HARD FACTS: Maybe Jesus Didn’t Really Die On The Cross, He Just Revived After They Buried Him?

Among the most common objections to Christianity is the rejection of the disciples’ claim that they saw and talked to the resurrected Jesus three days after his crucifixion on the cross and burial in a grave carved out of stone. He didn’t actually die on the cross, the critics claim.

This objection is one of the several ways, for example, that Islam rejects the resurrected Jesus Christ as proof of His claim to be both God and man. Similarly, atheists came up with the claim that Jesus could not have been resurrected from the dead because He didn’t die on the cross. He was buried, then revived in the cool grave, escaped and walked all the way to India or maybe Japan where he married, had kids, and died. (No, I’m not making this up, you can Google it!)

Palm Sunday is right around the corner, so odds are good this objection will be heard in coming days in the mainstream media, in online college classes and in the popular culture. But NBC “Dateline” Cold-Case Detective J. Warner Wallace explains in the following video why people who claim Jesus didn’t die on the cross have no idea what they are talking about:

Here Are 10 More Of The Most Amazing Facts  About Jesus  They Didn’t Tell You In School

Author: Mark Tapscott

Follower of Christ, devoted husband of Claudia, doting father and grandfather, conservative lover of liberty, journalist and First Amendment fanatic, former Hill and Reagan aide, vintage Formula Ford racer, Okie by birth/Texan by blood/proud of both, resident of Maryland. Go here: https://hillfaith.blog/about-hillfaith-2/

5 thoughts on “HARD FACTS: Maybe Jesus Didn’t Really Die On The Cross, He Just Revived After They Buried Him?”

  1. Can someone give me evidence that Jesus ever lived? Flavius Josephus wrote about mythical beasts as if they were real and was not a contemporary source. Other than the bible what hard evidence is there?


    1. I suggest you check out Prof. Bart Ehrman’s “Did Jesus Exist? The Historical Argument for Jesus of Nazareth,” which presents a case found convincing by Christians and non-believers alike. Ehrman is not a Christian.


    2. Both Tacitus and Suetonius refer to followers of Christ. Of course they are later sources than the NT. Do you believe in Alexander the Great?


  2. Pingback: OK, LET’S GET THIS ONE OUT OF THE WAY BEFORE PALM SUNDAY: Easter is coming, so expect to hear in the… – The usa report
  3. It is also intriguing how archaeological evidence supports even the fine-grained details of the world Jesus and the apostles lived in. In Acts 18:1-4, it describes how Peter goes to Corinth and to support himself works for Aquila and his wife Priscilla, making tents in their dwelling, apparently fairly close to the Synagogue. Recent excavations have found evidence of a tent manufactory in Corinth, fairly close to what may be a Synagogue, and of the same time (Claudius being Emperor). Same place? Who knows? But it’s consistent throughout, roads, towns, places in towns, names, public figures, even the style of Galilean fishing craft.

    And nobody can explain the most remarkable matters like the Turin Shroud. And do not forget that the Apostles who knew Jesus absolutely refused to abandon him even when the penalty for not doing so was death.

    No, there was certainly an out-of-context occurrence in relation to Jesus of Nazareth. Accepting his existence is the logical outcome of examining the evidence. Alternative hypotheses are much more outlandish.


Comments are closed.