Why would we believe there is anything beyond death?

Christianity had a minor starting point in the grand view of the time.  The events occur in a distant province, of a conquered nation who was resistant to the Roman culture.  A possible example would be if something remarkable happened in the Navajo nation in the United States.  The chances of anyone not connected to the Nation itself even caring about the event are low.  

Only 9 secular historians from within 150 years of Jesus life wrote about him.  But this is not that unusual.  Only 9 historians wrote about Tiberias Ceasar who was ruler during the 3 years of Jesus' public ministry.

There are other sources, but they are not secular.  The Bible is full of first-hand accounts by individuals who were witnesses to the man and the events.  Again, this makes logical sense.  If someone did really believe that the resurrection occurred, would they stay a secular resource?  And if you didn't believe it occurred, would you treat it as a crazy fairy tale not worthy of mentioning in letters and historical accounts?  

Three secular resources are preeminent in my search for facts about the earliest of followers and their commitment in Jesus.  

All of these accounts are relatively easy to find on the internet.....

From Josephus, a Jew who became a Roman Historian specializing in Jewish history.  He lived during the life of Jesus and wrote the vast majority  of his works after 71 AD.  This is what he says about James (the brother of Jesus) and his death.

      "when, therefore, Ananus was of this disposition, he thought he had now a proper opportunity [to exercise his authority]. Festus was now dead, and Albinus was but upon the road; so he assembled the sanhedrim of judges, and brought before them the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ, whose name was James, and some others, [or, some of his companions]; and when he had formed an accusation against them as breakers of the law, he delivered them to be stoned: but as for those who seemed the most equitable of the citizens, and such as were the most uneasy at the breach of the laws, they disliked what was done; they also sent to the king [Agrippa], desiring him to send to Ananus that he should act so no more, for that what he had already done was not to be justified"

Note, Josephus also writes about the early followers, but because the tone of that section is different than the majority of his writings, many historians believe that later copiers of the work embellished the account.

.............................

One of the greatest Roman historian Publius Cornelius Tacitus, who lived from  c56- c120, confirms both Jesus death and the early persecution of Christians.  He says in his Annals:

 Yet no human effort, no princely largess nor offerings to the gods could make that infamous rumor disappear that Nero had somehow ordered the fire. Therefore, in order to abolish that rumor, Nero falsely accused and executed with the most exquisite punishments those people called Christians, who were infamous for their abominations. The originator of the name, Christ, was executed as a criminal by the procurator Pontius Pilate during the reign of Tiberius; and though repressed, this destructive superstition erupted again, not only through Judea, which was the origin of this evil, but also through the city of Rome, to which all that is horrible and shameful floods together and is celebrated. Therefore, first those were seized who admitted their faith, and then, using the information they provided, a vast multitude were convicted, not so much for the crime of burning the city, but for hatred of the human race. And perishing they were additionally made into sports: they were killed by dogs by having the hides of beasts attached to them, or they were nailed to crosses or set aflame, and, when the daylight passed away, they were used as nighttime lamps. Nero gave his own gardens for this spectacle and performed a Circus game, in the habit of a charioteer mixing with the plebs or driving about the race-course. Even though they were clearly guilty and merited being made the most recent example of the consequences of crime, people began to pity these sufferers, because they were consumed not for the public good but on account of the fierceness of one man. 

from Washington State University and the translation by Richard Hooker.  

 Tacitus (c. 55 -117 CE): Nero’s persecution of the Christians | Common Errors in English Usage and More | Washington State University (wsu.edu) 

.........................

Finally, a colleague and friend of Tacitus provides and early record of Christians from a non-historian source.  Pliny the younger (61 -c113)  was a lawyer and magistrate who has 247 letters survive the centuries.  In particular, he writes Emperor Trajan about the Christians in 111.  Trajan's reply also survived through time.  You can find the translations here:   Pliny the Younger and Trajan on the Christians   You can also go to this article in Wikipedia to explore them in more detail and find other references:   Pliny the Younger on Christians - Wikipedia 

Pliny persecuted Christians.  When an anonymous list was published, he sought out the individuals to make sure they worship Trajan, the Emperor.  He gave Christians three opportunities to recant their faith and worship the Roman gods.  If they did not, they were executed.  The Christians only crime was their worship of Jesus.  By this time, the Christians being killed were probably second or third generations as most of the firsthand eyewitnesses would have died of old age or other causes.   The detail found in this historical document is outstanding and an undeniable witness. 

Trajan's reply was to tell Pliny he was in the right for what he was doing, but to not go out seeking Christians or pay attention to the anonymous list, just to prosecute those who were brought to Pliny for judgement.  

The Christians were not seen as a threat to the empire, it was the religion that they practiced which was offensive to the state and reason for execution.  It is also remarkable that even given multiple opportunities to do a simple act of recanting, the Christians were unwilling to save their own lives.  

Three accounts of Christians who either knew Jesus personally or probably knew someone who knew him personally.  In all cases, they were killed for their belief in him and his teachings.  Also, the historical accounts show that these people were good citizens and not troublemakers.  If Jesus had been resurrected, then those personal stories would have driven the fear of death out of the individuals.  If they were just committing their lives to his teachings, something utterly powerful must be in those teachings to drive the fear of death out of them.   

This is extremely remarkable considering the early circumstances.  After a very short-lived religious reformation in Judea, the founder was brutally killed by the authorities (both religious and government leaders).  The threat of violence was very real and yet, these Jews move through and outside of their communities, rapidly, spreading their faith.  

There is no record of a specific organization or political group or any other structure to support the cause.  By all normal accounts, the movement should have died out.  The foundation for the movement is very weak and the opposition is great.  The worldly rewards are slim, and the work would appear hard.  This movement should die out or be incorporated into larger cultural structures.  

Even after the persecution starts, there is no Roman record of the Christians aggressively fighting their murderers.  For zealots, that is the natural response, to fight for their beliefs.  The early Christians continue to spread abruptly, and they die without fighting against the men who kill them.  Eventually, the Christians overcome their opposition and transform these structures.

What might bring such change?  Why was the fear of death gone?