WHERE WE ARE

In Part 1 of this series, I carefully analyzed and clarified the McDowells’ Jesus’ Last Words Objection from their book Evidence for the Resurrection (hereafter: EFR). In Part 3 of this series, I showed that the Jesus’ Last Words Objection fails, based on my clarified version of the argument constituting that objection.

However, there was an ambiguity in the logical structure of the argument as presented by the McDowells in EFR, so I would like to cover all the bases and consider the alternative interpretation of that argument. The logical role of one specific premise was unclear. Premise (4) could have either been intended as a reason for believing premise (2a) or as a reason for accepting the conclusion of the argument: (A). I think it is more likely that the McDowells intended (4) to be a reason for believing premise (2a), but I’m not certain of this point.

CLARIFICATION OF THE OBJECTION BASED ON THE GOSPEL OF JOHN

So, in this current post, I will consider the alternative possibility, namely that premise (4) was intended as a separate reason or argument in support of (A), the conclusion of the core argument for the Jesus’ Last Words Objection against the Swoon Theory. On this view, the McDowells were actually presenting two different and separate objections against the Swoon Theory; one based on the Gospel of Luke, and another based on the Gospel of John.

My evaluation in Part 3 of this series clearly shows that the objection based on the Gospel of Luke fails. However, my evaluation of the reasoning based on the Gospel of John assumed that the intention was to provide additional support for premise (2a), but now I will evaluate the argument based on the Gospel of John as being a separate argument. Let’s call this the Gave Up His Spirit Objection. Here is the objection based on the Gospel of John:

John renders that he “gave up his spirit” (John 19:30).
(EFR, p.223)

The pronoun “he” should be clarified by replacing it with what it refers to: Jesus. Here is the main inference of this argument:

1a. John renders that Jesus “gave up his spirit”.

THEREFORE:

A. Jesus died while he was on the cross.

In the context of this argument (in view of the conclusion of the argument), premise (1a) is about an event that allegedly took place while Jesus was on the cross, which is a crucial point, so we should make that detail explicit in the premise:

1b. John renders that at some point while Jesus was on the cross, Jesus “gave up his spirit”.

It is not clear why the McDowells use the odd word “renders” here, so I am going to replace that term with a more straightforward term:

1c. John states that at some point while Jesus was on the cross, Jesus “gave up his spirit”.

Premise (1c) is ambiguous because the name “John” could refer either to “John the disciple of Jesus” or to “the Gospel of John“:

1d. John the disciple of Jesus states that at some point while Jesus was on the cross, Jesus “gave up his spirit”.

1e. The Gospel of John states that at some point while Jesus was on the cross, Jesus “gave up his spirit”.

If we go with interpretation (1d), the argument will have a significant problem, because it will need the assumption that John the disciple of Jesus was the author of the Gospel of John. But there are good reasons to doubt that John the disciple of Jesus was the author of the Gospel of John, so using premise (1d) will involve making an assumption that is probably false.

I think the argument can be made using premise (1e), and we can avoid the improbable assumption just mentioned by understanding the argument as being based upon premise (1e), so that is the direction I will take.

The evidence for premise (1e) is provided in this summary form:

2. (John 19:30).

We can spell out what this means in a complete sentence:

2a. Verse 30 of the 19th chapter of the Gospel of John states this:
“When Jesus had received the wine, he said, ‘It is finished.’ Then he bowed his head and gave up his spirit.”

This is a reason given in support of premise (1e), and (1e) is a reason given in support of the conclusion (A). So, here is the basic logical structure of the argument:

2a. Verse 30 of the 19th chapter of the Gospel of John states this:
“When Jesus had received the wine, he said, ‘It is finished.’ Then he bowed his head and gave up his spirit.”

THEREFORE:

1e. The Gospel of John states that at some point while Jesus was on the cross, Jesus “gave up his spirit”.

THEREFORE:

A. Jesus died while he was on the cross.

THE INFERENCE FROM PREMISE (2a) to PREMISE (1e)

Verse 30 of Chapter 19 of the Gospel of John does not explicitly state that Jesus was on the cross when the described events took place. Thus, premise (1e) does NOT follow logically from premise (2a). The inference from (2a) to (1e) is logically invalid, so this sub-argument is illogical, and thus the Gave Up His Spirit Objection fails.

However, if you read verse 30 of Chapter 19 of the Gospel of John in the context of the rest of that Chapter, it is clear that Jesus was hanging on the cross during the events described in verse 30. So, we may add another premise to the argument to include this information about the context of verse 30:

B. The context of verse 30 in Chapter 19 of the Gospel of John clearly implies that the events described in verse 30 took place at some point while Jesus was on the cross.

The combination of premise (2a) and premise (B) implies that premise (1e) is true, so adding premise (B) to the argument fixes the problem of the invalid inference from premise (2a) to premise (1e):

2a. Verse 30 of the 19th chapter of the Gospel of John states this:
“When Jesus had received the wine, he said, ‘It is finished.’ Then he bowed his head and gave up his spirit.”

B. The context of verse 30 in Chapter 19 of the Gospel of John clearly implies that the events described in verse 30 took place at some point while Jesus was on the cross.

THEREFORE:

1e. The Gospel of John states that at some point while Jesus was on the cross, Jesus “gave up his spirit”.

THE INFERENCE FROM PREMISE (1e) TO THE CONCLUSION (A)

The next inference in this argument is from premise (1e) to the conclusion (A):

1e. The Gospel of John states that at some point while Jesus was on the cross, Jesus “gave up his spirit”.

THEREFORE:

A. Jesus died while he was on the cross.

The inference from premise (1e) to the conclusion (A) is logically invalid. Premise (1e) says nothing about Jesus’ death, but the conclusion is about Jesus’ death. Therefore, the inference from (1e) to (A) is NOT a deductively valid inference.

However, although this is not a deductively valid inference, the meaning of premise (1e) might be such as to imply that (A) is true. It all depends on how we interpret the phrase “gave up his spirit”.

We could reasonably take this phrase literally and then add this premise to the argument:

C. IF The Gospel of John states that at some point while Jesus was on the cross, Jesus “gave up his spirit”, THEN the Gospel of John claims that at some point while Jesus was on the cross, Jesus caused the immaterial essence of his self to separate from his physical body.

This is a reasonable interpretation of the meaning of the phrase “gave up his spirit” in verse 30 of Chapter 19 of the Gospel of John. The author of the Gospel of John presumably believed that humans are composed of both a physical body and an immaterial spirit or soul, and also believed that when a person dies, the immaterial spirit or soul becomes separated from that person’s physical body. We can now draw an intermediate inference from (1e) and (C):

1e. The Gospel of John states that at some point while Jesus was on the cross, Jesus “gave up his spirit”.

C. IF The Gospel of John states that at some point while Jesus was on the cross, Jesus “gave up his spirit”, THEN the Gospel of John claims that at some point while Jesus was on the cross, Jesus caused the immaterial essence of his self to separate from his physical body.

THEREFORE:

D. The Gospel of John claims that at some point while Jesus was on the cross, Jesus caused the immaterial essence of his self to separate from his physical body.

This seems fine so far, but the argument still says nothing about the death of Jesus, which is what the conclusion (A) is talking about. So, there is still a logical gap between premise (D) and the conclusion (A).

There is also a potentially serious problem with the argument involving premise (D): the claim that the immaterial essence or spirit of Jesus became separated from Jesus’ physical body is NOT a historical claim nor can this claim be confirmed or disconfirmed on the basis of ordinary human observations.

We cannot see immaterial souls or spirits with our eyes; an immaterial soul or spirit has no size or shape or color or weight, so the claim that Jesus’ spirit became separated from Jesus’ physical body is NOT a historical claim. Even if we made the very dubious assumption that the Gospel of John provides an accurate and reliable historical account of the trials and crucifixion of Jesus, we still could not reasonably infer that Jesus’ spirit became separated from Jesus’ physical body on the basis of a statement in the Gospel of John, because this is a metaphysical claim NOT a historical claim.

However, although the author of the Gospel of John might have sincerely believed the metaphysical claim about the spirit of Jesus, this belief was based on a more ordinary factual belief, namely that Jesus stopped breathing, stopped moving, and stopped speaking or moaning at some point while he was on the cross. In other words, the author of the Gospel of John believed that Jesus died at some point while Jesus was on the cross, and from that ordinary factual claim the author of the Gospel of John inferred the metaphysical change about the immaterial and unobservable spirit of Jesus.

Thus, we may add another premise to the argument, in order to avoid the serious problems involved in trying to evaluate the truth or falsehood of the metaphysical claim asserted by the author of the Gospel of John:

E. IF the author of the Gospel of John claims that at some point while Jesus was on the cross, Jesus caused the immaterial essence of his self to separate itself from his physical body, THEN the author of the Gospel of John believed that Jesus died at some point while Jesus was on the cross.

Here is the clarified version of the sub-argument for the conclusion (A):

D. The Gospel of John claims that at some point while Jesus was on the cross, Jesus caused the immaterial essence of his self to separate from his physical body.

E. IF the author of the Gospel of John claims that at some point while Jesus was on the cross, Jesus caused the immaterial essence of his self to separate itself from his physical body, THEN the author of the Gospel of John believed that Jesus died at some point while Jesus was on the cross.

THEREFORE:

F. The author of the Gospel of John believed that Jesus died at some point while Jesus was on the cross.

THEREFORE:

A. Jesus died while he was on the cross.

Now we can construct an argument diagram that represents the argument constituting the McDowells’ Gave Up His Spirit Objection to the Swoon Theory:

STATED PREMISES/CLAIMS

1e. The Gospel of John states that at some point while Jesus was on the cross, Jesus “gave up his spirit”.

2a. Verse 30 of the 19th chapter of the Gospel of John states this:
“When Jesus had received the wine, he said, ‘It is finished.’ Then he bowed his head and gave up his spirit.”

UNSTATED PREMISES/CLAIMS

A. Jesus died while he was on the cross.

B. The context of verse 30 in Chapter 19 of the Gospel of John clearly implies that the events described in verse 30 took place at some point while Jesus was on the cross.

C. IF The Gospel of John states that at some point while Jesus was on the cross, Jesus “gave up his spirit”, THEN the Gospel of John claims that at some point while Jesus was on the cross, Jesus caused the immaterial essence of his self to separate from his physical body.

D. The Gospel of John claims that at some point while Jesus was on the cross, Jesus caused the immaterial essence of his self to separate from his physical body.

E. IF the author of the Gospel of John claims that at some point while Jesus was on the cross, Jesus caused the immaterial essence of his self to separate itself from his physical body, THEN the author of the Gospel of John believed that Jesus died at some point while Jesus was on the cross.

F. The author of the Gospel of John believed that Jesus died at some point while Jesus was on the cross.

EVALUATION OF THE SUB-ARGUMENT FOR THE CONCLUSION (A)

Most of this argument that constitutes the Gave Up His Spirit Objection is in support of the key premise (F). I don’t see any obvious problems with the argument for premise (F), so we have a good reason to believe that premise (F) is true. The only remaining question is whether the final inference in this argument is valid:

F. The author of the Gospel of John believed that Jesus died at some point while Jesus was on the cross.

THEREFORE:

A. Jesus died while he was on the cross.

This inference is invalid. The fact that the author of the Gospel of John believed that X was the case is NOT proof that X was in fact the case. The author of the Gospel of John could be mistaken about X being the case. The author of the Gospel of John believing that Jesus died on the cross is NOT a conclusive reason to believe that Jesus actually died on the cross, and it is not even a good reason to believe that Jesus actually died on the cross.

We don’t know who wrote the Gospel of John, but it was probably NOT written by John or by any of the eleven remaining disciples of Jesus. Furthermore, the Gospel of John provides an unreliable account of the life and teachings of Jesus, and an unreliable account of the trials and crucifixion of Jesus. So, either the author of the Gospel of John was a liar or else the author of the Gospel of John believed lots of things about Jesus that were false. So, either the Gospel of John contains many statements about Jesus that the author did not believe, which would cast significant doubt on premise (E), or else the author believed lots of things about Jesus that were false, which would cast significant doubt on the inference from (F) to the conclusion (A).

Thus, either premise (E) is dubious or the inference from (F) to (A) is dubious. In either case, we have not been given a good reason to believe that (A) is true, and thus (A) is dubious and might well be false. Therefore, the Gave His Spirit Up Objection against the Swoon Theory fails.