A Case Against the Swoon Theory in the McDowells’ Evidence For the Resurrection

Bradley Bowen | March 21, 2025

THE CASE AGAINST THE SWOON THEORY IN THE RESURRECTION FACTOR

In Chapter 6 of The Resurrection Factor (hereafter: TRF), published in 1981, Josh McDowell makes a case against the Swoon Theory, a case that draws on historical claims made in Chapter 3 of TRF. McDowell’s case against the Swoon Theory in TRF can be understood in terms of four general objections, each of which focuses on an alleged implication of the Swoon Theory and constitutes a reduction-to-absurdity argument:

TRF OBJECTION #1: IMPROBABLE SURVIVAL OF CRUCIFIXION
The Swoon Theory implies that Jesus was still alive when he was
taken down from the cross on Friday afternoon.

TRF OBJECTION #2: IMPROBABLE SURVIVAL OF ENTOMBMENT
The Swoon Theory implies that Jesus survived in his tomb from his burial on
Friday evening (the day he was crucified) until around sunrise Sunday
morning, about 36 hours after he was buried in that tomb.

TRF OBJECTION #3: IMPROBABLE DEPARTURE FROM TOMB
The Swoon Theory implies that Jesus walked away from his tomb
around sunrise on Sunday morning, about 36 hours after he was
buried in that tomb.

TRF OBJECTION #4: IMPROBABLE TRANSFORMATION OF DISCIPLES
The Swoon Theory implies that Jesus met with his disciples in
Jerusalem on Sunday evening, about 48 hours after he was buried in a
stone tomb, and that this meeting convinced his disciples that God
raised Jesus from the dead.

McDowell believes that each of these four alleged implications of the Swoon
Theory is very improbable and that the combination of these four very improbable
implications shows that the Swoon Theory is almost certainly false.

Note that TRF Objection #4 is the same as the Sickly Jesus Objection (Objection #5 in Kreeft and Tacelli’s Handbook of Christian Apologetics).

In the DRAFT Chapter 8 of my upcoming book Thinking Critically about the Resurrection of Jesus, Volume 1: The Resuscitation of the Swoon Theory, I show that McDowell’s case against the Swoon Theory in TRF fails:

https://thinkingcriticallyabout.podbean.com/e/chapter-8-the-case-against-the-swoon-theory-by-mcdowell

THE CASE AGAINST THE SWOON THEORY IN EVIDENCE FOR THE RESURRECTION

In a more recent book, Evidence for the Resurrection (hereafter: EFR), published in 2009, Josh McDowell and his son Sean McDowell present another case against the Swoon Theory. I suspect that this case can also be summarized into four or five main objections similar to the above objections in TRF, but in EFR they make thirty-three specific claims in just a few pages (p.222-225). These thirty-three claims are the basic components of their 21st-century case against the Swoon Theory.

In this post, I will try to determine which of these claims provide support for the four main objections that McDowell made in TRF, and also how these thirty-three claims relate to the objections in other cases against the Swoon Theory:

Chapter 8 of Handbook of Christian Apologetics (hereafter: HCA) by Peter Kreeft and Ronald Tacelli
Chapter 2 of The Son Rises (hereafter: TSR) by William Craig
Chapter 5 of The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus (hereafter: CRJ) by Gary Habermas and Michael Licona
Chapter 6 of The Resurrection Factor (hereafter: TRF) by Josh McDowell

THIRTY-THREE CLAIMS IN THE EFR CASE AGAINST THE SWOON THEORY

FROM PAGE 222

Consider first all that Jesus had been through:

Then according to the swoon theory, an incredible thing happened…

12. The cool damp air inside the tomb somehow revived and energized Jesus.
13. Jesus split out of his garments.
14. Jesus single-handedly pushed the stone away (from the entrance of Jesus’ tomb).
15. Jesus either fought off the Roman guards or somehow broke the seal and moved the stone without the Roman guards noticing it.
16. Jesus walked naked and barefoot on badly wounded feet through a city stirring in the morning.
17. Jesus appeared to his disciples as the Lord of Life.
18. [David Strauss’ Quote presenting the Sickly Jesus Objection.]

FROM PAGE 223

19. Probably the most significant problem for this theory is that it greatly underestimates the severity of Jesus’ wounds and the evidence for his death.

Here are some of the facts that have lead scholars to believe that Jesus died during his crucifixion:

20. The nature of Jesus’ 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.
21. The nature of crucifixion virtually guarantees death.
22. The piercing of Jesus’ side, from which came “blood and water” (John 19:34), is medical proof that Jesus had already died.
23. Jesus said he was in the act of dying while on the cross: (Luke 23:46) and (John 19:30).
24. The Roman soldiers, who were trained killers, were charged to make sure that Jesus died.
25. The examination of the Roman soldiers determined that Jesus was dead (John 19:33).
26. Pilot summoned the centurion to make sure Jesus had actually died before giving the body to Joseph for burial (Mark 15:44-45).

FROM PAGE 224

27. Jesus’ body was wrapped in about 100-plus pounds of cloth and spices and placed in a sealed tomb for three days (see John 19:39-40; Matt 27:60).
28. If Jesus had not died from his previous torture, he would have died in the tomb from lack of food, water, and medical treatment.
29. Medical experts who have studied the circumstances surrounding the end of Jesus’ life have concluded that he actually died on the cross.
30. Non-Christian historians from the first and second centuries, such as Tacitus and Josephus, recorded the death of Jesus of Nazareth.
31. The earliest Christian writers after the time of Christ, such a Polycarp and Ignatius, verify his death by crucifixion on the cross as well.

Was Jesus a deceiver?

32. Another significant problem for the swoon theory is that it makes Jesus into a deceiver. [Quote from William Craig presenting his Deceptive Jesus Objection]

FROM PAGE 225

33. To claim that Jesus survived the rigors of crucifixion and then convinced his disciples that he was Lord of life–as the swoon theory suggests–would be a greater miracle than the resurrection itself.

THE THIRTY-THREE CLAIMS AND THE FOUR OBJECTIONS IN TRF

There is some redundancy in the thirty-three claims, so these claims do not constitute thirty-three different objections against the Swoon Theory. Also, some of the claims are parts of the same objection, which means that in some cases two or three claims are part of just one objection.

I also recognize that most of these claims represent objections that I have already examined from other cases against the Swoon Theory (HCA by Kreeft and Tacelli, TSR by Craig, CRJ by Habermas and Licona). I have determined that all of those objections were weak, illogical, and/or based on false or dubious assumptions.

To start organizing this long list of claims, I am going to see how well they line up with the four general objections that McDowell put forward in his earlier book The Resurrection Factor.

I. Which of the thirty-three claims support TRF Objection #1?

TRF OBJECTION #1: IMPROBABLE SURVIVAL OF CRUCIFIXION
The Swoon Theory implies that Jesus was still alive when he was
taken down from the cross on Friday afternoon.

1. Jesus went through six trials.
2. Jesus was beaten to bloody shreds by the Roman flagrum.
3. Jesus was so weak he couldn’t carry his own patibulum to the crucifixion site.
4. Jesus had a crown of thorns thrust into his scalp.
5. Jesus had spikes driven into his hands and feet.
6. Jesus hung bleeding for six hours.
7. The Romans thrust a spear deep into Jesus’ side.
19. Probably the most significant problem for this theory is that it greatly underestimates the severity of Jesus’ wounds and the evidence for his death.
20. The nature of Jesus’ 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.
21. The nature of crucifixion virtually guarantees death.
22. The piercing of Jesus’ side, from which came “blood and water” (John 19:34), is medical proof that Jesus had already died.
23. Jesus said he was in the act of dying while on the cross: (Luke 23:46) and (John 19:30).
24. The Roman soldiers, who were trained killers, were charged to make sure that Jesus died.
25. The examination of the Roman soldiers determined that Jesus was dead (John 19:33).
26. Pilot summoned the centurion to make sure Jesus had actually died before giving the body to Joseph for burial (Mark 15:44-45).
29. Medical experts who have studied the circumstances surrounding the end of Jesus’ life have concluded that he actually died on the cross.
30. Non-Christian historians from the first and second centuries, such as Tacitus and Josephus, recorded the death of Jesus of Nazareth.
31. The earliest Christian writers after the time of Christ, such a Polycarp and Ignatius, verify his death by crucifixion on the cross as well.

II. Which of the thirty-three claims support TRF Objection #2?

TRF OBJECTION #2: IMPROBABLE SURVIVAL OF ENTOMBMENT
The Swoon Theory implies that Jesus survived in his tomb from his burial on
Friday evening (the day he was crucified) until around sunrise Sunday
morning, about 36 hours after he was buried in that tomb.

8. Jesus was encased in wrapped linen and 100-plus pounds of spices–and somehow (i.e. improbably) breathed through it all.
12. The cool damp air inside the tomb somehow (i.e. improbably) revived and energized Jesus.
27. Jesus’ body was wrapped in about 100-plus pounds of cloth and spices and placed in a sealed tomb for three days (see John 19:39-40; Matt 27:60).
28. If Jesus had not died from his previous torture, he would have died in the tomb from lack of food, water, and medical treatment.

III. Which of the thirty-three claims support TRF Objection #3?

TRF OBJECTION #3: IMPROBABLE DEPARTURE FROM TOMB
The Swoon Theory implies that Jesus walked away from his tomb
around sunrise on Sunday morning, about 36 hours after he was
buried in that tomb.

9. A large stone was lodged against the entrance of Jesus’ tomb.
10. A Roman guard was stationed outside of Jesus’ tomb.
11. A seal was placed (by the Roman guard) across the entrance.
13. Jesus (would have had to) split out of his garments (to escape the tomb).
14. Jesus (improbably) single-handedly pushed the stone away (from the entrance of Jesus’ tomb).
15. Jesus either fought off the Roman guards or somehow broke the seal and moved the stone without the Roman guards noticing it.

IV. Which of the thirty-three claims support TRF Objection #4?

TRF OBJECTION #4: IMPROBABLE TRANSFORMATION OF DISCIPLES
The Swoon Theory implies that Jesus met with his disciples in
Jerusalem on Sunday evening, about 48 hours after he was buried in a
stone tomb, and that this meeting convinced his disciples that God
raised Jesus from the dead.

16. Jesus (improbably) walked naked and barefoot on wounded feet through a city stirring in the morning.
17. Jesus (improbably) appeared to his disciples as the Lord of Life.
18. [David Strauss’ Quote presenting the Sickly Jesus Objection.]
32. Another significant problem for the swoon theory is that it makes Jesus into a deceiver. [Quote from William Craig presenting his Deceptive Jesus Objection]
33. To claim that Jesus survived the rigors of crucifixion and then convinced his disciples that he was Lord of life–as the swoon theory suggests–would be a greater miracle than the resurrection itself.

FOUR GENERAL TRF OBJECTIONS AND OBJECTIONS FROM OTHER CASES

We can see that all thirty-three points or claims against the Swoon Theory in EFR can be fit under the four general objections that constitute Josh McDowell’s case against the Swoon Theory in TRF.

I can also see that many of these thirty-three points constitute (or are part of) objections that I have examined from other cases against the Swoon Theory presented by other Christian apologists. So, I will now further analyze these groups of points to identify which points constitute (or are part of) more specific objections that I have already covered in my critiques of other cases against the Swoon Theory.

OBJECTIONS FROM OTHER CASES AGAINST THE SWOON THEORY

Objections from Handbook of Christian Apologetics by Peter Kreeft and Ronald Tacelli:

Objections from The Son Rises by William Craig:

Objections from The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus by Gary Habermas and Michael Licona:

CLAIMS FROM EFR THAT SUPPORT TRF OBJECTION #1

The McDowells EFR	McDowell TRF	Kreeft & Tacelli HCA	Craig TSR	Habermas & Licona CRJ
Claims 1-6	TRF Objection #1	N/A	TSR Objection #1	CRJ Objection #1
Claims 7 & 22	TRF Objection #1	HCA Objection #3	TSR Objection #1	CRJ Objection #1
Claims 19 & 20	TRF Objection #1	N/A	TSR Objection #1	CRJ Objection #1
Claim 21	TRF Objection #1	N/A	TSR Objection #1	CRJ Objection #1
Claim 23	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A
Claim 24	TRF Objection #1	HCA Objection #1	N/A	CRJ Objection #1
Claims 25 & 26	TRF Objection #1	HCA Objection #2 HCA Objection #3	TSR Objection #1	CRJ Objection #1
Claim 29	TRF Objection #1	HCA Objection #3	N/A	CRJ Objection #1
Claims 30 & 31	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A*

*Although Habermas and Licona do not reference early writers about the death of Jesus by crucifixion as an objection in their case against the Swoon Theory in Chapter 5 of CRJ, they do have a section in Chapter 3 of CRJ about the claim “Jesus died by crucifixion” supposedly being a historical fact.

NOTE: Claim 23 is the only point or objection above that is found only in EFR.

NOTE: Although Claims 30 and 31 in EFR are not found in the other cases against the Swoon Theory, Habermas and Licona make very similar points in Chapter 3 of CRJ. Habermas and Licona just don’t use this point as an objection against the Swoon Theory.

CLAIMS FROM EFR THAT SUPPORT TRF OBJECTION #2

The McDowells EFR	McDowell TRF	Kreeft & Tacelli HCA	Craig TSR	Habermas & Licona CRJ
Claims 8 & 27	TRF Objection #2	HCA Objection #4	TSR Objection #1	N/A*
Claims 12 & 28	TRF Objection #2	HCA Objection #4 HCA Objection #5	TSR Objection #1	N/A*

*Although Habermas and Licona do not mention the idea that Jesus would likely have died in the tomb if he was still alive when buried, their discussion of the wounds and injuries of Jesus in CRJ Objection #1 of their case is relevant to this objection.

CLAIMS FROM EFR THAT SUPPORT TRF OBJECTION #3

The McDowells EFR	McDowell TRF	Kreeft & Tacelli HCA	Craig TSR	Habermas & Licona CRJ
Claims 9,13, & 14	TRF Objection #3	HCA Objection #4 HCA Objection #7	TSR Objection #1	CRJ Objection #2
Claims 10, 11, & 15	TRF Objection #3	HCA Objection #6 HCA Objection #7	TSR Objection #1	N/A*

*Although Habermas and Licona do not mention the idea that Jesus would likely have been prevented from leaving the tomb by Roman soldiers, their discussion of the wounds and injuries of Jesus in CRJ Objection #1 of their case is relevant to this objection.

CLAIMS FROM EFR THAT SUPPORT TRF OBJECTION #4

The McDowells EFR	McDowell TRF	Kreeft & Tacelli HCA	Craig TSR	Habermas & Licona CRJ
Claim 16	N/A	N/A	N/A*	CRJ Objection #2 CRJ Objection #1
Claims 17, 18, & 33	TRF Objection #4	HCA Objection #5	TSR Objection #3 TSR Objection #1	CRJ Objection #2 CRJ Objection #1
Claim 32	TRF Objection #4	N/A	TSR Objection #2	N/A

*Although Craig does not specifically mention the issue of Jesus walking on wounded feet to leave the tomb, his TSR Objection #1 (Jesus’ Physical Injuries) asserts that Jesus’ feet were nailed to the cross, so that is relevant to the objection implied in Claim 16.

NOTE: HCA Objection #8 (Where Did Jesus Go?) and HCA Objection #9 (Swoon Theory implies False Theories) do not show up on the above charts, because they do not correspond to any of the claims or points from the McDowells’ case in EFR. These two objections from HCA appear to be unique, because they also do not occur in Craig’s TSR case against the Swoon Theory, nor in the case against the Swoon Theory by Habermas and Licona in CRJ.

CONCLUSION

The only new or unique objections in EFR are these:

23. Jesus said he was in the act of dying while on the cross: (Luke 23:46) and (John 19:30).

30. Non-Christian historians from the first and second centuries, such as Tacitus and Josephus, recorded the death of Jesus of Nazareth.
31. The earliest Christian writers after the time of Christ, such a Polycarp and Ignatius, verify his death by crucifixion on the cross as well.

I consider claims (30) and (31) to be two parts of one objection. Also, although no other case against the Swoon Theory raises this objection, Habermas and Licona do make very similar points in Chapter 3 of CRJ, so when I examine the objection that consists of claims (30) and (31), I will also examine the relevant passage in Chapter 3 of CRJ. This objection appears to be a very weak objection, a desperate grasping for straws.

NOTE: The CRJ Objection #3 (Paul’s Conversion Experience) in Chapter 5 of The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus is a new or unique objection to the Swoon Theory. This objection does not show up on the above chart, because it does not correlate with any of the McDowells’ objections, nor does it correlate with any of the objections by Kreeft and Tacelli in HCA, nor with any of Craig’s objections in TSR.