Skeptics: 6 & Christian Apologists: 0
This is the current score on the important issue of the Swoon Theory. The Swoon Theory is the skeptical view that Jesus survived crucifixion and later met with some of his disciples, and that as a result, the disciples sincerely but mistakenly inferred from this experience that God raised Jesus from the dead.
FOUR CASES SHOWN TO FAIL IN MY UPCOMING BOOK
In my upcoming book, Thinking Critically about the Resurrection of Jesus, Volume 1: The Resuscitation of the Swoon Theory, I show that four different cases against the Swoon Theory, presented by six different well-known Christian apologists, all fail to refute the Swoon Theory. Here is a list of those four cases:
- The case in The Son Rises by William Craig, published in 1981
- The case in The Resurrection Factor by Josh McDowell, published in 1981
- The case in the Handbook of Christian Apologetics by Peter Kreeft and Ronald Tacelli, published in 1994
- The case in The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus by Gary Habermas and Michael Licona, published in 2004
I critically examine William Craig’s case against the Swoon Theory in Chapter 6 of my upcoming book. I critically examine the case by Gary Habermas and Michael Licona in Chapter 7 of my book, and I critically examine the case by Josh McDowell in Chapter 8 of my book:
My critical examination of the case against the Swoon Theory by Peter Kreeft and Ronald Tacelli is presented in Chapter 3, Chapter 4, and Chapter 5 of my book:
TWO MORE CASES SHOWN TO FAIL HERE AT THE SECULAR FRONTIER
Because three of the four cases that I critically examine in my upcoming book were from the 20th century, I have also carefully analyzed and critically evaluated two more cases against the Swoon Theory that are from the 21st Century:
- The case in the 3rd edition of Reasonable Faith by William Craig, published in 2008
- The case in Evidence for the Resurrection by Josh McDowell and Sean McDowell, published in 2009
Because my upcoming book is already longer than I would like it to be, I do not include my analysis and criticism of these two 21st-century cases in the book. But in my book, I do point to the blog posts here at The Secular Frontier where I analyze and criticize those two cases:
In the blog posts about these two other 21st-century cases against the Swoon Theory, I conclude that these cases also fail to refute the Swoon Theory.
CONCLUSIONS
Given that six different cases (three from the late 20th century and three from the early 21st century) that were presented by seven different well-known Christian apologists, all fail to refute the Swoon Theory, and given that this failure is because none of these cases contains a single strong and solid objection to the Swoon Theory, we may reasonably conclude that (a) no Christian apologist in previous centuries has successfully refuted the Swoon Theory, and that (b) Christian apologists have in general failed to refute the Swoon Theory.
Given that efforts of Christian apologists to refute the Swoon Theory have been going on since the 19th century, we may also reasonably conclude that the Swoon Theory is still a viable explanation for why early Christians sincerely but mistakenly believed that God raised Jesus from the dead (i.e. the announcement of the death of the Swoon Theory by various Christian apologists has been greatly exaggerated).