The Swoon Theory: Could Jesus Have Survived the Cross?

Swoon Theory Article

By Jeff Pallansch

While there is strong historical documentation that Jesus died by crucifixion, some still wonder if Jesus only appeared to die and all the sources got it wrong. What if Jesus merely fainted (or “swooned”) on the cross and the soldiers mistook Him as dead? What if Jesus then resuscitated in the tomb, escaped, and convinced His disciples that He had been resurrected from the dead? Let’s look at The Swoon Theory: Could Jesus Have Survived the Cross?

While this theory continues to circulate in popular literature, almost all scholars reject it as an implausible fringe theory that lacks all semblance of credibility. In fact, no reputable scholar has held this view since David Friedrich Strauss dismantled it in 1835.[1] Let’s look at why this is and then conclude with Strauss’ famous critique.

  1. It is highly unlikely for one to survive the scourging and crucifixion Jesus received.

When a group of physicians, including a pathologist from the Mayo Clinic, examined what Jesus underwent, they concluded in the respected Journal of the American Medical Association:

“Modern medical interpretation of the historical evidence indicates that Jesus was dead when taken down from the cross…. Interpretations based on the assumption that Jesus did not die on the cross appear to be at odds with modern medical knowledge.”[2]

Their article goes on to outline the evidence for why this is the case. If it interests you, the full article is accessible at the link below,[3] but here are a few noteworthy details.

These physicians point out how the scourging process alone would bring one “just short of collapse or death”:

“The usual instrument was a short whip… in which small iron balls or sharp pieces of sheep bones were tied at intervals… the man was stripped of his clothing, and his hands were tied to an upright post…. The back, buttocks, and legs were flogged…. The scourging… was intended to weaken the victim to a state just short of collapse or death.

As the Roman soldiers repeatedly struck the victim’s back with full force, the iron balls would cause deep contusions, and the leather thongs and sheep bones would cut into the skin and subcutaneous tissues. Then, as the flogging continued, the lacerations would tear into the underlying skeletal muscles….

The severe scourging, with its intense pain and appreciable blood loss, most probably left Jesus in a preshock state…. Therefore, even before the actual crucifixion, Jesus’ physical condition was at least serious and possibly critical….

Jesus apparently was so weakened by the severe flogging that he could not carry the patibulum [cross beam] from the Praetorium to the site of crucifixion one third of a mile away.”[4]

When it came time to attach Jesus to the cross, each wound was intended to inflict excruciating pain. The Romans exacerbated this process by nailing the wrists and feet of the one they were executing.  They chose precise locations that could support the person’s weight while also inducing the maximum amount of agony.

“The driven nail would crush or sever the rather large sensorimotor median nerve. The stimulated nerve would produce excruciating bolts of fiery pain in both arms.”[5]

One doctor likened this sensation to the crushing of the nerve that triggers intense pain when you hit your elbow, what we refer to as the “funny bone.”[6]

Once Jesus was fixed to the cross, Gary Habermas and Michael Licona describe the process of crucifixion as such:

“The many physicians who have studied crucifixion over the years have invariably concluded that the major problem faced by victims of crucifixion was breathing, or more precisely—asphyxiation. Once on the cross, the victim would want to take the pressure off his nailed feet. To do this, he would allow the weight of his body to be held up by his nailed hands. However, in this ‘down’ position, certain muscles would be in the inhalation position, making it difficult to exhale. Thus, the victim would have to push up on his pierced feet in order to exhale. However, the first several times he did this would cause intense pain, since it would cause the nail to tear through the flesh in the feet until it enlodged itself against one of the bones. Thus, the crucifixion victim would be seen pushing up quite often and returning to the down position. Severe muscle cramps and spasms would also make breathing all the more difficult and painful.”[7]

Even with the best medical treatment, it is highly unlikely for one to recover after enduring hours of this process.

  • Soldiers could easily verify if a person was dead on the cross. It is not something one could fake.

Since the one crucified ultimately died on the cross due to exhaustion asphyxia (the inability to keep pulling oneself up in order to breathe), soldiers could easily tell if a person was alive or dead. If the person remained in the “down” position on the cross, this meant they could not breathe. When one stayed in this position for some time, it was clear they were dead. One could not fake this position for several minutes or stay alive on the cross in a coma or fainted state.

If soldiers ever wanted to bring an end to the dying process, as they did with the criminals beside Jesus due to the Sabbath, they would break the victim’s legs. This would inhibit their ability to push themselves up and they would quickly die from asphyxiation. However, the soldiers did not need to do this with Jesus, for it appears He had been in the down position for some time.

The soldiers, however, took extra measure to verify that Jesus was truly dead. They pierced His side with a spear causing water and blood to flow out (John 19:34-35). The Journal of the American Medical Association explains,

“The water probably represented serous pleural and pericardial fluid [from the sac surrounding Jesus’s heart], and would have preceded the flow of blood and been smaller in volume than the blood. Perhaps in the setting of hypovolemia and impending acute heart failure, pleural and pericardial effusions may have developed and would have added to the volume of apparent water. The blood, in contrast, may have originated from the right atrium or the right ventricle [from the piecing of His heart] or perhaps from a hemopericardium.”[8]

From this, they conclude,

“Jesus was dead before the wound to his side was inflicted.”[9]

  • The soldiers were highly motivated to ensure Jesus’ death.

Like the prison guard in Acts 16:7 who knew he was to be killed if any prisoners escaped on his watch, so the soldiers knew it would cost them their lives if they allowed Jesus or anyone else to escape the death penalty.

The same was true for the soldiers posted outside Jesus’s tomb if they allowed His body to be stolen. Hence, they needed assurance from the chief priests that they would be spared if the Roman governor found out about the empty tomb and the lie they were bribed to tell (Matthew 28:14). 

  • Even if Jesus survived, it would take an unbelievable feat for Him to appear to His disciples.

Even though Jesus was clearly beyond the point of resuscitation, let’s imagine that He was somehow able to survive the cross and regained consciousness in the tomb. Consider all the subsequent feats Jesus would need to do in order to get to His disciples.

  • In a Houdini-like fashion, Jesus would have needed to untie Himself from the tight wrappings which bound Him “with a mixture of myrrh and aloes weighing about seventy-five pounds” (John 19:39). As we see from the example of Lazarus, Jesus would have been “bound hand and foot with wrappings, and his face was wrapped around with a cloth.”  He would have needed someone to, “Unbind him, and let him go” (John 11:14).
  • Jesus would then need to roll back a “big stone in front of the entrance to the tomb” (Matthew 27:60). These stones typically weighed between 1-2 tons and were set down into a groove sandwiched between the tomb and an outside wall. This meant that Jesus could not have simply pushed the stone outward. In order for the stone to be removed, it needed to be rolled to the side, typically along an inclined track. Although, one man may have initiated the stone being rolled down into place, it would take many men to roll it up. Now, imagine Jesus barely alive, having gone three days without food or water, rolling this heavy stone sideways up an incline track.[10] Along with the stone not providing a grip to slide it horizontally, medical experts note that Jesus’ hands would also have been paralyzed into a claw-like grasp if the median nerve was severed when the spikes were driven through His wrists.[11] Furthermore, Jesus’s elbows and shoulders would have been dislocated at this point from hanging as He did on the cross.[12]
  • Once Jesus accomplished this, He would need to get past a unit of armed Roman guards who were defending the tomb with their lives.
  • Let’s say He did all this. Jesus would then need to walk to His disciples. Although this seems like such a simple task considering all that preceded it, this would have been extremely difficult given the nature of the wounds Jesus incurred from the spikes driven through His feet. Medical experts note how the spikes would cause severe damage to “the deep peroneal nerve and branches of the medial and lateral plantar nerves” while also “sever[ing] the dorsal pedal artery of the foot.”[13] Such a condition would make it nearly impossible to walk, especially if these wounds had become infected over those three days.

This combined series of feats make such an escape next to impossible.

  • Beyond the implausibility of a crucified man surviving and then escaping the tomb, it is unlikely that someone in this condition would convince anyone that they had been gloriously raised from the dead. As Gary Habermas puts it, “Alive? Barely. Risen? No.”[14]His disciples would have yelled for a doctor, not fallen down and worshiped Him as risen and glorified Christ.

This was the famous argument, as briefly mentioned in the beginning of this article, raised by David Friedrich Strauss in 1835. It is what dealt the final blow to this theory. Since it was made, no reputable scholar has tried to defend the swoon theory. Here is how Strauss puts it:

“It is impossible that a being who had stolen halfdead out of the sepulcher, who crept about weak and ill, wanting medical treatment, who required bandaging, strengthening and indulgence, and who still at last yielded to his sufferings, would have given to the disciples the impression that he was a Conqueror of death and the grave, the Prince of Life, an impression which lay at the bottom of their future ministry. Such a resuscitation could only have weakened the impression which He had made upon them in life and in death, at the most could only have given it an elegiac voice, but could by no possibility have changed their sorrow into enthusiasm, have elevated their reverence into worship.”[15]

Furthermore, the swoon theory cannot account for the radical transformation that turned Saul from a zealous persecutor of the church into the apostle Paul. Such a change occurred in Paul as a result of his encounter with the risen and glorified Christ (see Acts 9 and 22). If Paul merely encountered a resuscitated rather than glorified Christ, many of his statements, such as this one, would make no sense: “[Jesus] will transform our lowly bodies so that they will be like his glorious body” (Philippians 3:21). As Gary Habermas puts it, “Upon seeing a swooned Jesus who was limping, bleeding, pale, and stooped over in pain, Peter [and later Paul] would not have responded, ‘Wow, I can’t wait to have a resurrection body just like that!’”[16]

In light of all this, scholars have unanimously concluded that the “Swoon” theory has no merit and should be put to rest.

So, what does Jesus’s death mean to you?

Having established that Jesus truly walked this earth and died a gruesome death on a Roman cross two thousand some years ago, we need to consider why. Why would He, as the Sovereign Lord and Creator of all things, willfully undergo all this?

It is because He loves you. Even in light of all you have done, Jesus did this because He loves you and wants to restore you to a vibrant relationship with Himself.

The Bible says, “God showed his great love for us by sending Christ to die for us while we were still sinners” (Romans 5:8, NLT).

For on the cross, “For God made Christ, who never sinned, to be the offering for our sin, so that we could be made right with God through Christ” (2 Corinthians 5:21).

“He personally carried our sins in his body on the cross so that we can be dead to sin and live for what is right. By his wounds you are healed. Once you were like sheep who wandered away. But now you have turned to your Shepherd, the Guardian of your souls” (1 Peter 2:24-25).

As you enter this Easter season, may you return to the great Shepherd who laid down His life for His sheep. May you pause and consider afresh the cost of Jesus’s sacrifice and cherish the free gift of forgiveness and eternal life that is now yours in Christ.

Go Deeper

[1] Albert Schweitzer documents various publications on the historical Jesus over the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. After 1838, he ceases to list scholars contending for the swoon theory. See Albert Schweitzer, The Quest of the Historical Jesus: A Critical Study of Its Progress from Reimarus to Wrede, trans. W. Montgomery (New York: Macmillan, 1906, 1968).

[2] William D. Edwards, Wesley J. Gabel, and Floyd E. Hosmer, “On the Physical Death of Jesus Christ,” Journal of the American Medical Association 255, no. 11 (March 21, 1986): pp. 1455, 1463.


[4] Edwards, Gabel, and Hosmer, “On the Physical Death of Jesus Christ,” Journal of the American Medical Association, pp. 1457, 1461. Emphasis added.

[5] Ibid., p. 1458.

[6] Dr. Alexander Metherell in Lee Strobel, The Case for Christ (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1998), p. 197.

[7] Gary R. Habermas and Michael R. Licona, The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus (Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel, 2004), p. 103.

[8] Edwards, Gabel, and Hosmer, “On the Physical Death of Jesus Christ,” Journal of the American Medical Association, p. 1463.

[9] Ibid.


[11] Edwards, Gabel, and Hosmer, “On the Physical Death of Jesus Christ,” Journal of the American Medical Association, p. 1460.


[13] Edwards, Gabel, and Hosmer, “On the Physical Death of Jesus Christ,” Journal of the American Medical Association, pp. 1460-1461.

[14] Habermas and Licona, The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus, p. 105.

[15] David Friedrich Strauss, A New Life of Jesus, authorized trans., 2nd ed., 2 vols. (London: Williams and Norgate, 1879), 1: p. 412. Notably, Strauss did not believe in the resurrection. Rather, he argued that the perceived post-mortem appearances were hallucinations.

[16] Habermas and Licona, The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus, pp. 105-106.


  1. Thom Waters on August 16, 2023 at 1:15 pm

    Some years ago I began a “study” into the proofs supplied by Christian apologists for the death of Jesus on the cross. These so-called proofs were essentially reduced to three. They are:

    1–the so-called severe beating that he received prior to the cross leaving him in a physical state “just short of collapse or death”. ( Quote your words but sentiments shared by most apologists. ) He was already in a near-death state. This they and you insisted on although we have nothing in the gospels that elucidates the actual beating he received. In fact, Luke’s gospel, the one which many claim is the most historically accurate one, makes no mention of a scourging let alone the severity of such a beating.

    2–the pronouncement by the centurion that Jesus was dead;

    3– the spear thrust into his side found only in John’s gospel written probably 50 years after the event, and since not multiply attested to by independent sources casts considerable doubt on to its historical reliability.

    The more I researched, read, and talked with believers both formally trained and lacking training in such matters I began to more question and doubt the death and resurrection narrative. Essential to this conclusion was an often never mentioned verse in Mark 15:44. Upon Joseph of Arimathea asking Pilate for permission to take down the body of Jesus the verse states, “And Pilate wondered if he were already dead; and summoning the centurion he asked him if he were dead already. The Greek here suggests Pilate is both surprised and baffled by the news of his death as if to disbelieve the news.

    This verse in Mark resonates with some actual insight into the truth of what actually took place at this event. Two simple matters that surround this verse where Pilate disbelieves the news of Jesus’ death.

    1–Who would have known better than Pilate the actual physical condition of Jesus prior to the cross? No one. Pilate knew better than anyone. Pilate’s response calls into serious question and doubt this popular notion that Jesus was beaten to within an inch of his death prior to the cross. Yet apologists insist on rendering this near-death picture of Jesus because it serves their narrative and agenda that Jesus had to die. Actually after 3-6 hours on the cross the news that Jesus was dead should have been received by Pilate by him saying, “I can’t believe he lasted this long.” But, no, Pilate disbelieves the news. At the very least this appears to completely dismantle this near-death depiction of Jesus championed by apologists. It stands as true that many people have and cling to opinions on matters that they know virtually nothing about. They simply want things to be true in order to promote a belief, a self-serving position.

    2–Even more troubling for apologists at this point is the so-called spear thrust into the side of Jesus as another “proof” to the death of Jesus. It is twofold. As you and others have correctly pointed out Roman soldiers were duty bound to follow orders at the penalty of death for disobeying. You correctly pointed this out in Acts 12. That being said Pilate apparently orders the legs of Jesus and the others to be broken, known as crucifracture which is an act to hasten death of the victim, a time frame defined in minutes. Pilate according to John orders this act and Pilate has every reason to believe that his orders would be followed. We soon learn that this group of Roman soldiers disobey Pilate’s orders when it comes to Jesus. In fact, one soldier commits an act not ordered, that is the so-called spear thrust into the side of Jesus to guarantee that he is dead. At this point we are left with two possibilities: These are:
    1–these soldiers never report back to Pilate. If they don’t, Pilate is left to believe that his orders were followed, the legs of Jesus were broken, and he quickly expired. He’s dead.
    2–these soldiers do report back to Pilate. They tell him that they disobeyed his orders to break his legs because they thought him already dead. Instead, they guaranteed that he was dead by thrusting a spear into his side. He’s dead.

    I hope you can see the corner that apologists are backed into concerning this “proof” for the death of Jesus. In either case, whether the soldiers report back to Pilate or not, the death of Jesus is certain and a quick one at that. But when Joseph of Arimathea asks for the body of Jesus, what happens? Pilate doubts, disbelieves the news. All of this suggests at the very least that the spear thrust story is pure invention by the writer of this gospel. I can discuss at length the reason why this writer added this to his story. Actually easy to explain, but I will forego that here.

    I have debated in private these matters with many believers and apologists including some very well-known defenders of the faith. None have agreed to debate me in a public forum. And what I have briefly presented here is a small part of my investigation. It’s simply lamentable that so many apologists won’t deal with such matters with more integrity. I think they have too much invested, both intellectually and emotionally, into beliefs held and positions promoted.

    Thanks for reading. Thom Waters.

  2. Thom Waters on August 25, 2023 at 2:16 pm

    Mr. Pallansch

    Thanks for posting my comment. I appreciate your temerity, curiosity, and integrity in throwing some light on an opposing view of certain matters. Although your readership might be small, I have an affinity to those virtues you display. These stand in stark contrast to many well known apologists like Licona, Wallace, and McDowell who feel most comfortable by simply avoiding any research and investigation that reasonably challenges or might challenge their cherished opinions, videos, and books. A certain insecurity, I suspect, especially when faced with something “new” with regard to scholarship and investigative work. Best to pretend it simply doesn’t exist and best to keep it from any public forum. For them it seems that the search for truth and real inquiry into what might have actually happened at an event has ended.

    Thanks again for your kindness and generosity.

    Thom Waters
    [email protected]

    • John Ankerberg Show Staff on August 30, 2023 at 10:05 am

      Hi Thom, thank you for your thoughtful engagement with this. Just to clarify, are you
      raising these objections to argue that Jesus never died by crucifixion? The article
      above outlines some of the reasons why almost all critical scholars today affirm that
      Jesus died by crucifixion (and did not merely swoon on the cross).
      Take for example the following statements,
      “Jesus’ death by crucifixion under Pontius Pilate is as sure as anything
      historical can ever be. For if no follower of Jesus had written anything for one
      hundred years after his crucifixion we would still know about him from two
      authors not among his supporters. Their names are Flavius Josephus and
      Cornelius Tacitus.”
      – John Dominic Crossan, Co-founder of The Jesus Seminar Jesus: A
      Revolutionary Biography, p. 145.
      “Jesus death as a consequence of crucifixion is indisputable.”
      – Atheist Gerd Ludemann -The Resurrection of Christ, p. 50.

      Let me give a few responses to the points you bring up.
      1) The absence of a detail in one Gospel account (like Luke), does not undermine its
      historicity when it is mentioned in another Gospel.
      – First off, it is worth clarifying that each of the Gospels are grounded in
      eyewitness testimony. John, who records the detail about the soldiers piercing
      Jesus’ side, witnessed this event firsthand. Even if he wrote his Gospel 50 years
      later, this was a key event he would have frequently recalled and easily
      – Second, each author has their own purpose for selecting, wording, organizing
      the material they include. We should not expect them to mention all the same
      things or do so in exactly the same way.
      – Third, Luke does mention the guards for the High Priests beating Jesus (Luke
      22:63) and notes how Pilate only wanted to chastise and release Jesus (Luke
      23:16, 22) without crucifying him. Both Matthew and Luke record that Pilate
      carried this out by having Jesus flogged before he eventually handed Jesus over
      to be crucified: “having scourged Jesus, he delivered him to be crucified”
      (Matthew 27:26; Mark 15:15). Luke also mentions Jesus needing help carrying
      his cross – a task one man, Simon the Cyrene, was able to do by himself (Luke

      23:26). Why would they randomly select Simon to carry it if Jesus was capable
      of doing it himself?
      2) I am not convinced by your claim that Pilate knew Jesus’ physical condition prior
      to the cross better than anyone else. Jesus would have been flogged by Pilate’s guards,
      not Pilate himself.
      I would argue that the centurion, who oversaw the whole process and who saw when
      Jesus “breathed his last” (Mark 15:39), was the one who best knew Jesus’ condition
      throughout the entire process, both before and after Jesus was hung on the cross. This
      is the person to whom Pilate inquires, albeit after Jesus was hung on the cross, about
      Jesus’ physical state (Mark 15:44-45). The centurion has no doubt that Jesus died on
      the cross and Pilate is convinced by his report. Regardless of who best knew Jesus’s
      condition before the cross, everyone present was convinced that Jesus truly died on
      the cross.
      3) Pilate’s surprise that Jesus had already died is fitting given the fact that crucifixion
      generally lasted much longer, typically days rather than hours. This is further
      evidenced by the fact that Jesus died naturally before the others crucified next to him,
      whose death was hastened by the breaking of their legs. Based on these observations, I
      don’t find Pilate’s inquiry all that abnormal.
      4) I also don’t feel the same tension it seems you do over the Jews asking Pilate to
      break the legs of those crucified so they could be burried before the sabbath, and the
      soldiers piercing Jesus’s side instead. I say this because John 19:31-37 only gives us a
      general account. It does not include the exact order Pilate gave the soldiers, only the
      request of the Jews. Pilate may have restated it in general terms. We just don’t know.
      Thus, I find it unreasonable to draw strong conclusions by inferring from merely
      assumed details.
      5) One last thing, I am not aware of these objections being raised in scholastic
      publications. Do you know of a few who make these arguments that I could look into?

      Thank you again, Thom, for your thoughtful engagement and comments!

  3. Thom Waters on September 7, 2023 at 2:57 pm

    Staff member

    Thanks for your comments. I’ll be as concise as this type of forum allows.

    Yes, I am reasonably suggesting that one Jesus did not die by means of crucifixion. I am not exploring how he might have survived, but rather challenging the Christian claim that he died. If you can historically demonstrate that a person was beheaded, you need no “proof” that the victim died. Crucifixion by itself does not prove that the victim died. At what point is the victim dead? At five minutes, 30 minutes, 2 hours, 6 hours, 1 day, 2 days, and on? You need proof. At best the three most often used “proofs” for the death of Jesus stand on shaky ground and flimsy assumptions. Herein lies the critical issue, not how might he have survived, but rather what is the proof that he died. This is true and is the specific reason why Christian apologists have gone to such great lengths to portray, without any scriptural support, a “beating” or Scourging pre-cross that was so horrific that it translates to his complete inability to have survived. So your first “proof” is without any scriptural proof based on scholarly exegesis but a purposeful descent into eisegesis where assumptions and a specific agenda are pursued at the cost of intellectual and scholarly integrity.

    The mention of Simon of Cyrene to carrying the crossbeam is a perfect example. We simply do not know why he carries it. Nowhere does it mention that Jesus was physically unable to carry it. However, Christian apologists are happy to jump to the conclusion and assumption that Jesus was already near death, beaten beyond recognition. Some like Strobel and Metherell even say that Jesus collapses, something NOT FOUND in any account. But why be honest? They simply want and need this depiction to be true. And immediately after these apologists say that Jesus collapses and is unable to carry the crossbeam Luke in 23:26-31 has Jesus say, “Daughters of Jerusalem, do not weep for me, but weep for yourselves and for your children. For behold, the days are coming when they will say, ‘Blessed are the barren, and the wombs that never bore, and the breast’s that never gave suck!’ Then they will begin to say to the mountains, ‘Fall on us’, and to the hills, ‘Cover us.’ For if they do this when the wood is green, what will happen when it is dry?” Does this sound like a man beaten horribly and at death’s doorstep? Of course not. Jesus himself witnesses to the error of the apologists’ assumptions and conclusion.

    With regard to the centurion’s announcement to Pilate that Jesus was dead I refer to N.T. Wright and J. Warner Wallace who happily state that people, especially the Jewish people, who lived in Palestine during this time were acquainted with death firsthand and well knew what a dead person looked like. These apologists, who are happy to demonstrate their selective memory, conveniently forget the stoning of Paul in Lystra recorded in Acts 14. Some Jews stone Paul and supposing him to be dead, drag him out of the city and leave him. He certainly must have looked and been in bad shape. However, not only was he not dead but the very next day traveled to Derbe and continued preaching. The Jews even handled Jesus and saw him close up after the stoning. Still, they could not have been more wrong. The centurion neither handled Jesus or saw him from “close up”. Still he announced him dead. No possible mistake here.

    At some level this becomes an easy exercise to dismantle to a real degree the “proofs” offered by apologists to the death of Jesus. Even the so-called spear thrust found only in John’s gospel can be demonstrated to be most likely a fictional account. Would be happy to do so. Perhaps in a public forum? This is risky business for the apologist who is both intellectually and emotionally invested in this resurrection narrative. Hard to have a resurrection if the death is questionable.

    Anyway, just a short response to your post. Thanks for reading. I enjoy the dialectic.

    Thom .

  4. Thom Waters on September 11, 2023 at 12:24 pm

    Mr. Pallansch

    Thanks again for posting my latest comment. I did notice a mistake I made when discussing the stoning of Paul at Lystra. I wrote, “The Jews even handled Jesus and saw him close up after the stoning.” Of course that should read “Paul” not “Jesus”.

    Thanks again.

  5. Thom Waters on June 5, 2024 at 1:34 pm

    Mr. Pallansch

    Some time ago I submitted several posts to your site that you were kind enough to post. I periodically review posts that I submit to different outlets and came upon these sent to you. Thanks again for showing them.

    My interest in the Resurrection of Jesus has been a long, ongoing one. It has involved hundreds of hours of reading, research, and discussions, one of which was an extended one with Michael Licona, an apologist of some note. My real incursion into apologetics was prompted by Gary Habermas and his Minimal Facts Approach to the Resurrection. It became apparent, early on, that Dr. Habermas gives the impression that his list of “facts” are indeed “facts” and that his list is sufficient in order to reach a scholarly conclusion regarding the Resurrection as the most reasonable explanation for these facts. However, whether knowingly or not, Habermas’ list only includes those “facts” which seem to argue on behalf of the Resurrection proposition. The reader or student gets the impression that this list is both complete and that there are no facts which when “bundled” together like his own list seem to argue against the Resurrection proposition. It seemed likely that as is the case with most events, there should be a list of facts that would argue for the opposite position, that is, that the Resurrection did not occur as suggested by the belief. After hours of research and study I have developed such a list of facts which seem to powerfully argue against the proposition. Like the Habermas list where no one fact by itself proves the Resurrection as the best explanation for these facts, no one fact by itself disproves the proposition. However, a reasonable verdict can only be completely reached if both sets of facts are presented and considered. Until now, Dr. Habermas and others have enjoyed a free run at the narrative with no opposing historical facts to contend against. Dr. Licona seemed to understand this and unfortunately has ended our exchange. I will give you one of the facts I’m my list. And, as is the case with the MFA, each fact can be expanded upon in order to make a greater impression. Fact #1–There are no appearances or claims to an appearance of the risen Jesus prior to the discovery of the Empty Tomb. Just a fact, pure and simple. What might cause this to be significant? Now the game’s afoot, as we might say. Let me offer a contrasting story to a Resurrection claim:

    1–a person is beheaded ( no proof to a death is needed )
    2–this beheaded person is buried 6 feet in the ground
    3–three days later a person or persons claim to see this person alive
    4–upon investigation the grave is untouched
    5–the grave is dug up and the body of the dead person is gone.

    This now looks like an intriguing story. Certainly one to be persued.

    Here’s my interest. From what I understand the John Ankerberg Show is one that invites debate on topics pertaining to Christianity and matters of belief. You seem to have a connection to the show. Would the administrators of the show be interested in having someone of my leaning, that is, someone interested in investigating certain Christian claims by allowing all the facts to be considered in reaching a verdict?

    I know this is a longshot, but I thought it worth offering. You might have your most controversial show ever.

    Thanks for reading.
    Thom Waters

  6. Anwer m Khan on July 14, 2024 at 5:59 am

    Dear mr. Thorm: I agree with your logical explanation that jesus could not have died. To support your arguments please add these:
    1.Jesus said no sign will be given to this adulterous nation except the Sign of Jonah. Here apologists are interested to equate three days and three nights between Jesus and Jonah. The biggest fact is that Jonah was alive before going into the belly of whale and remained alive even prayed to God and came out alive. Jesus was swooned, he was treated with 100 lbs of Myrrh and aloe by Dr. Nicodemus while in the sepulcher, he came out alive, ate food with disciple and traveled 70 miles to Galilee.
    2. Jesus prayed a night before at Getsemani and as per Heb. 5:7 his prayers were heard.
    3. Procula,. wife of Pilate had a dream about Jesus and was shared with Pilate, this is when Pilate washes his hand
    4. If Jesus would have been dead blood and water could not gush out from the corpses. It coagulate and can only seep as a medical fact.
    Following scholars agree with this notion that Jesus survived crucifixion. Here are their names:
    John Deerdorff, Oregon
    Dr. Robert Price North Carolina
    Dr. Paul C. Papps, Virginia
    Holger Kersten
    Kurt Berna
    DR. Barbara Thiering
    Suzanne OLsson
    Karl Bahrdt
    Hugh Shoenfield
    Michael Baigent
    David Mirsch
    Even Shroud of Turin and Dead Sea Scrolls are powerful evidence as the blood stains on the shroud and kerchief on the head match the blood type of Jesus. There are at least 36 scholars of our times since 1835 to the present day who agree with Jesus’ survival on the cross to show the Sign of Jonah
    WE can converse more if you so choose and collect these books witnessing the fact where christians are sadly mistaken.
    anwer khan
    [email protected]

Leave a Comment