Skip to content

Course 16 · Lesson 7.3

Conspiracy, the swoon theory and the wrong tomb

11 minute read

Lessons in this course

Course 16 outline

Module 1: How Historians Reason

  1. Sources and evidence: primary, secondary, early and late
  2. Criteria of authenticity and their limits
  3. What historical probability means
  4. Where history stops and theology begins

Module 2: Jesus in the Ancient World

  1. The three quests for the historical Jesus
  2. Josephus and the Jewish sources
  3. Tacitus, Pliny and Suetonius on the Christians
  4. What outside sources can and cannot prove

Module 3: The Gospels as Historical Sources

  1. Dating the Gospels
  2. Authorship, anonymity and church tradition
  3. The Synoptic problem and John
  4. Eyewitness testimony, memory and reliability
  5. The Gospels as ancient biography

Module 4: The Death of Jesus

  1. How the Romans practiced crucifixion
  2. The evidence that Jesus died on a cross
  3. Burial and the empty tomb accounts

Module 5: The Earliest Testimony

  1. What the first Christians actually claimed
  2. Paul and the tradition in 1 Corinthians 15
  3. The appearance accounts in the Gospels and Acts
  4. Jewish and Greco-Roman expectations about resurrection

Module 6: Martyrdom and Its Limits

  1. Early persecution and the martyrdom traditions
  2. Late legends and early evidence about the apostles
  3. What martyrdom shows about sincerity and what it does not show about truth

Module 7: Alternative Explanations

  1. Hallucination and visionary experience
  2. Legend and the development of belief
  3. Conspiracy, the swoon theory and the wrong tomb
  4. Comparing explanations by explanatory power

Module 8: Building and Testing a Case

  1. Assembling the evidence into a case
  2. Background beliefs and the question of miracles
  3. Stating the limits of the case honestly

All courses

Program / Course 16: Historical Defense / Lesson 7.3

What you will learn

  • State the theft or conspiracy theory, the swoon theory and the wrong tomb theory.
  • Explain why most scholars today regard each as weak and which objections matter most.
  • Describe the best versions of each theory and what they were meant to explain.
  • Apply the same standards of evidence to these theories as to the resurrection claim.

The big idea

Three older explanations try to account for the empty tomb and the disciples’ belief without a resurrection. Conspiracy theories say that the body was stolen or moved and the disciples or others lied. The swoon theory says that Jesus survived crucifixion. The wrong tomb theory says that the women went to the wrong grave. Each explains something, and each meets serious objections. Most historians, including nonbelievers, now think none of them is the best explanation of the evidence. The reasons for rejecting them are historical and should be understood, not only repeated.

Key terms

Conspiracy (theft) theory
The proposal that the body was removed from the tomb, whether by the disciples, Joseph, or others, and the resurrection claim was made on false pretenses.
Swoon theory
The proposal that Jesus did not die on the cross but lost consciousness, revived in the cool tomb and escaped.
Wrong tomb theory
The proposal that the women, in the dim morning, went to a different tomb and mistook the empty one for Jesus’ grave. Kirsopp Lake put it forward in 1907.
Reimarus
Hermann Samuel Reimarus, an eighteenth century scholar who argued that the disciples stole the body and invented the resurrection.
Ockham’s razor
The principle that, other things being equal, the explanation with fewer assumptions is to be preferred.
Ad hoc explanation
An explanation added only to rescue a theory from an objection, without independent support.

Background

These theories belong to the first centuries of both Christian and anti-Christian debate. Matthew already mentions the rumor that the disciples stole the body (Matthew 28:13), and Justin Martyr and Tertullian answer the same charge. The swoon and wrong tomb ideas came in the Enlightenment and the nineteenth century, when rationalist writers sought natural explanations for the Gospel events.

A good student will not reject a theory only because it is old, or accept it only because it is natural. Each must be tested by the standards used in earlier lessons: fit with the sources, explanatory power and plausibility. This lesson sets out each theory, the evidence for and against it, and the reasons why it has lost most of its supporters.

Step-by-step explanation

Step 1: Theft or removal of the body

The oldest version says that the disciples stole the body and proclaimed him risen. Reimarus held it in the eighteenth century. Another version says that Joseph of Arimathea moved the body from his tomb before the women arrived, or that the Jewish or Roman authorities removed it.

The objections are strong. First, if the disciples knew the body had been stolen, they knew that the resurrection was a lie, and the evidence of their willingness to suffer (Lesson 6.3) counts against such a deliberate fraud. Second, the theory does not explain the appearances. Even if the tomb were empty by theft, the disciples’ reports of seeing Jesus alive remain to be explained, and this requires a further theory such as vision. Third, the authorities who wished to disprove the claim would have produced the body, or said that they had it. Their silence, and the fact that the early reply was a theft claim, suggest that they had no body. Defenders of the theory reply that the authorities may have been unwilling to act, or that the body may have decayed beyond recognition.

Step 2: The swoon theory

The swoon theory was proposed by Karl Venturini and H. E. G. Paulus in the early nineteenth century and revived in popular books such as The Passover Plot (1965) by Hugh Schonfield. It says that Jesus was taken down before he was dead, revived in the tomb and later appeared to the disciples, who believed he had risen.

Its difficulties are medical and historical. A man who had been scourged, nailed to a cross for hours and pierced by a spear would not likely survive, as discussed in Lesson 4.2. Roman executioners were experienced. Even if he had survived, he would have been crippled and in need of care, and would hardly have convinced the disciples that he was the glorious Lord who had conquered death. Strauss made this objection in the nineteenth century. It also cannot explain what became of Jesus afterward. Some more modern movements, such as the Ahmadiyya, hold that Jesus survived the crucifixion and later lived elsewhere, but they base this on their own tradition, not on historical sources.

Step 3: The wrong tomb theory

Kirsopp Lake argued in 1907 that the women, dazed with grief, went to the wrong tomb in the half light, found it empty, and were told by a young man that Jesus was not there, which they took as news of resurrection. Some later writers repeated this.

Objections include these. The women had seen where Jesus was laid (Mark 15:47). Joseph, who owned the tomb, and the authorities knew the place, and could have corrected the error by going to the right tomb. The theory fits the empty tomb at best and does not explain the appearances. It also does not explain how the story survived in Jerusalem within sight of the real tomb. Few scholars hold it today.

Step 4: Why the theories have fallen out of favor

The three theories have common weaknesses. They try to explain the empty tomb and neglect the appearances, which most scholars regard as the stronger evidence, or they require further assumptions that are not supported by the sources. They also depend on events for which there is no independent evidence. No ancient text says the disciples were caught in a fraud, or that Jesus survived. Critics call such additions ad hoc.

Many skeptical historians have also given up these theories. Those who reject the resurrection today generally prefer the vision or legend theories, which treat the disciples as sincere and the tomb story as secondary.

Step 5: Fairness in the use of these theories

Defenders of the resurrection sometimes write as if refuting these theories settles the case. It does not, because other explanations remain. Skeptics sometimes write as if any natural explanation is better than a miracle. That is not a valid argument either, because a natural explanation must be shown to fit the evidence at least as well. Each theory is to be judged on its own merits.

The theories are useful for one purpose in the argument: they show what a naturalistic account must explain. Any explanation of the origin of the Christian movement must account for the death of Jesus, the experiences of the disciples, the belief in resurrection, the tomb tradition and the conversion of Paul and James. A theory that handles only one or two is not enough.

  1. What does this theory explain, and what does it leave unexplained?
  2. Does it require the disciples to have lied, and does that fit what is known of them?
  3. What would the authorities have done if the body had been available?
  4. Does the theory depend on events for which there is no evidence?
  5. Is it being rejected because of evidence or because of prior commitments?
  6. What does a complete explanation have to account for?

Examples

The guard story

Matthew says the chief priests paid soldiers to say that the disciples stole the body while they slept. The story assumes the tomb was empty. A soldier who was asleep could not know who took the body, which defenders count against the claim. Critics suggest that the guard story itself may be a Christian response.

A bleeding survivor

Strauss pointed out that a man half dead, weak and in need of bandages could not have given the disciples the impression that he was the conqueror of death. A skeptic of the resurrection himself, he thought the swoon theory worse than the supernatural story.

Lake and Joseph

If the women went to a wrong tomb, then Joseph of Arimathea, who owned the real one, was nearby in Jerusalem and could have shown the right tomb. A story as public as the empty tomb would not likely survive such a correction for long in the same city.

Different perspectives

Mainstream critical scholars

They regard the three theories as obsolete. Most hold that the disciples sincerely believed they had seen Jesus alive and that a theory based on deceit or error about the tomb fails to explain this.

Defenders of the resurrection

They cite the failure of these theories as one part of a cumulative case, along with the argument that vision and legend theories also have difficulties. They hold that the resurrection is the best explanation of the whole.

Catholic and Orthodox Christians

Both traditions treat the matter as a mystery of faith as well as an event. They note that the church has answered these suggestions since the Gospel of Matthew and see no reason to doubt the apostles.

Jewish and Muslim traditions

Jewish tradition has recorded the theft charge. Muslim tradition denies that Jesus was crucified and holds that he was raised to God. Ahmadiyya Muslims teach that he survived and died later. These are religious positions and are not offered as historical reconstructions in the scholarly sense.

Popular skeptical writers

Some, in books and films, continue to present conspiracy and survival theories as live options. Scholars criticize these for ignoring the sources and for making claims about hidden plots that have no evidence.

Why it matters

These theories appear constantly in popular culture. A student who can state each one fairly and explain why historians largely reject them can answer them calmly. It is equally important to avoid thinking that rejecting them proves the resurrection: that depends on how well the remaining explanations do.

Common misunderstandings

Misunderstanding: No one ever offered a natural explanation until modern times.

Correction: The theft charge is recorded in Matthew and in second century writers. Natural explanations are as old as the claim.

Misunderstanding: If these theories are wrong, the resurrection is proved.

Correction: Other explanations, such as vision and legend, remain and must be weighed. Eliminating some does not prove the last.

Misunderstanding: Historians reject these theories out of loyalty to Christianity.

Correction: Skeptical and non-Christian scholars also reject them, for historical and medical reasons.

Misunderstanding: The swoon theory is supported by the Shroud or other relics.

Correction: Claims about relics are disputed and cannot be used to support a theory of survival without independent evidence.

Knowledge check

Give two objections to the theft theory.

It requires the disciples to have knowingly lied, which does not fit their willingness to suffer, and it does not explain the appearances. The authorities would also have produced the body if they had it, and their reply of theft concedes that the tomb was empty. Any two of these are good answers.

Why do scholars reject the swoon theory?

Scourging, crucifixion and a spear wound make survival very unlikely, and Roman executioners were skilled. A badly injured man could not have convinced the disciples that he was a triumphant Lord. The theory also leaves unexplained what became of him. Even skeptics such as Strauss rejected it.

What is the wrong tomb theory, and why is it weak?

It says the women went to the wrong tomb and mistook its emptiness for Jesus’ resurrection. It is weak because the women saw where he was laid, Joseph and the authorities knew the real tomb, the error would have been corrected in Jerusalem, and the theory does not explain the appearances.

What common weakness do these theories share?

They concentrate on the empty tomb and do not explain the appearances, the belief in resurrection or the conversions of Paul and James. They also rely on hidden events without evidence. A satisfactory theory has to account for all the main data, not only one part.

Think it through

  1. Why do you think these theories remain popular despite scholarly rejection?
  2. Which of the three seems to you the most plausible, and what is its greatest weakness?
  3. If the body had been available to the authorities, how might they have used it?
  4. What would a better version of the theft theory have to look like?

Independent assignment

A fair hearing

In your own notebook, write 400 to 600 words. Choose one of the three theories and write the best case that a defender of it could make. Then give the strongest objections and say whether the case survives them. Do not send this to anyone.

Further study