Possibilities

As a step towards the main point of this blog (which is the examination of the possibility of Jesus' resurrection), I will now do what millions or more have done before me and attempt to outline all the possibilities for what happened after the crucifixion of Jesus of Nazareth.

I see three possibilities:
1.  Jesus did not actually die as a result of crucifixion.
2.  Jesus did die, but did not rise again.
3.  Jesus did die and did rise again.

It is this third outrageous possibility that Christians like me believe to be true.  Even calling it a "possibility" seems rather absurd.  But before we get into just how absurd it may or may not have been, let's look at the other two possibilities first.

1.  Jesus did not actually die as a result of crucifixion.

I did a quick google search for "how many have survived crucifixion" and found confirmation that there are some people who believe Jesus did "survive" crucifixion in the sense that he did not technically die.  For example, one web site presents the theory that Jesus did not literally die on the cross, but fell into a deep coma from which he recovered while tucked away in his tomb.  This may be slightly "less miraculous" and easier to believe than the idea that Jesus rose from the dead, but it is still miraculous to say the least that someone in the first century would fall into a deep enough coma that they were presumed dead and then spontaneously come out of it by the third day after they fell into it.

This search also uncovered the fact that at least one person has survived a crucifixion that was intended to be lethal.  This person was a friend of Josephus, but in his case, the Romans were well aware that the person was still alive when he was taken down from the cross as Josephus had pleaded for his friend's life and won.  It sounds like there was no recorded instance of a person who was thought to be dead when removed from the cross but later found to still be alive.  (Of course that doesn't mean it didn't happen, just that no one confirmed it happened.)

It was also mentioned that the Romans confirmed death before taking someone off the cross by piercing their side, which the Bible claims was exactly what happened to Jesus before he was removed from the cross.

What it means to "pierce their side" seems up for debate as one source I found claimed that "piercing the side" would NOT pierce the heart while another I read said that it likely would.  The first source also claimed that the fact that blood flowed from Jesus' pierced side as reported in the Gospels proved he was still alive, but the second source suggested that the flowing of both blood AND water from Jesus side indicated he may have suffered from hypovolemic shock and died.

Further evidence for the hypovolemic shock that would have accelerated Jesus' death include his collapse on the way to his crucifixion site and his declaration of thirst near his death.  The shock would have been caused by the whipping Jesus received prior to crucifixion, a whipping which by itself could sometimes be fatal, and would explain Jesus' relatively quick death on the cross.  (http://www.gotquestions.org/blood-water-Jesus.html)

However, the source that claims the piercing did NOT kill Jesus and in fact proved he was alive presents an alternative for why Jesus "died" relatively quickly on the cross.  In what reads like a conspiracy theory (and I admit, conspiracy theories can be true), this site suggests that perhaps the whole crucifixion of Jesus was staged.  The suggestion is that Jesus was drugged while on the cross, perhaps from the sponge that was lifted up to him when he said he was thirsty, and only appeared to be dead when taken down.  It is further suggested that Jesus was then taken to a private tomb (that part is reported in the Bible) and there he was revived.  This website claims that the perfume ingredients reported to be taken to anoint Jesus' body had medicinal purposes that could account for Jesus' revival from unconscious non-death. (http://www.beliefnet.com/Faiths/Christianity/2006/04/Could-Jesus-Have-Survived-The-Crucifixion.aspx)

The above mentioned article further claims that when Joseph, the man who provided the tomb for Jesus, asked Pilot, the man who authorized Jesus' execution, for access to the body of Jesus, he referred to Jesus' body with a word that meant a living body.  The author of the article claims that this is the revealing evidence, reported right in the Gospel, that Jesus was still alive when taken from the cross.

Now, it seems very strange to me that Pilot would authorize Jesus to be taken down if he thought Jesus was still alive.  In fact, the same Bible passage that the above article's writer cites as "proof" that Jesus was still alive goes on to clearly state that Pilot confirmed with a centurion at the crucifixion site that Jesus was already dead.  So no matter what word Joseph may have used to describe Jesus' body, it certainly sounds as if, according the the Gospel account cited as "evidence" that Jesus was still alive, it was actually confirmed that Jesus was dead.  It doesn't seem to me as if citing this passage of Scripture proves anything about Jesus still being alive.  Even if there is an implication that he might have still been alive, it explicitly states that he was dead.  (Mark 15:43-45)  And that "implication" seems tenuous itself as the word for body (soma) that the author claims refers to a living body only might refer to a living body according to my research (http://www.biblestudytools.com/lexicons/greek/nas/soma.html).

It seems to me that this theory about Jesus not really being dead is tempting, but is it the truth?  Is it even the easiest of the options to believe?  I'll consider the other options and hope to give an even more in depth analysis and comparison of them in upcoming posts.

More on the Baptism of Jesus - Finally!

It's been five months since I last posted here, so I figured it was time to throw a little something together.  We're all imperfect; we all get distracted from certain things, no matter how important they might be.  The same was true for me and this blog as well.  I can't make any promises about how often I will post going forward, and will probably end up neglecting this blog again, but here are at least some thoughts continuing on the topic of Jesus' baptism.

First off, my last post mentioned the strangeness of Jesus' baptism and the possibility that this strangeness lends some credibility to the fact of His baptism.  If He was perfect, why be baptized at all?  Why include such a strange and confusing story if the Gospels are a work of fiction?

The argument that something probably would not have been made up by no means proves it wasn't made up.  People do make up crazy and nonsensical things that contradict other things they've said all the time.  In terms of evidence beyond the "it seems to work against the other alleged facts about Jesus being perfect" argument, I was interested to find a few websites about archaeological research into finding the exact site of Jesus' baptism.   Now, if Jesus was never baptized, no such site would even exist, so I would think that if someone could definitively identify the site where Jesus was baptized, that would mean he was actually baptized.

I found mention of some research into Jesus' baptismal site based on other historical happenings, like people establishing churches near the site of Jesus' baptism in the days of early Christianity. The establishing of churches near the alleged site of Jesus baptism still does not prove Jesus' baptism happened, but it shows Jesus' baptism was important to people.  Based on its importance for early Christians, it seems that either the baptism really happened or many people were convinced it had.  People usually don't intentionally cling to something they know to be false, and the churches were started not long after the time Jesus was alive, by people who had the potential to have received first or second hand accounts of Jesus' baptism.  This all lends credibility to Jesus' baptism being real, but it doesn't "prove" it.  (As a side note, a very similar thing could be said of Jesus' resurrection, but we will get to this more in future posts.)

Then, I found this documentary (which I have not personally vetted and have just started to watch) about the site of Jesus' baptism:  http://www.baptismsite.com/index.php/watch-the-documentary.html (I may update or add to this post after I've watched more of the documentary)

Now supposing Jesus' baptism really did occur, what is it's significance to followers of Jesus?  Perhaps it lends authenticity to what John the Baptist was saying about repentance.  It could also serve as an example for Jesus' own followers.  When I think of Jesus being baptized, I think also of the story about Him turning around and washing his disciples feet.  When Jesus asked John to baptize Him, John at first refused according to Matthew 3:14.  According to Matthew, John felt Jesus should be baptizing Him, but Jesus replied by saying:  “Let it be so now, for thus it is fitting for us to fulfill all righteousness.” (Matthew 3:15)  I don't really know what that means, but perhaps it means that Jesus was setting an example for others.  With the washing of His disciples feet, Jesus again met with resistance, according to the Gospel of John.  This time, Peter tried to stop Jesus from this degrading act of feet washing, but Jesus told him, "If I do not wash you, you have no share with me." (John 13:8b)  And John's account further states that after washing the disciples feet, Jesus told them that they "also should do just as I have done to you" (John 13:15b).  The Bible often claims to share with us things that Jesus did that we should emulate.  It seems that baptism may intended as one of those things as well.

In my next post, I will try to finally get to what in many ways was the original goal of this blog.  I will consider some of the alleged evidence for Jesus' resurrection and/or will present some alternative theories for Jesus' resurrection.  There are many who will lean towards the alternative theories, but I hope to show that believing in Jesus' resurrection, though it seems crazy, is not as far out there as many people think.