Maurice Casey on the Resurrection and Bereavement Experiences

Casey seeks to undercut the apologetic case for Jesus’ resurrection. By appealing to data about ‘bereavement experiences,’ he launches a series of interconnected arguments against the credibility of the resurrection. But there are many reasons for rejecting Casey’s hypothesis on the origins of believing in the resurrection of Jesus: his understanding of bereavement experiences is unreliable and therefore cannot account for the original meaning assigned to the Easter appearances. He himself admits that bereavement apparitions cannot explain all of the appearances. Lastly Paul’s testimony indicates that the appearances were bodily in nature. Given that the appearances should be understood as ‘resurrection appearances,’ it follows that Jesus’ tomb was empty. This overall depiction of Easter faith is consistent with the background of Second Temple Judaism and the relevant New Testament data. Thus the apologists’ concern to argue for Jesus’ resurrection may continue to be endorsed.