In Chapter 8 of their Handbook of Christian Apologetics (hereafter: HCA), Christian philosophers Peter Kreeft and Ronald Tacelli make a case for the resurrection of Jesus, and they claim to PROVE that Jesus rose from the dead.

Here is a summary of their case:

1. IF Kreeft and Tacelli refuted the four alternative (skeptical) theories, THEN Kreeft and Tacelli have proved that the Christian Theory of the resurrection of Jesus is true.

2. Kreeft and Tacelli refuted (in Chapter 8 of HCA) the four alternative (skeptical) theories.

THEREFORE:

3. Kreeft and Tacelli have proved that the Christian Theory of the resurrection of Jesus is true.

In a recent post about this case for the resurrection of Jesus, I argued that there was an obvious reason showing that premise (1) is FALSE, and thus that this case FAILS.

The obvious reason that premise (1) is FALSE is that other Christian philosophers and apologists criticize at least seven other skeptical theories besides the four skeptical theories that Kreeft and Tacelli examine. Because there are at least eleven different skeptical theories about the alleged resurrection of Jesus, disproving just four of those theories is not sufficient to disprove all of the relevant skeptical theories. Therefore, it is obvious that premise (1) is FALSE, and that the case for the resurrection of Jesus by Kreeft and Tacelli FAILS.

There is another good reason to believe that premise (1) is FALSE:

The Swoon Theory is actually just one specific example of a general category of skeptical theories about the alleged resurrection of Jesus. But there are a number of other specific skeptical theories in that same general category, and refuting just ONE specific theory in that general category of theories does NOT necessarily refute ALL of the skeptical theories in that general category. Thus, there are a number of skeptical theories that are similar to the Swoon Theory but that could be true even if the Swoon Theory was false. Therefore, premise (1) is FALSE, and the case for the resurrection of Jesus by Kreeft and Tacelli FAILS.

THE SWOON THEORY VS. THE APPARENT DEATH THEORY

The Swoon Theory consists of the following claims:

• Jesus was crucified by the Romans in Jerusalem about 30 CE.
• Jesus fainted but did not die while he was on the cross.
• Jesus was then removed from the cross, because he appeared to be dead.
• Jesus later came back to consciousness (without any divine intervention), and he met with some of his disciples who sincerely, but mistakenly, inferred that Jesus had died on the cross and that God had brought Jesus back to life.
• This belief of some of Jesus’ disciples was the primary reason why belief in the resurrection of Jesus became a widespread belief among first-century Christians.

Another term that is sometimes used for this theory is: the Apparent Death Theory. That is the term that the Christian philosopher William Lane Craig prefers to use. The Christian apologist Josh McDowell, on the other hand, prefers the term the Swoon Theory. The Christian philosopher Gary Habermas sometimes uses the term Apparent Death Theory and sometimes uses the term Swoon Theory. Gary Habermas and Michael Licona note that these are two different names for the same theory:

This apparent death theory has been referred to as the “swoon theory,”…

(The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus, p.100)

Although these two terms are often used to refer to the same theory, one could reasonably argue that the term Apparent Death Theory would be more appropriate as the name of a general category of skeptical theories of which the Swoon Theory was a particular example. In that case, there might well be other skeptical theories besides the Swoon Theory, that fall into the general category of theories called Apparent Death Theories.

The term “swoon” in the phrase “Swoon Theory” means faint. Thus, as indicated in the above list of claims constituting the Swoon Theory, Jesus fainted while he was on the cross, according to the Swoon Theory. That Jesus fainted is significant, because that would make it more likely that the Roman soldiers would mistakenly conclude that Jesus had died, when Jesus was actually still alive. In other words, if Jesus had fainted on the cross, he would have appeared to have died without actually being dead. If Jesus appeared to be dead, then the Roman soldiers might have allowed Jesus to be removed from the cross while Jesus was actually still alive.

It is important to note, however, that there is more than one way that a person could appear to have died. I can think of at least five different ways this could happen:

• the person fainted
• the person went into a coma
• the person was drugged
• the person pretended to be dead
• the person experienced clinical death (cessation of heartbeat and breathing)

Because there are different ways that a person could appear to be dead, there are different ways that Jesus might have appeared to have died on the cross. So, if we take the term Apparent Death Theory to be the name of a general category of skeptical theories that imply that Jesus was still alive when he was removed from the cross because he only appeared to be dead at that time, then the Swoon Theory would be just ONE of a number of theories that claim that Jesus appeared to be dead but was still alive when he was removed from the cross.

If we take the term Apparent Death Theory to be a general category of skeptical theories in which it is claimed that Jesus was still alive when he was removed from the cross because he only appeared to be dead before he was removed from the cross, then there would be at least five different specific skeptical theories in that general category of skeptical theories:

• The Swoon (or Fainting) Theory
• The Coma Theory
• The Drugged Theory
• The Pretended Death Theory
• The Clinical Death Theory

Clearly, it is possible that the Swoon Theory is false, but that the Coma Theory is true or that the Drugged Theory is true or that the Pretended Death Theory is true. Thus, disproving the Swoon Theory would not automatically disprove all of the other specific theories in this general category of theories. Therefore, premise (1) of Kreeft and Tacelli’s argument is FALSE, and their case for the resurrection of Jesus FAILS. Even if they successfully disproved the Swoon Theory, that might well leave open the possibility that one of these other Apparent Death Theories was true.

THE APPARENT DEATH THEORIES VS. THE SURVIVAL THEORIES

There is another similar problem that further expands the number of skeptical theories that Kreeft and Tacelli FAILED to examine. That is because the category of Apparent Death Theories is a subset of an even broader category of skeptical theories that I call the Survival Theories. Just as the Swoon Theory is just one of a number of skeptical theories in the category of Apparent Death Theories, Apparent Death Theories are just one kind of skeptical theory among a number of other skeptical theories in the broader category of Survival Theories.

The idea of Survival Theories is based on the fact that Jesus appearing to be dead is just one possible explanation of why Roman soldiers would have allowed Jesus to be removed from the cross when Jesus was still alive. There are other possible explanations of why Roman soldiers would have allowed Jesus to be removed from the cross when he was still alive.

For example, Habermas and Licona mention one such alternative explanation when they discuss the Swoon Theory:

Jesus had many followers. Certainly some of them must have been affluent. Could they have bribed the soldiers to take him off the cross while he was still alive?

(The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus, p.100)

If a wealthy follower of Jesus bribed the Roman soldiers to remove Jesus from the cross while he was still alive, then it was NOT necessary that Jesus appear to be dead while he was on the cross. In this scenario, the soldiers would have had a strong motive for removing Jesus from the cross even though they knew he was still alive. Jesus need not have fainted or gone into a coma or pretended to be dead. This Bribery of the Soldiers Theory is thus a different theory that the Swoon Theory, and it is also different than the four other previously mentioned Apparent Death Theories.

With a little bit of thought, one can generate more skeptical theories about the alleged resurrection of Jesus by coming up with more potential explanations for why the Roman soldiers would allow Jesus’ body to be taken down from the cross while Jesus was still alive. Here are a few such ideas:

• the Roman soldiers were bribed
• the Roman soldiers were threatened
• the Roman soldiers were deceived (e.g. into believing there was an order from a superior to remove Jesus from the cross)
• the Roman soldiers were distracted (so that some followers of Jesus could quickly remove him from the cross)
• the Roman soldiers fell asleep (allowing some followers of Jesus to quickly remove him from the cross)
• the Roman soldiers were drugged or got drunk (so they were unable to prevent some followers of Jesus from removing Jesus from the cross)
• the Roman soldiers were overpowered by a group of Jesus’ followers or sympathizers

Each of the above points constitutes a different explanation of why the Roman soldiers might have allowed Jesus to be removed from the cross while Jesus was still alive, and none of these explanations require that Jesus appear to be dead when he was removed from the cross. Therefore, these explanations constitute additional skeptical theories beyond the five Apparent Death Theories mentioned previously:

• The Bribery of the Soldiers Theory
• The Threatening of the Soldiers Theory
• The Deception of the Soldiers Theory
• The Distraction of the Soldiers Theory
• The Sleeping Soldiers Theory
• The Drugged or Drunk Soldiers Theory
• The Overpowered Soldiers Theory

There are at least seven different Survival Theories in addition to at least five different Apparent Death Theories (which is a subset of Survival Theories). Disproving the Swoon Theory thus amounts to disproving only one out of at least a dozen different skeptical theories in the very general category of Survival Theories.

CONCLUSION

Even if Kreeft and Tacelli did refute the Swoon Theory, that would probably leave four other Apparent Death Theories standing. Furthermore, if Kreeft and Tacelli refuted all five of the Apparent Death Theories, that might well leave the above seven Survival Theories standing. Therefore, even if the Swoon Theory was false, there are at least eleven other skeptical theories that might well be left untouched, and one of those other skeptical theories might well be true. Therefore, premise (1) is FALSE, and the case for the resurrection of Jesus by Kreeft and Tacelli FAILS.