Swooning Over the Crucifixion

By Dale Baranowski

(Originally published in ‘Biblical Polemics Magazine’ April 1996,
publication of the Jerusalem Institute of Biblical Polemics, Jerusalem.)

 

 The day finally came.  My yearly stint in the Israeli army reserves had come and, like it or not, this was my lot for the following month.  I arrived at my base for the first day with the usual mixed emotions.  On the one hand, I like the change of pace the tour of duty affords, the change of scenery, new experiences, meeting old friends as well as making new ones, not to mention serving my country.   On the other hand leaving family is hard and I always hope to be stationed close to home and given plenty of leave time.  Needless to mention, I always hope that if an appliance at home is destined to break down it should at least have the courtesy to wait until the end of the tour of duty.

 This year my military assignment was to participate in security patrols in Bethlehem.  As an ex-Christian it's very interesting doing my reserve assignment there, the supposed cradle of Jesus and Christianity,   As a soldier my  job was to help insure the security of the  general public but I was also outfitted for maximal personal safety.  One piece of equipment we’re required to wear is body-armor, known to non-professionals as a “bullet-proof vest.”  This is designed to protect the wearer against a knife in an attempted stabbing as well as high-velocity projectiles from firearms.  Doing my reserve duty close to last Easter in Bethlehem brought to mind the Crucifixion story, and wearing the body armor started me pondering the spear wound that Jesus endured as well as the whole process of his death.

 The best thing about reserves is that no matter what one’s principle task, there is plenty of time for reading. I always take a large stash of books for those hours of free time when I can indulge this passion for reading.  This year’s extra-circular reading selections included Hugh Shoenfield’s work The Passover Plot  and a rebuttal to this by  Rev. Charles Wilson called The Passover Plot Exposed,1  both which were scheduled for a re-reading.

 “The Passover Plot” was Dr. Schonfield’s monumental work created quite a stir in the early 70’s as he posited that Jesus tried to manipulate Heaven into bringing the messianic era by satisfying supposed messianic prophesies.  In order to do this Jesus was required to survive the crucifixion and come back as a “resurrected” messiah. There’s no need to mention that Christianity had particularly strong objections to his proposition and the fundamentalist Christian community was particularly vocal in their condemnation of Schonfield’s ideas.  Wilson seems to have been a spokesman for the Bible Bashers.

 Christians like to call any explanation of the survival of Jesus’ crucifixion as ‘the swoon theory.’ Others before Schonfield have used this approach to explain the resurrection claimed in the NT by saying that Jesus had fainted, went into shock or was somehow comatose.  Swoon theorists usually maintain that those who removed him from the cross were unknowingly dealing with someone who was still in this life, albeit on the fringes thereof.  Before Schonfield book Christians, and the proponents of the swoon theory, liked to envision Jesus as having revived in a cool tomb and somehow escaping on his own strength despite the stone that was placed to seal the tomb’s entrance. This is a bit unbelievable and it’s no wonder Missionaries got a good laugh out of this kind of an abortive attempt to promote the swoon theory as an explanation.  Schonfield, however, took a more believable stance and showed evidence from the NT that suggested that there was a whole different group of disciples, though not explicitly mentioned in the NT, who acted as a support group from the outside. Schonfield suggested that it was this group which provided the physical strength to roll back the stone at the tomb entrance, contributed medical help in order to patch him up and get him back on his feet.

 Having reread these books and considered their ideas more thoroughly, I came to the conclusion that even though Dr. Schonfield was a scholar of the highest caliber and greatly advanced thinking in this area, his explanation is still a bit weak on how Jesus may well have survived the crucifixion. Fact is, he still needed a polemicists’ help to argue the key point of how Jesus survived crucifixion.

  Despite the fact that many missionaries react to the suggestion that Jesus survived the crucifixion with peals of derisive laughter, they may well be surprised to learn that if the New Testament narrative is considered in light of a modern knowledge of anatomy and through the eyes of one experienced in emergency medicine, the survivability of Jesus after the crucifixion was almost a certainty.  Now I’m not a physician that can claim intimate knowledge of the body processes.  However, I have been a US certified emergency paramedical technician, having worked in our county hospital trauma unit as well as on our ambulance in my capacity as a fireman.  With this in mind I would like to offer a more sophisticated explanation of how Jesus might have survived the crucifixion, in light of emergency medicine, in an effort to assist all such "swoon theories."
 My premise can be summarized as follows: When one compares Jesus' crucifixion experience with his contemporaries it becomes clear that his torture was rather mild and his time on the cross was unusually brief.2   Even though the NT says that he died there was no clear reason or cause for him having expired, as his wounds were definitely sub-lethal.  In addition, there were those who got him off the cross and into a sheltered environment quickly.  There it seems that they applied first aid in the form of bandages and mendicants, and afterwards they had more than ample time to remove him to other points where more advanced care could have been administered.  Missionaries react with scorn to these ideas but it’s really not as outlandish as it sounds as I have discussed this matter with a number of physicians.  One of these doctors was a practicing and believing Christian, and even he reluctantly agreed that this approach has merit.
 The following is a detailed exposition of the evidence gleaned from the NT that shows how Jesus may well have survived the crucifixion. For the convenience of the reader I have first placed a short bare-bones summary of the NT crucifixion narrative in a bold typestyle, after which appears the relevant explanation as how Jesus may well have survived his ordeal...
  Jesus was arrested and tried by the High Priest first, found guilty of blasphemy, then sent to the Roman Governor Pilate.  Pilate found him to be innocent but handed him over to torturers and the execution squad just the same.  After which Jesus walked to the crucifixion site, and one Gospel narrative even said he carried his own cross. Contrary to Christian claims, the torture routine that was put upon Jesus was not the most terrible the world has ever known. His torture was composed of having been smitten with the palm of the hand, he was “buffeted”, a crown of thorns was placed on his head and he was scourged. The Romans routinely carried out speechless cruelty on many hapless individuals.  Considering this, Jesus did not receive anything approaching the full potential of what the Romans were capable. The mere fact that he was able to walk to the crucifixion site on his own two legs is a sure sign that the torture was not at all severe. The Gospel of John even says he was strong enough to carry the cross himself:  "Then delivered he him therefore unto them to be crucified.  And they took Jesus, and led him away.  And he bearing his cross went forth into a place called the place of a skull, which is called in the Hebrew Golgotha: Where they crucified him" (John 19:16-18).   One who is severely tortured is unable to walk, much less carry a heavy object a distance.

  He was nailed to the cross at the hands and feet.   Victims of crucifixion were either roped at the wrist or their hands were nailed to the crossbeam.  Affixing the person with nails was quite common and many besides Jesus suffered this fate.  Although one might easily imagine that blood loss was severe with nails penetrating the hands and feet, such is usually not the case as there are no major blood vessels in these parts of the extremities and the nails remaining in place could effectively clamp off a major blood flow.

  Crucifixion involves the hands being secured on the crossbeam with the feet being attached, usually to an angular wooden block on the column of the cross.  Standing up on this block was unbelievably painful because of a nearly impossible angle forced on the torso with respect to the legs and feet. The person was so arranged that if he relaxed his legs his entire body weight then rested on his arms and this caused the chest to constrict which made breathing next to impossible.  When the ill-fated individual stood up on the block he was able to breathe but only with extreme discomfort in his legs and torso.  Victims of this spent their final hours straightening up until they could no longer bear the pain and then relaxed for as long as they could go without breathing.  This ‘Catch-22’ cycle was repeated over and over with the individual slowly declining in strength.  Death was due to a mixture of exhaustion and suffocation.  Ancient writers say that those of strong bodily constitution tolerated three days of this misery before death took them, while those who were weak could only survive one. Curiously, Jesus was on the cross for only several hours before he appeared to die.

  He hung on the cross for a maximum of six hours.   In ancient Judea time was calculated a bit differently than we do today. Daytime was divided into 12 divisions called hours, zero-hour being at dawn and the 12th hour being at sundown.  In Israel at Passover the length of daylight is about 12 modern-day hours. Mark 15:25 says that the crucifixion began at the third hour, i.e., about 9 o’clock in the morning:  “And it was the third hour, and they crucified him.”  While Luke 23:44, 46 says that Jesus hung there “...until the ninth hour.  And when Jesus had cried with a loud voice, he said, Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit: and having said thus, he gave up the ghost.” Jesus spent no more than six of our present day hours on the cross before “expiring.”

  Then Jesus said he was thirsty and was given a drink of vinegar and “died” very suddenly.  When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar, he said, It is finished: and he bowed his head, and gave up the ghost,( John 19:30 ). This drink of vinegar was typically given to crucifixion victims as an act of kindness.  This acidic drink reduced blood viscosity somewhat which allowed the circulatory system to function more efficiently and thus served to revive the condemned.  In Jesus’ case, rather than reviving him, it seems to have had the very opposite effect.  Schonfield believed that a drug was added to this drink making Jesus comatose, imitating death.  Although Christians believe this to be patent nonsense, how else could anyone explain his sudden “death”?  After all, crucifixion was deliberately designed to be a prolonged and agonizing process of exhaustion and suffocation.  Clearly, Jesus could not have died of suffocation since every Gospel agrees that Jesus was quite talkative, if not downright chatty, up to his “end.” Those who struggle for the breath of life can not afford to waste it on streams of mere words even if they be important. Considering that even weak people took a day to succumb to exhaustion this could not have been the reason for his “demise” occurring so quickly.  The whole point of crucifixion was to prolong suffering for several days.  Yet Jesus died within 6 hours.  Why?  We may rule out ineptitude on the part of the Romans as the explanation for this, for they had extensive experience with crucifixion and could be depended upon to display remarkable competence when it came to extending such agonies.  For this reason, the possibility that someone slipped a Mickey Finn into Jesus’ drink is very attractive.

  Roman soldiers went about breaking the legs of other crucifixion victims yet alive to speed up the death process so no one would be tortured over the Sabbath or Holiday, but they passed over Jesus as they believed him to be dead already.   Actually, history records that the Roman soldiers went about with a mallet and broke the kneecaps of the damned as a way of speeding the coming of death as suffocation would quickly ensue. They called this crurifragium.  Christians hail this verse as sure and convincing evidence that Jesus was dead. Their Bible recorded that the Roman soldiers were “witnesses” to his ex-animate physical state.  This is an unfortunate assumption as the Jerusalem Talmud records that lack of visible movement was not a sign of death. The Talmud records that only if animals or birds had started to eat portions of the body could death be assured.  Besides that, Roman officers were quite amenable to bribes and willing to cut men down from the cross-well before death.3

  Often and again missionaries point to the verse in the NT that claims that Jesus was stuck with a spear in his side and insist that no one could have survived that. "But one of the soldiers with a spear pierced his side, and forthwith came there out blood and water", John 19:34.  This action would suggest that the soldier had a nagging suspicion that Jesus was yet alive and tried to rectify this situation by applying his pig-sticker to the side of Jesus.  Rather than suggest that the spear wound was a sure cause of death if all else failed, here is the very evidence that suggests that Jesus was still animate!  Even though the NT insists that he was as dead as a doornail the simple and inescapable fact is that dead bodies do not bleed of their own accord!   Oh sure, one can get a fresh corpse to exude some blood if it’s placed so gravity can be of maximal benefit and a major vessel is opened to the surface--but Jesus had neither the advantage of gravity nor of an perforated major vessel.  Besides, the text says that the blood and water issued forth immediately and this is an indication of blood pressure and of life.

  Another bit of evidence that Jesus was not dead lies in the detail that blood and water issued forth from the spear wound.  Although the NT claims that Jesus was pierced in the side there is no anatomical structure in the sides of the torso that hold a clear liquid.  The only place that contains a liquid like unto water is the pericardial sack that surrounds the heart.  The main function of the pericardium is to provide a physical buffer between the often violently pumping heart and the surrounding organs, as well as a reservoir for the pericardial fluid.  This is a clear, not-very-viscous liquid that is the lubricant that protects the heart and pericardial sack from a lifetime of friction from the beating heart.  If the spear entered Jesus’ body at his side and found it’s way to the heart area to puncture the pericardium the fluid would have been lost in the chest cavity and not be discharged outside the body, so it seems unlikely that he was pierced in his side.  The only possibility remaining was that the spear entered the frontal torso, punctured the pericardial sack and just missed his heart.  If the heart was not beating this fluid would remain within the chest cavity as ingress of air would be necessary for the fluid to flow outside the body.

  However, if the heart was still beating, even minimally, the phenomena described in the NT would present itself: both blood and the fluid would discharge from the site but the blood would not be of such volume that would visually hide the pericardial fluid.  Now if the heart muscle itself would have been damaged a massive spurt of blood would have gushed forth and no one would have seen this ‘water.’  In this way the evidence points to Jesus being alive at the time even though the NT claims he had met his demise.

 Doctor of Divinity Reverend Clifford Wilson, in his book ‘The Passover Plot Exposed’ gives the typical reaction of missionaries to such explanations, “We are even told that that the fact that blood and water flowed forth, when Jesus’ side was pierced, indicates that the life was still in Him.   However, the reverse is true.  Commentators make it clear that the out-flowing of blood and water proved the fact of Christ’s death as a physical reality...(this evidenced the) complete collapse of the heart cavity.” (p. 165). Interestingly, Father Raymond E. Brown  S.S.4 wrote  concerning the Greek word nyssein for “pierced” in this verse: “the  verb nyssein has the connotation of pricking or prodding, sometimes lightly (so as to awaken a sleeping man), sometimes deeply (so as to inflict a mortal wound).”   So even according to the Greek this wound was not necessarily lethal and may well have been applied gently enough to puncture only the pericardium.  Somehow Wilson sees this puncture wound to have entered the side of Jesus and he imagines that it traveled to the center of the torso and collapsed the heart cavity. This is not very likely when the anatomical structure of the chest is considered.

   Despite Rev. Wilson’s insistence that having one’s side pierced is a guarantee of death, any physician that has experience working in a hospital trauma emergency room in a major American city will disagree.  Such are routine wounds resulting from gang wars and mugging attempts.  The fact is that people survive these -- albeit many by the skin of their teeth -- but they do survive!

  Many Christians love to explain the cause of the death of Jesus as a  “rupture of the heart” and for years it was very popular to claim that his extreme psychological suffering caused his heart to literally burst with grief.  In “Evidence That Demands A Verdict” apologist Josh McDowell (1972, p.207) quoted Dr. Samuel Houghton, MD, as “the great physiologist from the University of Dublin” and is quoted as holding the view of the cause of Jesus’ death that:
  “There remains, therefore, no supposition possible to explain the recorded phenomenon except the combination of the crucifixion and rupture of the heart. That the rupture of the heart was the cause of the death of Christ ably maintained by Dr. William Stroud; and that rupture of the heart actually occurred I firmly believe...5 It is interesting to note that McDowell gleaned support from an one whom he regards as an "expert."  This passage was originally published in 1878, and considering the advances in medicine that have occurred in the previous century it would seem absurd that McDowell should actually expect us to take this outdated source seriously.  One would do just as well to quote the ancient physician-writer Gallen on such topics and ask us to regard him as yet authoritative! But then McDowell (p.206) also claimed that...
 “Professor Day, speaking of the volume The Physical Cause of the Death of Christ, says of its author, James Thompson:  “He “demonstrates that the death of Christ was due, not to physical exhaustion, or the pains of crucifixion, but to agony of mind producing rupture of the heart. His energy of mind and body in the act of dissolution proves beyond contradiction that His death was not the result of exhaustion; the soldier’s spear was the means to exhibit to the world that His death was due to a cardiac rupture.”6 This was originally published in 1906. Again, this is another reference to outdated sources.  McDowell is grasping for straws.

 It is worth mentioning that the above passages that McDowell cited were very effectively refuted in articles published in the current medical journals of the day.  McDowell was quite happy to advance the cause of Christian propaganda by referring to articles from the previous century that were thought of as utter rubbish even by the author's peers within the medical community.

   Brown, in the Anchor Bible Commentary (c. 1970), which is a much more scholarly and sober Christian exposition of the NT, refutes those speculations:
 “In 1847 J.C. Stroud, M.D., published The Physical Cause of the Death of Christ (rev. ed., 1871), proposing what has become the classical thesis of a violent rupture of Jesus’ heart--a convenient thesis that gives preachers the opportunity to stress that literally the Lord died of a broken heart. Stroud theorized that after a hemorrhage had taken place the heart wall into the pericardial sac, there was a clotting of blood, separating it from serum. The lance thrust opened the pericardial sac, releasing the two substances.  The theory is held by few today;  it runs afoul of the subsequently gained experience that such cardiac ruptures do not occur spontaneously or under the pressure of mental agony, but as a result of previous, diseased condition of the heart muscle.  Moreover, the coagulation of blood in the pericardium would have required more time after death than the Gospel allots7.

  Brown advances a theory by Sava in an attempt to explain the exit of blood and water from the wound.  In a nutshell Sava’s idea is this:  Jesus was severely beaten by scourging and this caused a hemorrhage into the pleural cavity between the ribs and lungs several hours before his death.  The hemorrhagic blood, which could have been of considerable volume, separated itself into a light relatively clear serum fluid above and a dark red fluid below.  Sava says that this would have been fostered by being secured in a very rigid position on the cross. The spear thrust just happened to enter at the division between the two and so both blood and “water” were seen exiting the wound.  The problem with this theory is that the hemorrhage would have occurred during the scourging and the blood pouring into the pleural cavity would have caused so much pain  that Jesus would have been completely incapacitated just on that account.  He would be unable to walk and this would contradict the Gospel narrative.  Also, if any volume of blood had collected in the pleural cavity Jesus’ lung capacity would have been severely reduced. So even if the pain didn’t get him into trouble Jesus would have such breathing difficulties that would not permit him to walk to the crucifixion site, much less carry his own cross as John insists he did. Sava would do well to forget this as a possibility. Furthermore, Romans did not secure their victims to the point of rigidity on the cross as this would prevent the cyclic ‘Catch-22’ of standing-up-in-great-pain/suffocation pattern that is characteristic of crucifixion.

  Despite whatever theories Christians may advance to explain the account of the crucifixion of Jesus, many people have survived to tell of knife wounds that punctured the side and punctures of the pericardium.  Others have experienced stabs that have very nearly grazed the heart and survived quite nicely with appropriate medical care. The key to survival is prompt medical attention.  Jesus, as it seems, got the state-of-the-art care at the time and got it quickly.

  One Joseph of Aramathea then went to Pilate and asked for the body, and Pilate agreed having been assured by a centurion that Jesus was indeed dead.  Joseph took the body and placed him in his own tomb.  He and Nicodemus wrapped Jesus in linen wrappings and distributed spices between the layers, after this they rolled a stone in front of the entrance.  Wilson objects to Schonfield as making too much of Joseph of Aramathea referring to Jesus’ as soma (body) as he did not think of him as dead. Pilate, in turn, refereed to him as ptoma (corpse) but its clear that the perceptions of these men had of Jesus was expressed in their language.  Pilate was surprised to learn that Jesus had died in such a short time, "And Pilate marveled if he were already dead," Mark 15:44, but upon confirmation of death from a soldier, he allowed Joseph to take Jesus.   Joseph and Nicodemus then prepared the “soma” of Jesus by wrapping him in linens with spices.  "And there came also Nicodemus, which at the first came to Jesus by night, and brought a mixture of myrrh and aloes, about a hundred pound weight.  Then took they the body of Jesus, and wound it in linen clothes with the spices, as the manner of the Jews is to bury", (John 19:39-40).

   There is something curious about this business with the spices.  Despite the NT stating explicitly that it was a Jewish burial custom to anoint a corpse with spices, the fact is that there has never been a Jewish funerary rite that included anointing with spices, as Jewish ritual law had forbidden this practice early on. Missionaries have attempted to counter this saying that the Patriarch Joseph advised embalming his own corpse after he died so the idea of this is plausible.  However, Joseph’s intent was to preserve his remains only until they could be buried in the Land Of Israel, besides, this happened before the Torah and Jewish ritual law was given was given.  Also missionaries may mention that King Asa was decked out in aromatic spices at his funeral and point to the following verse: “And Asa slept with his fathers, and died...and laid him in the bed which was filled with sweet odors and divers kinds of spices prepared by the apothecaries' art: and they made a very great burning for him,”(2 Chronicles 16: 13-14).    According to the Jewish commentator Metzudat David the “burning” mentioned here was the burning of the bed of spices in honor of the king.   King Asa’s body did not receive an anointing.  Also in the Babylonian Talmud the proselyte Onkelos burned at least eighty pounds of spices upon the death of Raban Gamaliel the Elder.  When questioned about this he referred to Jeremiah 34:5 where spices were burned in honor of kings, and said that Gamaliel was better than 100 kings.8  During the Second Temple Period  the anointing of cadavers with spices was in practice throughout the surrounding nations, but among Jews this was a definitely forbidden. Instead, Jews burned spices--but only in honor of very important personages.

  In addition to this, the spices propertied to have been used as funerary ointments for Jesus were also very curious.  First, there is a problem with the massive volume of spices taken to the tomb.  According to the NT Joseph and Nicodemus took to the tomb on Friday night for anointing Jesus 100 Roman pounds of myrrh and aloes-- which today is about 75 lbs., or 34 kg.  As if that wasn’t enough, another 100 pounds was taken by women followers of Jesus on Sunday morning!  For anyone to purchase 100 Roman pounds of aromatics, about 34 kg., twice over, for use on one body goes well beyond total absurdity!  Not only due to the fact that this would cost a fortune, but the volume of spices is beyond anything one would need to prepare one body, perhaps even by a factor of ten!  Why on earth would anyone even consider such a massive amount of spices for one corpse?

  Perhaps the answer lies in the possibility that the aloes taken to apply to Jesus’ body were not the very expensive aromatic variety, but rather one of the very cheap species of medicinal aloe that is native to the old world and thrive in Israel. For example, the aloe vera (Aloe Barbadiensis) is widely grown in Israel in private gardens and is used even today in the treatment of scrapes, punctures, abrasions and burns.  It is wonderful as a topical first-aid application and many believe it to promoting speedy healing that even today it even competes with commercial preparations. .  Medicinal aloe would have been quite affordable compared to the aromatics that Jesus is presumed to have been “anointed” with.  It would also be a far more reasonable choice when the next point is considered.

  The next departure from Jewish burial custom is the use of wrappings. The NT says that "Then took they the body of Jesus, and wound it in linen clothes with the spices.."(John 19:40).  This is not the Jewish way of burial.  Jews have always taken a sheet, at least double the length of the deceased, placed a layer of cloth under the body, folded the sheet over the head and placed the rest gently over the top of the corpse.  The controversial Shroud of Turin, which some Catholics claim was the grave-shroud of Jesus, is an excellent example of this practice. The NT claims that Joseph and Nicodemus wound the “grave clothes” around Jesus’ body.  This would be a serious departure from accepted practice if we were dealing with an interment procedure, but if Joseph and Nicodemus were practicing first-aid by bandaging up Jesus and including with the bandages healing medicinal aloes--it would all be quite logical!

 Most proponents of the swoon theory suggest that Jesus revived having been laid in the cool tomb.  Well, I live in Judea and in my immediate area are some fifteen burial caves that date back to at least Byzantine times and many go back to the Roman period. These tombs are empty, having been rifled of their contents by nomads hundreds of years ago.  On a number of occasions I have entered them to seek shelter from rain or the heat of the day.  These caves are surprisingly temperature stable at around 18-degrees Celsius if some form of closure is improvised.  Consider that Jesus was hanging on that cross in late afternoon in March or April when ambient air temperatures typically drop quite suddenly in late afternoon. Spring nights in Jerusalem are very cool and windy and leaving Jesus there on the cross would have added the problem of exposure to his already compromised state of health.  Relief from exposure would occur by placing him in a relatively warm and windless tomb.

  The next morning, Saturday, a seal was placed on the tomb to prevent theft of the body.  Guards watched over the site. In every discussion I have had with Christians their objection to the swoon theory was that seals were placed on the tomb along with guards to watch it, so no one could have entered the tomb to steal or fiddle with the body.  Their objection has no grounds for two reasons.

 First, in his lectures, Shmuel Golding likes to quote the Gospel of Matthew 28:13-15 where it says of the Chief Priests:  "And when they were assembled with the elders, and had taken counsel, they gave a large sum of money unto the soldiers, Saying, “Say ye, His disciples came by night, and stole him away while we slept  And if this come to the governor's ears, we will persuade him, and secure you." So they took the money, and did as they were taught: and this saying is commonly reported among the Jews until this day."  Golding never fails to elicit at least a chuckle from a lecture audience when he points out that this whole story is quite unbelievable.  How could the guards know that the disciples would have stolen Jesus’ body if they had been sleeping?  And if they had not been sleeping why didn’t they stop the theft?  Anyone with any intelligence would have scoffed a this story immediately, but the NT tries to make it’s readers believe that this obviously fabricated yarn is commonly reported among the Jews until this day!  Hogwash!

  Second, in this case it is easy to explain how Jesus body--either alive or dead--could have been secretly carried away from Joseph of Aramethea’s tomb.  Those guards who were assigned to seal and oversee the tomb were only in place on Saturday morning while Jesus was laid in the warm tomb some twelve hours previous.  Whoever wanted to attend or remove Jesus had the entire night to do as they wished without any interference.  Christians typically display the most amazing illiteracy when they miss the point that anything could have happened to the body of Jesus as the tomb was unguarded for nearly twelve hours, from Friday night at sundown until Saturday morning about dawn.
 Before establishing that it would have been easy to cart Jesus away, Christians typically insist that before the guards set up their post outside the tomb they must certainly have checked if there was a body inside to guard.  Such an assumption!  The NT narrative does not record that orders were given to the guards to open the tomb and check inside, but many Christians will declare firmly that it would have been only reasonable for the guards to check first.  “Tut-tut!” I always respond, “I’m a reserve soldier and am witness to the fact that soldiers are taught to obey orders unquestionably. What may be ‘reasonable’ to civilians is not part of a soldier’s mentality. Thinking is not the task for the ordinary foot soldier, obeying is.  In every army in the world if a soldier is told to seal and guard a tomb he would do it.  If there were no orders to check the tomb then no check would have been done.   In the military orders are to be followed--no more and no less.”  Only in this century have the Israeli, Australian and German armies decided to take advantage of the intelligent gray-matter located between their soldier’s ears and give them latitude to act upon common sense.   However, these are only latter-day exceptions and by no means the rule even today.

  So if Jesus was removed from the tomb well before the seal and guards were posted what became of him?  Fundamentalist Christians typically assert that the empty tomb indicated that he rose from the dead and that he ascended to heaven in glory.  This does not necessarily follow as many possibilities exist that could provide an explanation of an empty tomb.  He may have been removed and may have expired shortly thereafter.  He may have lived long enough to make some appearances to his disciples and then died, perhaps of sepsis from the wounds.  As far as we know controlling or eliminating infection was not one of the areas of expertise of the medical practitioners of the Roman period.  Then again, if he had somehow miraculously made a complete recovery it would be in his interest to discretely leave Judea and the Galilee and take on a new identity.  It would be very dangerous for him if the authorities knew that he was still alive and up and about.  The result of this would be that they would seek to kill him, if only to save themselves the embarrassment of an obviously botched job. Those who got him out of the tomb and attempted to save his life would be in mortal danger as well.  If given a chance, the authorities would prosecute those who assisted Jesus for conspiring to help the condemned escape a death sentence. Whether Jesus ultimately died or survived the crucifixion it would then be in the interest of everyone involved to keep quiet so no one would really know what happened to Jesus’ soma.

  Missionaries voice their objections to the swoon theory by demanding an explanation of how various “post-resurrection” events described in the NT could possibly take place had Jesus only been patched-up rather than resurrect in glory.  Both Wilson and McDowell claim that Jesus walked the eight miles from Jerusalem to Emmaus, on the Sunday of his purported resurrection, (Luke 24:13-31)--on feet that had been perforated two days before.  Answering this is easy.  The NT does not say he walked eight miles on the road to Emmaus as fundamentalist Christians claim.  It simply says that he met them on the road to Emmaus.  Still, the question remains how someone with feet that were pierced through with nails was able to stand up at all!  Admittedly, this presents a difficulty, but Christians have another problem that is simply overwhelming.  The fact is that the Gospel of Matthew (28:10) has a resurrected Jesus telling women at his tomb that his disciples would see them in the Galilee: "Then said Jesus unto them, Be not afraid: go tell my brethren that they go into Galilee, and there shall they see me". But the NT contradicts on the point of where the followers of Jesus actually saw him .The Gospel of Mark describes incidents of Jesus’ appearance to the disciples at a meal in Jerusalem, and John has him appearing both at a meal in Jerusalem and at the Sea Of Tiberius.  None of these incidents were in the Galilee.  Even though Matthew says that the disciples should go to and meet Jesus in the Galilee there is no reported occasion of this having occurred, the NT records only appearances that contradict this!  Explaining how Jesus was able to stand on the road to Emmaus is not insubstantial, but reconciling the contradictory accounts of his post-resurrection appearances is simply an impossible task for the Christian.  Missionaries should always be made aware that when they discuss Jesus’ ‘post-resurrection appearances’ they enter an area where they can be made to confront contradictions that undermine the credibility of their New Testament and the very foundation of their belief system!  This is very dangerous ground for the proselytizing believer. They would be wise for them to steer clear of this issue.

  Getting back to the original subject, Israeli army reserves takes one to places that would be otherwise outside the usual sphere of activity.  While on patrol in Bethlehem,  my squad  arrived in Manger Square wherein  is located the Church of the Nativity, a spot held sacred by Christians because the Byzantine Queen Helena had a dream that informed her that the pagan temple of Adonis there was the birthplace of Jesus.  Due to the Queen's dream this the temple was converted into a Christian shrine and tourist attraction. As soldiers, our job was to keep an eye out for the Muslim fundamentalists who occasionally try to organize civil disturbances intended to harass pilgrims, as well as guarding against a terrorist attack.   While we were occupied with these matters, tourists tended to regard us and our activities as photo opportunities with their video cameras.  Snatches of tourist’s conversation I picked up showed their deep wonderment with this converted pagan temple and how these physical trappings of Christianity led them back to their “spiritual roots”.  I quite agree, getting back to ones’ spiritual roots is always a good idea.

  I, for one, would love to show missionaries their spiritual roots and do this by means of a trick worthy of a good stage magician. I would like to show how easy is to resurrect an ordinary human being from the (apparent) grasp of death of crucifixion.  I even have the props in my area needed to perform this bit of magic!  A wooden cross is no problem to make from some abandoned telephone poles in the neighborhood, a bit of vinegar and a sponge is necessary and available from the kitchen, a Mickey Finn-type of drug can be made up easily, four railroad spikes I have in the basement, bandages for wrappings can be cut from old sheets, a whole slew of medicinal aloes grows in my neighbor’s garden, and there are plenty of unoccupied burial caves that litter the surrounding hills.  All that remains is to secure about twelve hours of time and a willing volunteer from among Christian fundamentalists.    This trick involves crucifying a volunteer to demonstrate its high survival rate!   In Mexico certain Christians perform this trick annually, actually allowing themselves to be crucified by being nailed on crosses in the week before Easter. Believe it or not, in Mexico this has become a bit of a rage.  Funny enough, those who have the stomach to go through this always claim that they are better Christians for the experience.  Maybe on this wise I can get a willing volunteer that would be just tickled pink to participate! Hey, Christian Missionaries out there, any  takers?
 

Notes:

1. Wilson The Passover Plot Exposed, (Master Books, San Diego, Ca., USA)  c. 1977.

2. A full explanation of this can be found in the author’s article “Big Deal” from the ________ issue of Biblical Polemics.-

3.   (Yev.16.3,15c; taken from Encyclopedia Judaica 1972. Vol. 5,  p.1134.)

4. Anchor Bible: The Gospel According to John XIII-XXI.  A New Translation with introduction & Commentary  by Raymond E. Brown S.S. Professor of Biblical Studies at Union Theological Seminary and Woodstock College, NYC., C. 1970

5. McDowell, Evidence That Demands a Verdict (Campus Crusade For Christ, 1972), p.206--with reference to Cook, Frederick Charles (ed.),  “Commentary on the Holy Bible”, London, John Murray, 1878, pp 349-350].

6.  McDowell, Evidence That Demands a Verdict (Campus Crusade For Christ, 1972), p.206--with reference to Day. E. Hermitage. On the Evidence for the Resurrection. London: Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge, 1906, pp. 48-49].

7. Anchor Bible Commentary: The Gospel According to John XIII-XXI, Commentary by Father Raymond E. Brown S.S., Professor of Biblical Studies at Union Theological Seminary, Woodstock College, NYC., (Doubleday, 1970) p. 946

8.  cf. Babylonian Talmud: Ebel Rabbathi or Semahot 8:6