This book considers the historical veracity of Jesus’ resurrection with special emphasis on the rise of the earliest known Christian beliefs and traditions: Jesus died for our sins, was raised on the third day, and appeared to many people (1 Corinthians 15:3-7).
Chapter 1: The Discovery of an Empty Tomb, Fact or Fiction?
Chapter 2: An Obscure Burial
Chapter 3: The Belief Jesus Died for Our Sins and Was Raised
Chapter 4: The Appearance Traditions
Chapter 5: Raised on the Third Day
Chapter 6: A Short Summary of the Hypothesis
Chapter 7: A Comparison to the Resurrection Hypothesis
Chapter 8: Conclusion and Meaning.
Appendix: Myth Growth Rates and the Gospels
“Rare is it when a lay author puts in the effort of wide research, gathers the references to every point together, interacts with the leading disputes, and offers something soundly argued that hadn’t been so well argued before. Komarnitsky does all of that and presents a surprisingly excellent demonstration of how belief in the resurrection of Jesus could plausibly have originated by natural means. Though I don’t always agree with him, and some issues could be discussed at greater length, everything he argues is plausible, and his treatise as a whole is a must for anyone interested in the resurrection.”
— Richard Carrier, Ph.D. Ancient History
“If you liked my book Beyond Born Again, you’re going to love this one by Kris Komarnitsky! He shows great acuity of judgment and clear-eyed perception of the issues. He does not claim to have proof of what happened at Christian origins, but he does present a powerfully plausible hypothesis for what might have happened, which is all you need to refute the fundamentalist claim that things can only have gone down their way. By now it is a mantra—it is also nonsense, and Kris shows that for a fact.”
— Robert M. Price, Ph.D. Theology, Ph.D. New Testament
“Komarnitsky is addressing an important topic in a considered and rational way. This book offers the open-minded reader an opportunity to work through some of the key questions surrounding the Easter mystery that lies at the heart of Christian faith.”
— Gregory C. Jenks, Ph.D. FaithFutures Foundation
“Clearly written and well argued, Doubting Jesus’ Resurrection lays out a plausible and intriguing case for a non-supernatural explanation of the New Testament resurrection accounts. Don’t be put off by the fact that Komarnitsky is not a scholar—his book makes a solid contribution to the historical-critical understanding of these immensely important texts. This book deserves serious attention from scholars and all those interested in Christian Origins.”
— Robert J. Miller, Professor of Religious Studies, Juniata College
“Proving the exception, this book shows that if a layman takes the time to investigate a topic, including learning how the relevant disciplinary tools are applied and familiarizes themselves with what experts have already written on a subject, they can draw balanced and even insightful conclusions that enhance the conversation. Those interested in a plausible natural explanation for the birth of Christianity will want to seriously consider this book.”
— James F. McGrath, Associate Professor of Religion and Clarence L. Goodwin Chair of New Testament Language and Literature, Butler University
“In this book Komarnitsky provides a compelling and convincing account of how the early Christians came to believe in Jesus’ resurrection. Building on my own research and documentation of a modern-day Jewish movement that rationalised their dead Messiah would resurrect from the dead, Komarnitsky argues clearly and concisely that the same basic cognitive process could have given birth to the Christian resurrection belief two thousand years ago. This book contains a wealth of biblical and social scholarship, and it is an important contribution to the study of early Christianity.”
— Professor Simon Dein, Social Anthropologist, Durham University, Author of Lubavitcher Messianism (2012)
“As Kris Komarnitsky notes in his book, I am on record with an explanation of the belief in Jesus’ resurrection that is essentially identical with his own. The difference is that I merely proffered this explanation, while he provides a full, vigorous, and nuanced argument for it. Not surprisingly, I am persuaded.”
— David Berger, Ruth and I. Lewis Gordon Professor of Jewish History and Dean, Bernard Revel Graduate School of Jewish Studies, Yeshiva University