's 
followers shortly after his death.  Let's test this hypothesis to see if 
the argument functions well in explaining our reality:


Case #1 - Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneerson.

Schneerson is credited with the building the Lubavitch Hasidic 
movement [2].  Within this religious community, many of Schneerson's 
followers thought he was the Messiah [3].  In fact, in 1993, many 
Hasidic Lubavitcher Jews in Crown Heights Brooklyn NY were carrying 
"Messiah beepers" to alert them should Schneerson be transformed into 
the Messiah [4].  But in 1994, Schneerson suffered a stroke and three 
months later, he died [5].  The New York Times reported that within a 
few hours of his death, thousands of his followers gathered into the 
streets to mourn.  He was buried the next day.  In the days that 
followed, we read about the grief among Schneerson's followers.  The 
Washington Post ran a story entitled, "Schneerson's followers cope 
with void of failed expectations." [6]  USA Today reports, "Followers 
await resurrection." [7]  

If Spong's argument had validity, it would predict that we should have 
read stories, a few weeks or months later, about Schneerson followers 
who claimed to have seen the Risen Rabbi.  But there are no such 
reports.  It's been more than two years since Schneerson's death, and 
not a single report of a resurrection.  

Why is this?  If Spong's argument had validity, we should expect such 
resurrection reports.  After all, if the press had been around when 
Jesus died, wouldn't we have seen stories entitled, "Jesus' followers 
cope with void of failed expectations?"  

Associated with Schneerson seems to be all the ingredients proposed 
by Spong to be sufficient for generating belief in a resurrection.  We 
have an apocalyptic religious community that dearly loves its Messiah 
and expects him to be revealed at any moment.  He then meets with a 
sudden tragic fate - the stroke.  Three months later, he dies suddenly.  
The community is gripped with sorrow.  His death even splits the 
community.  Many then anticipate his resurrection.  Surely, the Hebrew 
Scriptures have been consulted to interpret the meaning of this death.

Everything is there.  But no belief in Schneerson's resurrection has ever 
surfaced.  


Case #2 - David Koresh

David Koresh was also considered to be the Messiah.  He also had a 
close-knit following, preached an apocalyptic message, and met with a 
sudden death.  In 1993, Koresh died as part of the siege in Waco.

After his death, the papers again report of the anticipation of Koresh's 
resurrection by his remaining followers.  The Houston Post wrote 
articles entitled, "Branch Davidians will await for the return of 
messiah Koresh" [8] and also reports on a woman, a follower of Koresh, 
who is waiting patiently for Koresh to rise from the dead [9].

But again, it's been almost four years since Koresh died, and not one 
word about Branch Davidians believing Koresh rose from the dead.

Once again, Spong's argument fails the test.  All the ingredients deemed 
sufficient for a resurrection belief are there.  We have a deeply 
religious community who sincerely thought Koresh to be the Messiah.  
Koresh meets with a tragic and sudden death.  In fact, this time a 
parallel with Jesus would be seen - Koresh was "executed" by the pagan 
authorities.  Koresh's followers then suffer great sorrow and await his 
resurrection.  But again, not a word about the resurrection of David 
Koresh.  Surely, the Bible must have been consulted to interpret the 
meaning of this death.

There is also one aspect of the Branch Davidians that cannot be said 
about the early Christians; the Branch Davidians had been shaped by the 
belief in resurrections.  They knew all too well about Jesus' 
resurrection.  Thus, they already possessed a motif upon which to 
interpret Koresh's death.  With the early Christians, we have no reason 
to think they expected Jesus to rise from the dead.


Summary

Spong's argument attempts to explain the belief in Jesus' resurrection 
by appealing to factors that have nothing to do with the actuality of 
such a resurrection.  Yet, if this argument has any explanatory power, it 
should also apply to other Messiah-figures in similar settings.  I have 
offered two recent examples that qualify.  Spong's argument would 
predict that the death of Schneerson and Koresh should have generated 
belief in the resurrection of these men, believed to be the Messiah.  But 
years later, no such belief exists.  At this point, the believer in Spong's 
argument can either attempt to prop it up with ad hoc considerations, 
or recognize that it fails in adequately accounting for the origin of a 
resurrection belief.  

While the believer in Spong's argument would be forced to engage in all 
sorts of mental gymnastics to maintain the argument in light of its 
failures, the Christian has an easy explanation for the lack of 
resurrection beliefs as they pertain to Koresh and Schneerson - they 
didn't rise from the dead and appear to their followers.  


1.  Bishop Spong is actually popularizing a type of argument that is 
well-known among biblical scholars.  Thus, I refer this argument as 
"Spong's argument" for matters of convenience.

2.  New York Times, 6/13/94

3.  New York Times, 3/11/94

4.  New York Times, 1/3/93

5.  New York Times, 3/24/94

6.  6/19/94

7.  6/13/94

8.  Houston Post, 3/21/93

9.  Houston Post, 6/17/93