Can the resurrection of Christ be explained as a case of mistaken identity?

[Unknown Soldier]

Apologist William Lane Craig finds the notion that the reputedly risen Christ can be explained as a mistaken identity to be absurd. Craig has said that he debated a skeptic who, out of desperation to save face in his debate over the resurrection with Craig, argued that Jesus could have had an identical-twin brother who was mistaken for Jesus after Jesus was executed.

I'm not so sure if the idea of Jesus having an identical twin brother is so absurd. No doubt there are cases in which an identical twin is misidentified as his or her deceased twin, and some people, especially those who are unaware that the deceased twin had an identical twin brother or sister, could think the deceased twin has come back from the dead!

But a case of misidentifying Jesus need not involve a twin or even a sibling. Any man who resembled Jesus may have been mistaken for Jesus. In those days there were no cameras, and exactly what Jesus looked like may have been unknown to most people who had heard of him. Consequently, it would not have been hard for them to believe that the man they were seeing was the risen Christ.

 

[steve_bank]

Religious opportunists and con artists have always been around. Someone could have seized on the moment.

Way back then Romans had the saying cavet emptor or the buyer beware. Confidence schemes were probably as old as prostitution.

 

[Unknown Soldier]

Religious opportunists and con artists have always been around. Someone could have seized on the moment.

Way back then Romans had the saying cavet emptor or the buyer beware. Confidence schemes were probably as old as prostitution.

I agree with what you've posted here, but a case of people misidentifying a living man as the supposedly risen Jesus would not be a deliberate con unless the early Christians intended that man to be mistaken for Jesus. It is very possible that such a case of mistaken identity happened "naturally," and the Christians living then and there never corrected those who thought they were seeing Jesus post-death. Those Christians could have realized the value of people believing their Messiah had been raised from the dead.

So yes, religions are often deliberate scams, but serendipity can also play a role.

 

[skepticalbip]

But then it isn't necessary to invent a look-alike to explain the myth. It is a retelling of resurrection myths that most religions have for their god figures. Egyptians had Osiris, Greeks had Adonis, Romans had Attis, Phoenicians had Melqart, etc, etc. all died and were resurrected. A death and resurrection story of the culture's god was pretty much a requirement of any religion at the time.

 

[DBT]

It may be a case of believing that the 'spirit of Christ' is manifesting in another person, sort of like channeling. So someone appears to be speaking like Christ, that is Christ speaking to them.

 

[steve_bank]

Religious opportunists and con artists have always been around. Someone could have seized on the moment.

Way back then Romans had the saying cavet emptor or the buyer beware. Confidence schemes were probably as old as prostitution.

I agree with what you've posted here, but a case of people misidentifying a living man as the supposedly risen Jesus would not be a deliberate con unless the early Christians intended that man to be mistaken for Jesus. It is very possible that such a case of mistaken identity happened "naturally," and the Christians living then and there never corrected those who thought they were seeing Jesus post-death. Those Christians could have realized the value of people believing their Messiah had been raised from the dead.

So yes, religions are often deliberate scams, but serendipity can also play a role.

I can't take the tales of Jesus literally. The gospels are more promotional literature of the day. Embellished to attract converts.

Eveen in our socalled educated enlightened times we can see how fats transform into fasehoods.

In the time of Jesus all it would take would be one person saying he observed a resurrected Jesus. Or somebody claiming to be Jesus. The next person embellishes the telling. Eventualy it is doubting Thomas talking to Jesus.

There ere no pictures and no reporters.

 

[Unknown Soldier]

But then it isn't necessary to invent a look-alike to explain the myth. It is a retelling of resurrection myths that most religions have for their god figures. Egyptians had Osiris, Greeks had Adonis, Romans had Attis, Phoenicians had Melqart, etc, etc. all died and were resurrected. A death and resurrection story of the culture's god was pretty much a requirement of any religion at the time.

You are correct, but what I'm trying to demonstrate is that even if we generously consider many of the resurrection story's elements as factual, even then the resurrection cannot be deemed indisputably historical. The resurrection story, in other words, does not require an actual resurrection even if people did in fact sight a man they honestly thought was the risen Jesus. It is more probable that those sightings were cases of mistaken identity than that Jesus really was raised from the dead, a fact William Lane Craig does not concede.

 

[Unknown Soldier]

It may be a case of believing that the 'spirit of Christ' is manifesting in another person, sort of like channeling. So someone appears to be speaking like Christ, that is Christ speaking to them.

Yes, I suppose that's a possibility if you don't take "witnessing" as sightings only and if you don't insist that Jesus was raised bodily. Rumors of people hearing Jesus could have evolved into rumors of his rising from the dead. After all, we know that people sometimes say they can hear dead loved ones speaking to them.

 

[Elixir]

WLC is on very soft ground calling ANY notion absurd.
Resurrection can definitely be explained by mistaken identity, aliens, ye olde majicke, or good old fashioned making stuff up.
That doesn’t make any of those things any more or less likely than WLC’s fav fantasy.

 

[Thomas II]

Apologist William Lane Craig finds the notion that the reputedly risen Christ can be explained as a mistaken identity to be absurd. Craig has said that he debated a skeptic who, out of desperation to save face in his debate over the resurrection with Craig, argued that Jesus could have had an identical-twin brother who was mistaken for Jesus after Jesus was executed.

I'm not so sure if the idea of Jesus having an identical twin brother is so absurd. No doubt there are cases in which an identical twin is misidentified as his or her deceased twin, and some people, especially those who are unaware that the deceased twin had an identical twin brother or sister, could think the deceased twin has come back from the dead!

But a case of misidentifying Jesus need not involve a twin or even a sibling. Any man who resembled Jesus may have been mistaken for Jesus. In those days there were no cameras, and exactly what Jesus looked like may have been unknown to most people who had heard of him. Consequently, it would not have been hard for them to believe that the man they were seeing was the risen Christ.

The Gospel of Thomas begins by saying: “These are the hidden words that the living Jesus spoke. And Didymus Judas Thomas wrote them down.” Maybe Jesus had a twin, or an apostle who looked like Jesus' twin...

 

[steve_bank]

Or there was more than one Jesus. Nobody knows the real name and identity of te real Jesus. The tag Jesus is an assignment by later writers.

I see possibly multiple persons in the gospels. It could have been a movement.

And Thomas saying he wrote down the words of Jesus could just be fabrication to present his own self serving version of events. You have to include human nature and self interest as things evolved.

 

[Politesse]

Can the resurrection of Christ be explained as a case of mistaken identity?

Of course it can.

I betcha a person's faith identity is even a reliable predictor of how plausible they find such a scenario. It's not just atheists, their Muslim and Gnostic friends are likely to find such an argument similarly compelling to "at least consider".

 

[LoAmmo]

I think we should compile two stacks of empirical evidence--one pile for identical twins being a real thing, and one for dead people coming back to life being a real thing--and after examining those two piles, we decide what's "absurd" and what isn't.

 

[skepticalbip]

I think we should compile two stacks of empirical evidence--one pile for identical twins being a real thing, and one for dead people coming back to life being a real thing--and after examining those two piles, we decide what's "absurd" and what isn't.

You need at least one more pile, a pile of evidence that the whole story was just invented out of whole cloth to attract converts that believe a god worthy of worship had to die and be resurrected... like all the religions of neighboring areas had.

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

People have told me they have seen Elvis performing on stage. Should we start composing the Gospel of Elvis?

 

[blastula]

Apologist William Lane Craig finds the notion that the reputedly risen Christ can be explained as a mistaken identity to be absurd.

Then Craig has drunk his own koolaid. Of course it's possible and far more likely than someone dead for days coming back to life. So is a case of a twin brother or even triplets. So is a deliberate hoax.

And in fact the gospel story of the Road to Emmaus even hints at mistaken identity, since it says the two followers were walking and talking with someone for some time and not recognizing him as Jesus until just before he supposedly vanished.

 

[Elixir]

Or there was more than one Jesus. Nobody knows the real name and identity of te real Jesus. The tag Jesus is an assignment by later writers.

I see possibly multiple persons in the gospels.

Hopefully the next Jesus will have an iPhone, and His phone number can be used by citizens of the next millennium to positively identify Him.

 

[steve_bank]

2000 years from now people reading news reports of Elvis sightings may be interpreted as a rien Elvis appearing to the faithful. Therr may even be an Elvis religion with miracles attributed to Elvis.

There was a true and real Elvis, and there were people who dressed like Elvis and claimed to be Elvis.

If the metaphor fits, wear it.

 

[Unknown Soldier]

WLC is on very soft ground calling ANY notion absurd.

LOL What's strange is that Craig doesn't seem to realize it. It's like: "You atheists come up with the most ridiculous ideas. As if some guy could have been mistaken for Jesus after Jesus was buried! Now, allow me to explain that Jesus was raised from his grave..."

Resurrection can definitely be explained by mistaken identity, aliens, ye olde majicke...

Craig argues that an actual resurrection explains the testimonial evidence best which doesn't impress me too much because an actual Bigfoot would explain well those who have sighted him.

...or good old fashioned making stuff up.

Craig and other apologists say it is very unlikely that people would die for the resurrection if they knew they made it up. Craig doesn't bother to say who died for the resurrection and why he knows that they did in fact die for the resurrection. As I see it, if those supposed martyrs had been sensible, then they would have avoided dying for any claim true or false. If they remained alive, then they could have continued to evangelize.

That doesn’t make any of those things any more or less likely than WLC’s fav fantasy.

Yes, and apologists continue to scoff at how unlikely naturalistic explanations for the resurrection are while apparently oblivious to how unlikely any resurrection is. Maybe they're hoping nobody will notice.

 

[skepticalbip]

2000 years from now people reading news reports of Elvis sightings may be interpreted as a rien Elvis appearing to the faithful. Therr may even be an Elvis religion with miracles attributed to Elvis.

There was a true and real Elvis, and there were people who dressed like Elvis and claimed to be Elvis.

If the metaphor fits, wear it.

Now you have me wondering if the Davidians have a sect that worships David Koresh. He was recognized as "the final prophet" by his Branch Davidian group. Maybe they celebrate his birthday as "Koreshmas". I can imagine that in a thousand years they could be a major world religion.