Case For The Resurrection Of Christنموونە

Answer to Critics of Resurrection 

One of the allegations raised by critics against the resurrection of Christ is that ‘Christ did not actually die on the cross!’ This charge has come to be known as the ‘Swoon theory’. The theory maintains that Jesus had fainted or swooned from exhaustion, pain and excessive loss of blood. Furthermore, when he was laid in the tomb, he somehow was revived as a result of the coolness or dampness of the tomb. Later, on gaining consciousness, he came out and appeared to his disciples, who mistakenly thought that their master had risen from the dead!

Contrary to this theory, one needs to be aware that according to Roman custom, the Roman executioners would have to pay with their life, if a prisoner escaped from their hand. Furthermore, the Gospel accounts confirm the fact that Jesus was dead on the cross and this was certified by the Roman soldier who ensured by thrusting a spear into his side resulting in the flow of blood and water. It was only after this confirmation was made that the soldiers felt there was no need to break his legs in order to hasten his death. 

Furthermore, the swoon theory sounds quite plausible, until you consider some very important questions and they are: A. Is it possible to believe that he would have survived three days in a damp tomb, without food, water and medical attention? B. Would he have survived being wound in spice-laden grave clothes? C. Would he have had the strength to free himself from the grave clothes? D. Could he have pushed the heavy stone away from the mouth of the grave and at the same time overcome the Roman guards? D. Following which he would have had to walk miles on feet that had been pierced with spikes? These questions and many more post a great challenge to the theory. 

In fact, with this theory, there are bound to be more questions than answers it seeks to provide concerning the resurrection. German critic David Strauss who does not at all believe in Resurrection, in his book, ‘The Life of Jesus for the People’ writes, “It is impossible that one who had just come forth from the grave half dead, who crept about weak and ill, who stood in the need of medical treatment, of bandaging, strengthening, and tender care, and who at last succumbed to suffering, could ever have given the disciples the impression that he was a conqueror over death and the grave; that he was the Prince of life. This 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-or at the most, could have given in an elegiac voice-but could by no possibility have changed their sorrow into enthusiasm or elevated their reverence into worship.”