DEBUNKING THE CONSPIRACY THEORY

[Randy Carson]

Many people believe that the Apostles knew that Jesus had not really risen from the dead and that they fabricated the accounts of his resurrection. Known as the Conspiracy Theory, this claim, if true, would mean that the Apostles engaged in a secret plan to preach publicly that Jesus had risen from the dead while knowing privately that his resurrection had never happened...

We have looked at the five factors that contribute to the success of a conspiracy, and we have seen that while it is possible that a group could successfully conspire to preach falsely that Jesus had been raised from the dead., the fact that none of the five factors seems to apply the Apostles suggests that it would be highly unlikely that the group would be able to take a secret of such great magnitude to their graves. That they did just that indicates that it is more probable than not that the Apostles were telling the truth concerning the appearances of the risen Jesus.

Randy, the 'conspiracy theory' argument is one that is pretty infrequently employed by those trying to refute 'resurrection' claims as there are a few more elegant, parsimonious explanations out there that carry more weight:

1. Jesus didn't exist
2. none of the biblical account is true
3. Jesus wasn't really dead

Since you singled out this argument, I'd counter:

1. that a dozen or so people is a small enough number to be consistent with maintaining a conspiracy (as described in your rules); remember that the audience was a credulous, ill-educated, superstitious population, living in a time when word-of-mouth was considered a reliable way for information to be cascaded and little was written. You claimed that there could be >500 co-conspirators but your only source for that is the bible and since the biblical accounts can't be trusted, we don't know how many conspirators there might have been. Maybe the Apostles themselves never existed..?

2. the length of time for which a conspiracy theory needs to be maintained is dependent on how long it takes for it to be generally accepted and on the effectiveness of the investigative tools which might uncover the it. I'd suggest that due to my outline in point 1, the amount of time would be pretty short.

3. Communication between conspirators is only needed if the story changes or if the the conspirators are subject to the same investigation by a single authority. Since there was plenty of time for the Apostles to get their story straight (assuming they existed as described by the bible, that is...) and the group was never under scrutiny, only individuals, no communication was needed at all. Even if one of the conspirators were to break under questioning, all the others would need to do is to claim of the authorities "Well, they would say that, wouldn't they...".

4. Familial connections are secondary to the group-investment in the conspiracy: if there's much to be lost as a result of the conspiracy coming to light, so the conspirators will be more likely to maintain the conspiracy. Also, much research has been done in to the bonds created during a variety of religious indoctrination methods where familial bonds are completely replaced. In fact, didn't Jesus teach that his followers should love god (sic. him) more than they should love their families?

5. The information we have regarding the amount of pressure under which the Apostles came originates from the bible. Since the bible can't be trusted as an accurate source...

So, your alternatives are:

1. Mythicism (which atheist scholar Bart Ehrman flatly rejects as laughable);
2. Biblical error (which he also generally rejects);
3. The Swoon Theory (which is weaker than the Conspiracy Theory).

If you take the time to read Ehrman's book, Did Jesus Exist?, you will learn that while Ehrman (and others) reject the supernatural resurrection of Jesus, two things they do NOT reject are the existence of Jesus and the historical value of six gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Thomas, Peter).