Two New Objections Against the Swoon Theory by the McDowells – INDEX
WHERE WE ARE
In my upcoming book Thinking Critically about the Resurrection of Jesus, Volume 1: The Resuscitation of the Swoon Theory (hereafter: TCAR1), I show that various cases by different Christian apologists against the Swoon Theory fail. The Swoon Theory is the skeptical view that Jesus did not die on the cross but survived his crucifixion and then sometime later contacted some of his disciples who mistakenly inferred from this that God had raised Jesus from the dead.
In TCAR1, I show that:
- The case against the Swoon Theory by Peter Kreeft and Ronald Tacelli in their Handbook of Christian Apologetics (hereafter: HCA) fails
- The case against the Swoon Theory by William Craig in his book The Son Rises (hereafter: TSR) fails
- The case against the Swoon Theory by Gary Habermas and Michael Licona in their book The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus (hereafter: CRJ) fails
- The case against the Swoon Theory by Josh McDowell in his book The Resurrection Factor (hereafter: TRF) fails
But McDowell’s book The Resurrection Factor was published in 1981, so it is quite possible that sometime in the four decades that have elapsed since that book was published, McDowell could have improved and strengthened his case against the Swoon Theory.
THE MCDOWELLS’ 21ST-CENTURY CASE AGAINST THE SWOON THEORY
In 2009, Josh McDowell published a book co-authored with his son Sean McDowell called Evidence for the Resurrection (hereafter: EFR). In that book, the McDowells make a case for the resurrection of Jesus, and they also make cases against various skeptical theories, including the Swoon Theory.
On pages 221 to 225 of EFR, the McDowells make a 21st-century case against the Swoon Theory. They present twelve objections against the Swoon Theory in those five pages. However, seven of those objections correspond to objections by Kreeft and Tacelli in HCA, and three of those objections correspond to objections by Craig in TSR or by Habermas and Licona in CRJ. (See my article “A Case Against the Swoon Theory in the McDowells’ Evidence For the Resurrection” for my analysis of the number and content of the objections presented by the McDowells in their book EFR.)
So, in my book TCAR1, I have already shown that ten of the twelve objections in EFR fail. Thus, only the two new objections in EFR need to be carefully analyzed and evaluated:
- Jesus’ Last Words Objection (EFR, p.223)
- Early Writers Objection (EFR, p.224)
In a series of six posts, I show that these two new objections fail, and thus that the 21st-century case by the McDowells against the Swoon Theory fails, because all twelve objections that constitute their new case have been shown to fail: