From: epowers@mccoy (POWERS,  ERIK  LEE )
Subject: Re: Easter whodunnit
Organization: New Mexico State University
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 20:23:49 GMT

In article <1ipt02INNcti@wupost.wustl.edu> oser@fermi.wustl.edu (Scott Oser)  
writes:
> 	Let's assume for the moment that Jesus did not rise from the dead.
> One possible and often repeated explanation of the subsequent events is that
> graverobbers took the body, resulting in an empty tomb.  (Calm down, theists.
> If you don't want to assume these things, you don't have to play.)
> 	If this is what actually happened, then let's play Sherlock and try
> to see whodunnit?  I've come up with four possibilities:
> 
> 1) Ordinary graverobbers.  Perhaps ordinary graverobbers, unconnected to
> Jesus or his disciples, took the body to sell to medical students or whatever
> they did with robbed corpses.  This theory has the advantage that it allows
> Jesus' disciples to honestly believe that he may have risen.  After all, the
> body had mysteriously disappeared, and their upset emotional state as well
> as certain things Jesus might have said could have led them to believe that
> he rose from the dead.

		  The two major problems I see here are that there does not seem to be any  
reason for them to take the body.  There is no indication that any valuables  
were on the body.  The only possible value would have been in any expensive  
perfumes or oils or whatever used to prepare the body (an ancient conspiracy of  
poor morticians?)...but then why leave the wrapping behind, which would have  
contained most of these materials?  The only value other than that would be in  
the hoax itself, which you address later.  The other major problem is the  
presence of the guards.  Failure to carry out guard duty had serious  
consequences, death for those in the Roman military, so it seems unlikely the  
guards would allow anyone to waltz off with the body, at least without a hefty  
bribe and an attempt to conceal the robbery, which they obviously did not do,  
since several people found the tomb open.


> 
> 2) Jesus' disciples.  Perhaps some or all of Jesus' disciples decided to take
> the body, hoping to somehow continue the movement through a farce.  This
> theory has the advantage that there is clearly motive for them to do so.
> A big disadvantage is that we have no record of anyone ever confessing to
> the deed, even when the disciples were being persecuted and executed.  I 
> find it hard to believe that anyone would allow themselves to be killed for
> the sake of a known lie.

			This also has the disadvantage that it doesn't deal with the presence of the  
guards.

> 
> 3) Jesus' family.  The NT tells us that Jesus' family was opposed to his
> mission during his lifetime, and specifically that his brother James joined
> the church only after the resurrection.  Perhaps James and/or other family
> members decided to take the body themselves, and use the resurrection to
> take control of Jesus' movement themselves.  This theory has the advantage
> that since James was not a follower of Jesus, it is more credible that he
> would accept perpetrating such a farce than would the disciples, who
> seemingly believed in Jesus.  Also, James WAS able to gain leadership of the
> early Church.  It is also easier to keep secrets within the family.

			I'm still curious about the guards.

> 
> 4) Jesus himself.  Mindblowing, huh?  The scenario goes like this:  Jesus,
> knowing he would be killed, hires accomplices to steal the body and to later
> claim they saw him resurrected, the idea being to give the disciples a reason
> to continue to proclaim the kingdom of God.  Perhaps these accomplices  
included
> the man some of the disciples met on the road, telling them of Jesus'
> rising.  These men would not likely later be part of the movement, and so
> could have easily kept their mouths shut.

			I don't know how easily they could keep their mouths shut.  I'd sure want to  
brag if I pulled off something THAT big.  This would, however, explain some of  
the seemingly crazy stuff Jesus said, like "I am the resurrection and the life"  
or "Apart from me you can do nothing" and "Do not resist an evil person".   
Anyone crazy enough to hire people to steal his body and not bother trying to  
escape with his life could say stuff like that.  However, this still doesn't  
account for the guards.

> 
> Out of these possibilities, I kind of lean towards number 3.  Given that
> Jesus did not miraculously appear to his brother James, I find the premise
> that James was in on it to be the best explanation of his sudden "conversion"
> to the teachings he was so lukewarm to before.  All of these scenarios
> except number 2 assume that Jesus' disciples, shaken by his death and a
> superstitious lot anyway, could easily be convinced that he had risen.
> I find this reasonable.  For an analogous case, consider that John the
> Baptist's disciples believed that he had risen, even though as far as I
> know neither atheists nor Christians believe this.
> 	Any thoughts or theories?  And please don't write telling me I'm
> full of shit and that Jesus is Lord(tm) or whatever.  If you can't at
> least for the sake of argument assume my premises, have the courtesy to
> just ignore the thread.  Thanks.

			This is too much fun!  Keep it up!

> 
> -Scott O.


																																								Erik Powers
Newsgroups: alt.atheism