Mathematical Model Analyzes Sincerity of Early Christian Resurrection Testimony
A new study uses probability models to evaluate the likelihood of early Christian deception.
1Mathematical Approach to History
Philosopher Nathan Rockwood from Brigham Young University has applied mathematical modeling to early Christian accounts of Jesus' resurrection. The study examines the probability that a group of witnesses could maintain a fabricated story for decades without any individual admitting to the deception or accidentally exposing the falsehood to the public.
2Modeling Witness Disclosure Risks
Rockwood developed a model assuming a one percent annual chance for any individual witness to reveal a fabrication. By accounting for the natural decline in witness numbers over time, the model predicts a 95 percent probability that a conspiracy would be exposed within 28 years for a group of 16 people.
3Variables in Witness Groups
The study analyzes two distinct groups of witnesses reconstructed from biblical texts. The smaller group of 16 includes the apostles, Paul, James, and three women. A larger group of 23 incorporates additional figures like the disciples from the road to Emmaus and candidates to replace Judas, testing different potential conspiracy sizes.
4Comparison to Conspiracy Research
The research builds upon David Robert Grimes’ work regarding the longevity of large-scale conspiracies, such as claims surrounding the Moon landings. While Grimes focused on large groups, Rockwood adapted these principles to smaller cohorts claiming miraculous events, specifically challenging David Hume’s assertion that deception is always more believable than a miracle.
5Assumptions and Methodology
The model relies on specific assumptions, including a one percent annual disclosure rate based on the public nature of the disciples' claims. Rockwood utilized Robert McIver’s research on memory and ancient Roman lifespan data to project witness survival rates, estimating that roughly one-third of the original group remained alive after 30 years.
6Evaluating Potential for Error
Rockwood argues that the testimony is unlikely to be a result of perceptual error due to the reported abundance of empirical evidence. Biblical accounts of repeated conversations, shared meals, and physical contact with the resurrected Jesus suggest that the witnesses were not merely experiencing hallucinations or simple mistakes during their reported encounters.
7Historical Record Limitations
The study acknowledges that the historical record is incomplete and cannot definitively prove that every damaging statement would have survived. While opponents of early Christianity would likely have publicized any confession of deception, the absence of such records serves as a central pillar in Rockwood’s argument for the witnesses' sincerity.
8Scope of the Conclusion
The model does not independently verify that the biblical encounters occurred, as its results are contingent upon initial assumptions regarding witness numbers and disclosure rates. Rockwood concludes that the sustained testimony makes deliberate invention unlikely, suggesting that the disciples were either intentionally deceiving others or reporting what they believed was true.