WHERE WE ARE

The Christian apologists Peter Kreeft and Ronald Tacelli presented nine objections against the Swoon Theory in their Handbook of Christian Apologetics (published in 1994). I have carefully analyzed those nine objections and then carefully evaluated them. I concluded that each of those nine objections against the Swoon Theory FAIL. So, Kreeft and Tacelli FAILED to refute the Swoon Theory. Because their case for the resurrection of Jesus required them to refute the Swoon Theory, their case for the resurrection in Chapter 8 of Handbook of Christian Apologetics also FAILS.

I am in the process of carefully analyzing and evaluating six more objections against the Swoon Theory, objections from other Christian apologists besides Kreeft and Tacelli.

In this current post, I will carefully analyze one last objection against the Swoon Theory, one of the six objections by other Christian apologists that do not correspond to any of the nine objections presented by Kreeft and Tacelli in their Handbook of Christian Apologetics.

OBJECTION #15 (JESUS’ WOUNDS)

Objection #15 (Jesus’ Wounds) is the last objection against the Swoon Theory that I plan to examine, but it is certainly NOT the least. Kreeft and Tacelli did a good job of rounding up nine different objections to the Swoon Theory, but they missed a major objection that is used by many other Christian apologists.

In his book The Son Rises (originally published 1981, republished in 2000; hereafter: TSR), the Christian apologist William Craig puts forward only three objections to the Swoon Theory. The first objection he makes in that book is one that Kreeft and Tacelli do not present in their objections against the Swoon Theory:

The theory failed to take seriously the extent of Jesus’ physical injury.

(TSR, p.37)

Craig is talking about the Apparent Death Theory; that is just another name for the Swoon Theory.

Christian apologists Gary Habermas and Michael Licona raise the same objection in their Case for the Resurrection of Jesus (hereafter: CRJ), and it is also the first objection that they raise:

First, such an occurrence seems highly unlikely, given the nature of scourging and crucifixion.

(CRJ, p.100)

The “occurrence” to which they refer appears to be Jesus’ alleged survival of his crucifixion, which is the main assertion of the Swoon Theory. They are saying that it is highly unlikely that Jesus would have survived his crucifixion because of the wounds or injuries that Jesus experienced from scourging and crucifixion.

In their book Evidence for the Resurrection (hereafter: EFR), Christian apologists Josh McDowell and Sean McDowell also make this objection against the Swoon Theory:

Probably the most significant problem for this theory [i.e. the Swoon Theory] is that it greatly underestimates the severity of Jesus’ wounds and the evidence for his death.

(EFR, p.223)

Note that the McDowells think this is “Probably the most significant problem” for the Swoon Theory. Since this objection is the first of only three objections raised by Craig in The Son Rises, and since it is also the first objection raised by Habermas and Licona in their Case for the Resurrection of Jesus, it appears to be viewed as a major objection by these Christian apologists.

Craig provides examples of wounds or injuries of Jesus that are given as evidence that Jesus died on the cross:

Considering the beatings of Jesus, His exhausting all-night trial and interrogations, His scourging, His crucifixion, the spear in his side…

(TSR, p.39)

The McDowells also provide examples of wounds or injuries of Jesus that are given as evidence that Jesus died on the cross:

(1) The nature of his injuries–his whipping, beating, lack of sleep, crown of thorns and his collapse on the way to his crucifixion while carrying the cross–indicate that his ordeal must have killed him. (2) The nature of crucifixion virtually guarantees death.

(EFR, p.223)

The McDowells provide a similar list on the previous page:

Consider first all that Jesus had been through: (1) He went through six trials–three Roman and three Jewish; (2) was beaten to bloody shreds by the Roman flagrum; (3) was so weak he couldn’t carry his own patibulum to the crucifixion site; (4) had a crown of thorns thrust into his scalp; (5) had spikes driven through his hands and feet and hung bleeding for six hours, (6) the Romans thrust a spear deep into his side…

(EFR, p.222)

The two key phrases that summarize this objection are these from Craig and from the McDowells:

…the extent of Jesus’ physical injury.

(TSR, p.37)

…the severity of Jesus’ wounds…

(EFR, p.223)

According to the McDowells, the wounds and injuries inflicted on Jesus just before his crucifixion and during his crucifixion lead us to an important conclusion:

The nature of his injuries…indicate that his ordeal must have killed him.

(EFR, p.223)

IDENTIFICATION STEPS

I will now identify the explicitly stated claims in Objection #15.

Claims from Evidence for the Resurrection (p.222):

1. [He went through six trials–three Roman and three Jewish;]

2. [He…was beaten to bloody shreds by the Roman flagrum;]

3. [He…was so weak he couldn’t carry his own patibulum to the crucifixion site;] – this is NOT a wound or injury, but provides evidence in support of statement (2).

4. [He…had a crown of thorns thrust into his scalp;]

5. [He had spikes driven through his hands…]

6. [He…had spikes driven through his…feet…]

7. [He…hung bleeding for six hours,]

8. [the Romans thrust a spear deep into his side;]

Claims from Evidence for the Resurrection (p.223):

9. [his whipping,] – this is redundant with statement (2).

10. [his…beating,] – this seems to be a reference to Jesus being struck during his trials.

11. [his…lack of sleep,] – this is the point or significance of statement (1).

12. [his…crown of thorns] – this is redundant with statement (4).

13. [his collapse on the way to his crucifixion while carrying the cross] – this is redundant with statement (3).

14. [The nature of his injuries…indicate that his ordeal must have killed him.]

Claims from The Son Rises (p.39):

15. […the beatings of Jesus,] – this is redundant with statement (10).

16. [His exhausting all-night trial and interrogations,] – this is redundant with statement (1).

17. [His scourging,] – this is a less detailed version of statement (2).

18. [His crucifixion,] – this is a less detailed version of three claims made by the McDowells: (5), (6), and (7).

19. [the spear in his side…] – this is a less detailed version of statement (8).

Claim from The Son Rises (p.37):

20. [The theory failed to take seriously the extent of Jesus’ physical injury.] – this makes a claim that is very similar to statement (14).

Claim from The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus:

21. [First, such an occurrence seems highly unlikely, given the nature of scourging and crucifixion.] – this makes a claim that is very similar to statement (14).

CLARIFICATION STEPS

I will now clarify the explicitly stated claims in Objection #15.

1. [He went through six trials–three Roman and three Jewish;]

11. [his…lack of sleep,] (redundant claim)

16. [His exhausting all-night trial and interrogations,] (redundant claim)

=>1a. Jesus went through six trials–three Roman and three Jewish, and Jesus was kept up all night by his trials and interrogations just before he was crucified.

2. [He…was beaten to bloody shreds by the Roman flagrum;]

9. [his whipping,] (redundant claim)

17. [His scourging,] (redundant claim)

=>2a. Jesus was severely scourged with a Roman flagrum shortly before he was crucified.

3. [He…was so weak he couldn’t carry his own patibulum to the crucifixion site;]

13. [his collapse on the way to his crucifixion while carrying the cross]

=>3a. Jesus was so weak that he collapsed trying to carry the patibulum (the horizontal bar of the cross) to the crucifixion site just before he was crucified.

4. [He…had a crown of thorns thrust into his scalp;]

12. [his…crown of thorns] (redundant claim)

=>4a. Jesus had a crown of thorns thrust into his scalp shortly before he was crucified.

5. [He had spikes driven through his hands…]

=>5a. When Jesus was crucified, spikes were driven through his hands to attach him to the cross.

6. [He…had spikes driven through his…feet…]

=>6a. When Jesus was crucified, spikes were driven through his feet to attach him to the cross.

7. [He…hung bleeding for six hours,]

=>7a. After Jesus was attached to the cross, he hung on the cross bleeding for six hours.

8. [the Romans thrust a spear deep into his side;]

19. [the spear in his side…] (redundant claim)

=>8a. While Jesus was on the cross, a Roman soldier thrust a spear deep into his side.

10. [his…beating,]

15. […the beatings of Jesus,]

=>10a. During some of his trials shortly before his crucifixion, Jesus received beatings.

14. [The nature of his injuries…indicate that his ordeal must have killed him.]

20. [The theory failed to take seriously the extent of Jesus’ physical injury.] – similar to claim (14).

21. [First, such an occurrence seems highly unlikely, given the nature of scourging and crucifixion.] – similar to claim (14).

=>14a. The nature and extent of the physical injuries that were inflicted on Jesus shortly before his crucifixion and during his crucifixion make it highly unlikely that Jesus was still alive when he was removed from the cross.

FILL IN STEPS

I will now make explicit any unstated assumptions or claims needed to understand the argument constituting Objection #15.

The final sub-argument of this objection is left UNSTATED, but it is not difficult to infer the final sub-argument based on what Craig and the McDowells have explicitly stated:

B. It is highly unlikely that Jesus was still alive when he was removed from the cross.

C. IF it is highly unlikely that Jesus was still alive when he was removed from the cross, THEN it is highly probable that the Swoon Theory is false.

THEREFORE:

A. It is highly probable that the Swoon Theory is false.

DIAGRAMMING THE ARGUMENT FOR OBJECTION #15

I will now show the logical structure of the argument constituting Objection #15 (Jesus’ Wounds).

EXPLICITLY STATED CLAIMS

1a. Jesus went through six trials–three Roman and three Jewish, and Jesus was kept up all night by his trials and interrogations just before he was crucified.

2a. Jesus was severely scourged with a Roman flagrum shortly before he was crucified.

3a. Jesus was so weak that he collapsed trying to carry the patibulum (the horizontal bar of the cross) to the crucifixion site just before he was crucified.

4a. Jesus had a crown of thorns thrust into his scalp shortly before he was crucified.

5a. When Jesus was crucified, spikes were driven through his hands to attach him to the cross.

6a. When Jesus was crucified, spikes were driven through his feet to attach him to the cross.

7a. After Jesus was attached to the cross, he hung on the cross bleeding for six hours.

8a. While Jesus was on the cross, a Roman soldier thrust a spear deep into his side.

10a. During some of his trials shortly before his crucifixion, Jesus received beatings.

14a. The nature and extent of the physical injuries that were inflicted on Jesus shortly before his crucifixion and during his crucifixion make it highly unlikely that Jesus was still alive when he was removed from the cross.

UNSTATED ASSUMPTIONS/CLAIMS

A. It is highly probable that the Swoon Theory is false.

B. It is highly unlikely that Jesus was still alive when he was removed from the cross.

C. IF it is highly unlikely that Jesus was still alive when he was removed from the cross, THEN it is highly probable that the Swoon Theory is false.

NOTE: I have gathered together five claims that are about what appear to be major wounds or injuries into a single sub-argument supporting statement (14a). Three claims that talk about less serious wounds or injuries I have represented as each providing some separate evidence in support of statement (14a).

One could also represent each of the wound or injury claims as providing some separate support for (14a), but I think the way I have structured the diagram gives more emphasis to the five claims that are about what appear to be the most serious wounds, and that this is a clearer way to represent the thinking of Christian apologists. For example, when Habermas and Licona present this objection, they focus on the “scourging and crucifixion” of Jesus, and the five claims that I have grouped together into a sub-argument are in fact focused on the wounds and injuries related to the “scourging and crucifixion” of Jesus.