What historical hypotheses exist to explain the aftermath of the crucifixion of Jesus of Nazareth?

by [deleted]

Assuming, of course, that Jesus didn't die and then come back to life. I'm not from /r/athiesm, I"m just curious.

talondearg

I'll refrain from commentary on these hypotheses and lay out for you a number of proposed alternatives.

  • Swoon theory. Jesus fainted on the cross, was taken down, and on the third day was recovered enough to emerge 'alive'.

  • Substitution theory. Someone else died on the cross, allowing Jesus to appear alive.

Both these two theories are built on the idea that a physical resurrection appeared to occur so you can easily explain how this fake resurrection explains the birth if earliest Christianity.

  • Shared hallucination. The disciples had a shared experience of a risen Jesus which they interpreted collectively as a resurrection. Essentially mass delusion.

  • Deliberate fraud. The disciples deliberately invented the idea of resurrection and used this as the basis for their preaching. Theories of stealing the body of Jesus fall under this category.

  • Literary fraud. Acts and other new testament documents are themselves faked, being later in time and wildly inaccurate. This means you don't need to explain much about the resurrection at all since the whole story is faked.

Hmmm , did I leave any major theories out?

Edit: formatting