A Memory Approach to Jesus’ Resurrection

by David Graieg

What is a Memory Approach?

A memory approach is to make use of what is known about human memory in historical analysis.
As with other methodologies, one of the difficulties is that there isn’t a unified consensus on the best way to undertake a memory approach.
It has been popular since about 2000 but can be dated to the 1970s or earlier.

Different Uses of a Memory Approach

A memory approach can be utilized to determine, assuming that a hypothesis is true, the probability that it was accurately remembered.
Second, a memory approach can be employed to compare which alternatives are more memorable.
Third, a memory approach can be used to postulate the best explanation that gave rise to the surviving memories.
Social memory can also be used to examine how a collective group presently remembers a past event.

Why this Subject Matters?

For Paul and the early Christian communities (1 Cor 15:11), Jesus’ resurrection is of first importance (1 Cor 15:3).
“Further, in 1 Corinthians 15:12–19, Paul says that if Christ has not been raised, the tradents are false witnesses, faith in Christ is useless, and believers are still in their sins. Paul’s logic is that without the vindication of the resurrection, Jesus’ shameful death (on the cross; cf. 1 Cor 1:17–18; Gal 3:13; Deut 21:23; Rom 4:24b–25) would be devoid of any real purpose, value, or efficacy.” (4)
Also, historical Jesus studies have generally attacked a criteria approach and promoted a memory approach.

A Definition of Memory

Memory can be defined as “a cognitive capacity related to how an organism’s past affects its ability to recall information or modify its behaviour” (Graieg, Resurrection Remembered, 106).

Is Memory Reliable?

Schacter writes, “Although this volume is concerned primarily with understanding distortion, it must be emphasized again that memory is quite accurate in many situations. […] Therefore, the key issue is not whether memory is ‘mostly accurate’ or “mostly distorted”; rather, the challenge is to specify the conditions under which accuracy and distortion are most likely to be observed (“Memory Distortion,” 25).
Diamond, Armson, and Levine found that while roughly only a quarter of things are remembered, those that are remembered can be recalled with about 93%–95% accuracy (“The Truth Is Out There,” 1544–56).

The Elements of a Memory Approach

(1) a definition and taxonomy of memory, (2) passivism and constructivism, (3) presentism and continuism, (4) philosophical considerations of forgetting, (5) theories of remembering, (6) social and collective memory, (7) transience, (8) absent-mindedness, (9) blocking, (10) misattribution, (11) persistence, (12) Bartlett and schemata, (13) John Dean’s testimony and memory distortion, (14) Deese-Roediger- McDermott (DRM) lists and false memories, (15) suggestibility, (16) the social contagion of memory, (17) memory conformity, (18) hindsight bias, (19) personal event memory and flashbulb memory, (20) memory and age, and (21) the effects of health on memory.
Which is too much to cover, so we must focus on a few things.

Transience

Transience can be defined as “a weakening or loss of memory over time.”

The Implications of Transience

If Jesus was crucified around 30/33 CE, and First Corinthians was written around 53–57 CE, this represents an interval of around 20 to 27 years. Based on the forgetting curves discussed in Section 3.2, this falls into the “c) 20–50 years” grouping, which would indicate an approximate 62%–85% likelihood that the information was remembered correctly (assuming individual memory with infrequent rehearsal). Nevertheless, as outlined in Section 3.3.2, it is more likely that such traditions were performed regularly (perhaps even weekly by community members), and as such, the likelihood that the information was remembered correctly would have been very probable.
Paul probably received the creed of 1 Corinthians 15:3–5/7 within 18 months to 5 years from Jesus’ alleged resurrection (and probably no more than a decade after the event).

Forgetting Curves

Passivism and constructivism

“A passivist (preservationist or archival) view of memory argues that memory is analogous to a storehouse. The view purports that if one is focused while encoding the memory and archives it correctly, then one can accurately retrieve that memory.” (110–1)
“a constructivist (or generationist) approach views memory as active “as the combined influences of the world and the person’s own ideas and expectations.” (111)

Examples of the active nature of memory

“Selection: Only certain incoming stimuli are selected for encoding.
Abstraction: The meaning of a message is abstracted from the syntactic and lexical features of the message.
Interpretation: Relevant prior knowledge is invoked.
Integration: A holistic representation is formed from the products of selection, abstraction, and interpretation processes.
Reconstruction: During retrieval, whatever information was selected for representation and is still accessible is used, together with general knowledge, (roughly) to generate a representation of what must have happened.” (111)

The Implications of Passivism and Constructivism

“As for the implications of passivism and constructivism for Jesus’ resurrection, studies on the extent to which the faculty of memory is creative indicate that semantic memory tends to be more passive than constructive. Hence, regarding the creed of 1 Corinthians 15:3–5/7, there are probably fewer constructive factors at work.” (114–5)
“As for abstraction, the creed of 1 Corinthians 15:3–5/7 is already an abstraction of some underlying series of events by those who originally formulated the creed. That is, no one (or no group) perceived the creed taking place. Instead, the creed is a formulation of a larger narrative. However, there is no reason to think that any further abstraction occurred between Paul receiving the creed and passing it on to the Corinthians.” (115)

Theories of Remembering

There are four main types of theories about what it means to remember: (1) empiricist theories, (2) epistemic theories, (3) causal theories, and (4) simulation theories.

An Epistemic Theory of Remembering

On an epistemic theory of remembering, if subject S remembers proposition p, “then S knows that p” or “if S remembers that p, then S knows that p because S previously knew that p.”
The standard view is that knowledge is justified true belief—namely, that a subject S knows proposition P if and only if:
“S believes that P.
P is true.
The belief that P is justified for S at the time S believes it.”

The Implications of an Epistemic Theory of Remembering

if p1 = “the risen Jesus appeared to Paul,” and S1 = “Paul,” then 1 Corinthians 15:8 would indicate that premise (1) is true; namely, Paul believes the risen Jesus appeared to him.
Premise (2) asks, is it true that the risen Jesus appeared to Paul? Unfortunately, the truth of this premise is difficult to determine.
Premise (3) asks, is “the belief that the risen Jesus appeared to Paul justified for Paul at the time he believes it?” There is insufficient detail in 1 Corinthians 15:8 to conclusively decide one way or the other. Paul’s belief could be properly basic—that is, a perceptual belief “produced by cognitive faculties functioning properly in a congenial epistemic environment according to a design plan successfully aimed at truth.” Alternatively, one might conclude from the testimony of others—namely, other parts of the New Testament, such as Acts 9:3–5, 22:6–11, and 26:12–15—that the premise is true. On the other hand, one might infer that Paul was experiencing a cognitive malfunction,191 so the premise is false.

Social and Collective Memory

Social memory can refer to “the distribution throughout society of what individuals believe, know, and feel about the past, how they judge the past morally, how closely they identify with it, and how they commemorate it.”

The Implications of Social and Collective Memory

1 Corinthians 15:11 indicates that the creed did not originate nor exist solely in Paul’s individual memory; instead, it was the collective memory of all the apostles, and hence, one could argue the social memory of the early believers (cf. 1 Cor 1:2; 4:17; 7:17; 11:16; 14:33). The creed was the common message that all the churches proclaimed “that Christ died and rose again.” (137)
Another implication from social memory is, “that within early Christianity there is virtually no spectrum of belief about life beyond death”; instead, Christianity looks “like a variety of Pharisaic Judaism [holding to bodily resurrection]. There is no trace of a Sadducean view [no afterlife] or of that of Philo [immorality of the soul]” (Wright, Surprised by Hope, 42).

Bartlett and Schemata

Schemata are cognitive structures “representing a person’s knowledge about some entity or situation, including its qualities and the relationships between these.” (148)

The Implications of Bartlett and Schemata

“Bartlett proposed that schemata played a role in remembrance, and, in the case of the creed of 1 Corinthians 15:3–5/7, it is directly stated that the Scriptures played this role (cf. 1 Cor 15:3–4). However, the particular Scriptures are not specified. It could have included one or more of the following passages: Deuteronomy 18:15; Psalms 2; 16:8–11; 18:22; 22; 31; 69; 110:1; 118; Isaiah 53:7–8; 55:3; Hosea 6:2. Despite this, it is hard to see how reflection upon these Scriptures would have given rise to belief in an individual bodily resurrection prior to the closing of the age.” (151)

John Dean’s Testimony and Memory Distortion

Dean’s “testimony [of Nixon] was accurate at a level that is neither “semantic” (since he was ostensibly describing particular episodes) nor “episodic” (since his accounts of the episodes were often wrong). The term “repisodic” is coined here to describe such memories: what seems to be a remembered episode actually represents a repeated series of events, and thus reflects a genuinely existing state of affairs.”

The Implications of John Dean’s Testimony and Memory Distortion

“The narratives underlying Paul’s traditions could be affected by this memory principle (concerning gist and tenor). Hypothetically, it would mean that even if there were confusions, for example, about when the tomb was found, or which women were present, or if it was one or two young men or angels, or whether the appearances were in Galilee or Jerusalem, one could still have accurate information,303 and perhaps that core is the creed of 1 Corinthians 15:3–5/7.” (154)

Deese-Roediger-McDermott (DRM) lists and False Memories

“The DRM task presents participants “with lists of semantically associated words (e.g., bed, rest, awake). In subsequent free recall and recognition tests, participants often erroneously recall and recognize non-presented critical lures (e.g., sleep) as having been presented as part of the earlier lists.” (155–6)
A false memory can be defined as a distorted recollection of an event or, a recollection of an event that never actually happened.

The Implications of DRM lists and False Memories

“Studies on DRM lists suggest that false memories can arise from associations. DRM associations based on first-century Jewish cultural beliefs about the afterlife would have expected an ascension to heaven, awaiting the general resurrection. The predictions of Jesus’ resurrection (cf. Mark 8:31//Matt 16:21// Luke 9:22; Mark 9:31//Matt 17:23; Mark 10:34//Matt 20:19//Luke 18:33; Mark 14:58//Matt 26:61; Mark 15:29//Matt 27:40; Mark 14:28; Matt 12:40; 27:63–64; Luke 24:6–7, 46; John 2:19–22; Mark 16:7//Matt 28:6//Luke 24:6–8) could prime the disciples for a more imminent resurrection; however, it is doubtful that this could generate a false memory of such a magnitude. The disciples also knew that Jesus was crucified and did not believe that individuals were bodily resurrected in advance of others.” (157)

Suggestibility

Refers to “memories that are implanted as a result of leading questions, comments or suggestions.”

The Implications of Suggestibility

“The creed of 1 Corinthians 15:3–5/7 is unlikely to have been influenced by suggestibility due to its memorability and brevity. However, the creed was formulated at some point. If one assumes that a narrative similar to those found in the Gospels underlies it,326 then there are several ways in which suggestibility could have impacted the tradition. Unfortunately, this is speculative. For instance, one could imagine one of the Gospel authors speaking with an eyewitness about the tomb where Jesus was buried. Even asking an innocent question such as, “Was it still dark when you found the tomb?” has the potential to implant false memories, whereas asking an open-ended question such as, “At what time did you find the tomb?” would not induce suggestion.” (159)

Hindsight Bias

Bias is “the powerful influence of our current knowledge and beliefs on how we remember our pasts.”

The Implications of Hindsight Bias

“A study has found that considering alternative explanations for one’s beliefs can reduce hindsight bias.362 Interestingly, on the morning of Resurrection Sunday, apart from the beloved disciple (cf. John 20:8), none of the other disciples interpreted the events to imply that Jesus had risen.363 Instead, they came to conclusions, such as Jesus’ body had been taken (cf. John 20:13–16), or they were generally puzzled (cf. Luke 24:11, 21–25; John 20:25), or thought that Jesus was a ghost (Luke 24:37). The other disciples had to consider “alternative explanations” before they could reduce their bias and came to believe that Jesus had risen. Also, the beloved disciple was exposed to the other disciples’ “alternative explanations,” providing him with an opportunity to reconsider his interpretation, but he found himself convinced that “Jesus has risen” was the correct explanation.” (167)

Personal Event Memory and Flashbulb Memory

Flashbulb memories “are memories for the circumstances in which one first learned of a very surprising and consequential (or emotionally arousing) event.”

The Implications of Personal Event Memory and Flashbulb Memory

“The original eyewitnesses would have had a flashbulb memory of their experiences due to both the shocking nature of Jesus’ death and the surprising nature of his resurrection. The creed itself was succinct, memorable, and contained remarkable content. The creed of 1 Corinthians 15:3–5/7, containing surprising and consequential content, would likely (at least for first-century believers) create a flashbulb memory upon its initial hearing. Furthermore, the appearance of Jesus to Paul (cf. 1 Cor 15:8) would have formed a flashbulb memory for him. Although Paul does not mention further details of the memory (cf. Acts 9:3–5, 22:6–11, and 26:12–15), the likelihood that Paul would have misremembered “that Jesus appeared to him” is highly improbable.” (171)

Conclusion

A memory approach supports the conclusion gained from historical criticism—confirming that the early Christians would have had deep and lasting memory impressions of the bodily resurrected Jesus.

Hermeneutics (principles of interpretation)

Grammatical-historical exegesis, which seeks to follow the rules of grammar within the historical context of the text in question in order to interpret meaning from the text (rather than eisegesis, which is to read one’s ideas into the text).
Historical criticism “purports to convey historical information in order to determine what actually happened” (Marshall, “Historical Criticism,” 126).

1 Cor 6:14

“And God both raised up the Lord and will raise us up by his power” (LEB).
“The context speaks of the physical body (cf. 1 Cor 6:13, 15–16, 18) and probably implies that Paul understands Jesus as being raised from the dead (in a physical bodily sense)” (28)

1 Cor 6:14 – The Slogans?

“if the clause, “and God will destroy both one and the other” (1 Cor 6:13b, NRSVue), was not part of the Corinthians’ slogan but rather a part of Paul’s argument, then that could imply that Paul is endorsing that the physical body (i.e., the stomach) will be done away with in the future, and hence, suggesting a future disembodied existence. However, even given this view of a shorter slogan, it is unlikely that Paul is arguing for future disembodied existence, but instead, arguing that believers will be raised like Christ (cf. 1 Cor 6:14), meaning that the present ψυχή “natural” body will be transformed into a πνεῦμα “supernatural” body—but both will still be material bodies” (28–9)

1 Corinthians 15:3–8

3 For I passed on to you as of first importance what I also received—that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures, 4 and that he was buried, and that he was raised on the third day according to the scriptures, 5 and that he appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve. 6 Then he appeared to more than 500 of the brothers and sisters at one time, most of whom are still alive,6 though some have fallen asleep. 7 Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles. 8 Last of all, as though to one born at the wrong time, he appeared to me also. (NET2)

1 Cor 15:3–5/7 is Probably a Creed

Passed on and received
Contains atypical Pauline phrases
“Paul may have received this creed (i.e., 1 Cor 15:3–5/7) in either 32/34 CE (cf. Acts 9:9–20, 26–29) or, more likely, 35/36/37 CE (cf. Gal 1:18).” (34) “However, it could have been any time before Paul preached to the Corinthians (cf. 1 Cor 15:1; Acts 18:11) in about 49–52 CE.” (34)
“The creed itself was probably formulated shortly after Jesus’ crucifixion.” (34)

Christ Died

“The significance of the usage of “Christ” rather than “Jesus” is “[t]hat the man Jesus died meant little, for many men were crucified in Jewish Palestine.” However, that “the messiah died” has great significance” (35)

Buried

“The mention of ὅτι ἐτάφη “that he was buried”61 (1 Cor 15:4) functions to verify the reality of the death.” (37–8)
“Tradition points to burial by Joseph of Arimathea (cf. Mark 15:43–46//Matt 27:57–60//Luke 23:50–53; John 19:38–42; Acts 13:29).”

An Empty Tomb?

Although the creed does not explicitly mention an empty tomb, that does not necessarily mean that Paul did not know of this tradition or that Paul did not believe that the tomb was empty (cf. Acts 13:29–37).
“Given that the creed is a confessional summary (i.e., a shorter formula and not a larger narrative; cf. Acts 2:22–32; 3:13–15; 4:10; 10:36–41; 13:26–37; 17:31), its lack of a reference to the empty tomb does not mean that Paul did not know or did not believe that the tomb was empty.” (38–9)
“Further, while a “sequence involving a burial followed by a resurrection not involving the revivification of the entombed body would be quite conceivable,”66 it seems more probable that the sequence also has importance to its interpretation:” (39–40)
“the meaning of ἐγήγερται “he has been raised,” argues against interpreting the body as any longer remaining in the tomb.” (40)
[So basically Paul thought the tomb was empty–Jesus was risen]

Raised

ἐγείρω “I raise.”
In the context of death and the afterlife, this term refers to the raising of a physical body, not a ghost-like ascension.

On the Third Day

“‘on the third day’ probably refers to the day Jesus rose from the dead (as evidenced by the discovery of the empty tomb and his appearances to others); this is the Lord’s day of salvation, and because of the links with the firstfruit, this is also the promise ofthe general resurrection (cf. 1 Cor 15:20–23).” (47–8)

According to the Scriptures

The Old Testament Scriptures (either the whole thing or specific ones such as Deut 18:15; Ps 2:1–2; 16:8–11, 110:1; 118:22; Isa 53:7–8; Hosea 6:2) “provided the memory schematic by which the early Christian community interpreted the events of Jesus’ death and resurrection.” (51)
It is unlikely that that reflection on the scriptures invented belief in a resurrection.

He Appeared to

καὶ ὅτι ὤφθη Κηφᾷ “and that he appeared to Cephas” emphasizes that Christ appeared (rather, but not excluding, that Peter saw), establishing the fact of Christ’s resurrection.
To the twelve, to more than 500, to James (probably the brother of Jesus), to all the apostles, lastly to Paul.

Why no mention of the women?

“A fifth option is that the formulators of the creed (and Paul himself) had a cultural reason to exclude female witnesses from an authoritative list. As mentioned in Section 3.5.9.7.1 on memory conformity, studies have shown that one is less likely to trust sources one considers unreliable. Hence, it is also possible that if the testimony of women was less valued in either the culture from which the tradition originated or in the culture to whom it was being proclaimed, it is less likely that such a tradition would have been included.” (58)

The Corinthian denial of resurrection (1 Cor 15:12)

“it is difficult to reconstruct what some Corinthians believed in denying the resurrection. The most probable option seems to be that these deniers said there was no bodily resurrection (whatever else they affirmed about the afterlife), and they had not thoroughly considered the implications of this denial for Jesus’ bodily resurrection (which, it seems, they did inconsistently affirm); hence, Paul clarifies the matter.” (74)

1 Corinthians 15:12–19

Paul’s logic in 1 Corinthians 15:12–19 is as follows, “Paul is urging that [the deniers’] present position with regard to the resurrection means that they cease to be believers altogether. This, of course, is a reductio ad absurdum; since their experience is otherwise, he expects them to read the logic in reverse and admit therefore that there must be a resurrection of the dead.” As Paul has argued in 1 Cor 1:11, Christ is risen.

A “spiritual” body (1 Cor 15:44)?

From the eighth century B.C. to the third century A.D., the term ψυχικός “is never employed in a sense that carries the meaning of ‘physical’ or ‘material.’” (Licona)
“Had Paul desired to do so, he could have used the contrast between σάρκινος and ἀόρατος. Paul had used the term σάρκινος only a few chapters earlier (cf. 1 Cor 9:11) and ἀόρατος in Romans 1:20. Paul also uses the terms ψυχικός and πνευματικός in 1 Corinthians 2:14–15, where it is clear he is not referring to a material or immaterial person; instead, Paul “is contrasting those governed or animated by their fleshly and sinful desires and who think in accordance with the world’s wisdom with those governed by holy desires and heavenly wisdom centered on God.”” (82)
adjectives ending in –ικός connote like
So “the σῶμα πνευματικόν is like everything that surrounds it: characteristically imperishable, able, immortal, and heavenly” like the body of the risen Jesus.” (84–5)

The Period Between Events and Writing

Book	Lower (Bernier)	Lower (Robinson)	Middle (Harnack)	Higher (Sturdy)
Matt	45–59	50	70–75	130
Mark	42–45	45	65–73	80
Luke	59	60	80–95	110
John	60–70	65	80–110	140
Acts	62	62	80–95	130
Romans	winter of 56/57	57	56–57	50
1 Cor	early 56	55	56	50
2 Cor	late 56	56	56	50
Gal	47–52	56	53	50
Eph	57–59	58	57–59	100
Phil	57–59	58	57–59	50
Col	57–59	58	57–59	80
1 Thess	50–52	50	48–49	40
2 Thess	50–52	50–51	48–49	120
1 Tim—if Pauline	63 or 64	55	n/a	n/a
1 Tim—if pseudo	60–150	n/a	90–110	140
2 Tim—if Pauline	64–68	58	n/a	n/a
2 Tim—if pseudo	60–150	n/a	90–110	140
Titus—if Pauline	63 or 64	57	n/a	n/a
Titus—if pseudo	60–175	n/a	90–110	140
Philemon	57–59	58	57–62	50
Hebrews	50–70	67	81–96	110
James	prior to 62	47–48	70–90	130
1 Peter	60–69	65	81–96	110
2 Pet—if Petrine	60–69	61–62	n/a	n/a
2 Pet—if pseudo	60–125	n/a	110–120	150
1 John	60–100	60–65	80–110	140
2 John	60–100	60–65	80–110	140
3 John	prior to 100	60–65	80–110	140
Jude	prior to 96	61–62	100–130	130
Rev	68–70	68	93–96	150

Bernier, Jonathan. Rethinking the Dates of the New Testament: The Evidence for Early Composition, 2022.

Performance Frequency

“Repeatedly recalling the entire event, instead of just either the central details or the peripheral aspects, is the most effective way to remember an event. Transience occurs over time, and so repeated recall reinforces a memory. Further, recollecting an event with others creates a social web in which the memory is embedded and endures.” (94)

The Implications of Performance Frequency

[after surveying the Gospels, Acts and the Epistles, I conclude that] “the memories about the risen Jesus were not simply stored in memory for decades and then retrieved, but rather were regularly performed” perhaps weekly.
“the creed of 1 Corinthians 15:3–5/7 being ἐν πρώτοις “of first importance” or “among first things” (1 Cor 15:3), could have played a role in the catechesis of new converts. If so, the creed would create a deeper memory impression due to the phenomenon known as primacy.” (98–9)

Models of Orality (including a fourth option)

“informal uncontrolled means having no designated teacher with no attempt to preserve the tradition.
Formal controlled means having a teacher and intentionally seeking to preserve the tradition.
Informal controlled means having no designated teacher but attempting to preserve the tradition.
Formal uncontrolled means having a designated teacher but not attempting to preserve the tradition.” (102)

The Implications of Models of Orality

“in the case of the tradition of 1 Corinthians 15:3–5/7, regarding the tradents, Paul (and what one might call the foundational disciples) probably operated mainly in the formal with minor flexibility [controlled] model given that the creed was something one received and passed on. Although for traditions that were not ἐν πρώτοις “of first importance” or “among first things” (1 Cor 15:3), it is probable those traditions were handled on the formal with moderate flexibility spectrum. However, some disciples could have passed on the tradition closer to the informal with wild flexibility model (recall Ehrman’s model)” (105–6)

Presentism and Continuism

Presentism argues that the present “is so determinative that the past can be rewritten ‘constantly’ and the socio-cultural matrix of the present is solely responsible for ‘what is remembered (or forgotten), by whom, and for what end.’”
For continuism, “memory is always formed in, and thus ultimately conditioned by, the present” but not completely overridden by it.

Forgetting

Can be define as: “forgetting as complete loss from storage,” “forgetting as retrieval failure,” and “forgetting as loss of information over time.” (119)
“there are several views on why forgetting occurs: the decay theory, the interference theory, the retrieval theories, the cue overload theory, the consolidation theory, the repression theory” (120)

The Implications of Forgetting

“Assuming the decay theory is correct, the further one is removed from the event, the more one forgets.” So, since the disciples and the NT are close to the events at hand, they probably didn’t forget it.
Assuming the interference theory is correct, the implication is that since a bodily resurrection is unique, it is improbable that memories related to Jesus’ resurrection would be overlaid by other similar experiences (since there were few to none).

A Simulation Theory of Memory

on the simulation theory of memory, a subject “S remembers an event, e, if and only if” subject S satisfies the current representation condition, “S now represents e,” and proper function condition, “S’s current representation of e is produced by a properly functioning and hence reliable episodic construction system that aims to produce a representation of an event belonging to S’s personal past.”

Memory Chunking

One could also use memory chunking267 to group the creed into two parts, namely four whats (died, buried, raised, appeared) and secondly, two (or five) whos (who experienced appearances—Cephas, the Twelve, more than 500, James, and all the apostles). While it may not be possible to determine if chunking was utilized, it nevertheless demonstrates that the creed was plausibly remembered (with respect to transience). (144)

Absent-mindedness

Absent-mindedness is “a breakdown at the interface between attention and memory,” perhaps due to a distraction, where the original event was not properly registered in the first place.

The Implications of Absent-mindedness

“when Paul received the creed of 1 Corinthians 15:3b–5/7, it was probably not in the presence of one individual but of multiple persons (c.f. Acts 9:19, which mentions disciples and Galatians 1:18–19, which mentions Cephas and James). As such, this is not a case dealing with absent-mindedness due to one weak link in a chain. Instead, the transmission functioned as a web-like network and would probably not have succumbed to this particular memory distortion.” (145)

Blocking

Blocking is “a thwarted search for information that we may be desperately trying to retrieve.”

The Implications of Blocking

“As for the implications of blocking (explained in Section 3.5.8), it is plausible that one of the tradents (occasionally) suffered from blocking—being unable to retrieve the desired information. However, given that a single individual did not pass on the oral tradition/history and that the tradent was not restricted to a single attempt to remember all the information (as in, for example, a live stage performance) but may have had time to reflect on the matter or be even cued by others, then it is improbable that blocking was a significant factor in remembering the traditions related to Jesus’ resurrection (especially in the case of the creed of 1 Corinthians 15:3–5/7).” (146)

Misattribution

Misattribution involves “assigning a memory to the wrong source.”

The Implications of Misattribution

“As for the implications of misattribution (explained in Section 3.5.8 and defined as “could one of the tradents have wrongly attributed one of the sources?”), although possible, there were control checks in place that would have made it less likely that such a memory distortion would have been propagated—particularly in the case of the creed of 1 Corinthians 15:3–5/7.” (146)

Persistence

Persistence entails “repeated recall of disturbing information or events that we would prefer to banish from our minds altogether: remembering what we cannot forget.”

The Implications of Persistence

“As for the implications of persistence, while the creed of 1 Corinthians 15:3–5/7 is memorable, there is no indication that Paul wished to forget it, and in fact, there is plenty of evidence that he and the other tradents sought to continue to remember what they viewed as good news. One could imagine elements of Paul’s encounter with Jesus (cf. 1 Cor 15:8; Acts 9:3–5, 22:6–11, and 26:12–15) as having degrees of persistence. Paul’s encounter with Jesus was a defining moment in his life and a memory that he cherished, which likely served as a positive reminder. Nevertheless, remembering that he was also someone who formerly persecuted Christ’s church (cf. Gal 1:13–16; 1 Tim 1:12–15) was something he may not have always wanted to come to mind (although for Paul, it did highlight God’s grace, cf. 1 Tim 1:16).” (147)

The Social Contagion of Memory

“The social contagion of memory refers to “false memories implanted by social influence.”” (161)

The Implications of The Social Contagion of Memory

“Studies focusing on the social contagion of memory suggest that if one of the early disciples, especially a prominent disciple, were to recall the traditions in a particular way, it is more likely that the others would be influenced accordingly. The creed of 1 Corinthians 15:3–5/7 is an example of how social interactions have enhanced memory—he creed is a formulation not devised by Paul, yet nonetheless, it is a formulation that Paul once received and passed on to the Corinthians. Furthermore, Paul would probably have now influenced the Corinthians, so they would, in turn, pass on the tradition in a similar form.” (162)

Memory Conformity

Memory conformity occurs “when an individual alters their memory report of an event to be consistent with another person’s differing, and sometimes erroneous, memory report of the same event.”

The Implications of Memory Conformity

“memory conformity is more likely to occur when one is unsure of his or her memories. Given that Jesus’ resurrection was central to Christian identity, it is improbable that the early Christians would have been unsure of the main details (such as Jesus’ death, burial, resurrection, and appearance) as outlined in the concise creed (cf. 1 Cor 15:3–5/7). However, perhaps for the narratives underlying Paul’s traditions, memory conformity could have impacted the secondary details, such as which women were present, whether it was one or two young men (or angels) who were present, and so on. Further, given that the disciples did show a degree of scepticism (cf. Matt 28:17; Luke 24:4; 11–12, 21–25, 37; John 20:2, 9), it suggests that although memories concerning Jesus’ resurrection would, in general, be more prone to conformity, the central facts would be less prone to distortion.” (164)

Memory and Age

“Studies have found that younger people generally have better memory function.” (172)

The Implications of Memory and Age

Paul was probably born ca. AD 5–10, during the reign of the Emperor Augustus. He is described in Acts 7:58 as a young man at the stoning of Stephen, and in Phlm 9 (written after AD 55) as an “old man.”
“This data would mean Paul was roughly between 22 and 32 years old when he received the creed and about 43 and 52 years old when it was passed on in First Corinthians. While life expectancy in the first century was lower than in twenty-first-century Western cultures, based on Paul’s likely age, there is no reason to think that his memory recall would have been unreliable simplybecause of his age.” (172–3)

The Effects of Health on Memory

“[F]actors such as exercise and a healthy diet (especially diets low in saturated fats and high in antioxidants) are not only healthy for the body, but they may well also help the brain to function well into old age.” (173)

The Implications of The Effects of Health on Memory

“It is challenging to gauge Paul’s health during his ministry. Given his ability to travel around the Mediterranean, one can assume he was not in poor health; however, considering some of the afflictions Paul endured, including imprisonments, beatings, and, at times, close to death, he may not have always been in the best of health.” (173)
“Overall, it is difficult to determine how Paul’s health would have affected his memory; perhaps it is prudent to remain agnostic on this matter.” (174)

Mnemicity

“Mnemicity concerns whether or not one can have criteria to distinguish between successful and unsuccessful remembering and imagining” (185)

The Implications of Mnemicity

“There are presently no airtight criteria for mnemicity. Furthermore, it is easier to apply these criteria to one’s own memories than to the memories of others. With that qualification, source markers indicate that more detailed memories tend to be associated with successful remembrances, although given that what counts as detailed is subjective, it does not seem that this marker can be applied in any helpful way to the memories of Jesus’ resurrection. At most, one could say that the kind of memories found in Paul’s writing is consistent with regard to mnemicity (with either successful or unsuccessful remembering) and that this is not a decisive factor.” (186)

Gender and Memory

“Studies have shown some gender differences in memory.8 For instance, “women more accurately recalled information concerning the appearance of their social targets than did men.”” (186)
“[M]en outperformed women on a visuospatial task and women outperformed men on tests of verbal fluency.”11 “[W]omen consistently performed at a higher level than did men on the episodic memory tasks, although there were no differences between men and women on the tasks assessing semantic memory, primary memory, or priming.” (187)

The Implications of Gender and Memory

The creed of 1 Corinthians 15:3–5/7 involves semantic memory, and there were no differences between men and women for semantic memory. The underlying narratives, such as those found in Mark 16, Matthew 28, Luke 24, and John 20–21, involved facial recognition and episodic memory, in which women outperformed men, and visuospatial tasks, in which men outperformed women. Nevertheless, these passages are outside the scope of the present study.

Bibliography

I interact with roughly 1700 sources.

Some keys works:

Allison, Dale C., Jr. The Resurrection of Jesus: Apologetics, Polemics, History, 2021.
Habermas, Gary Robert. On the Resurrection: Vol. 1: Evidences, 2024.
Licona, Michael R. The Resurrection of Jesus: A New Historiographical Approach, 2010.
McIver, Robert K. Memory, Jesus, and the Synoptic Gospels, 2011.