The Disappearance of Jesus’ Body Part 2: Physical Considerations, a new paper by Robert A. Rucker, discusses the “physical/scientific aspects of how Jesus’ body disappeared from the tomb”(Rucker, 1). Part One (not discussed here) “considers this question based on the Biblical references to his resurrection and based on the theology of resurrection throughout the Bible”.
If you haven’t read Part One, I recommend reading it; however, it is not necessary to understand Part Two. Part Two discusses seven hypotheses describing the disappearance of the body from the tomb. There are certainly many more. Rucker works through each hypothesis and how the physics could describe what may have happened. He considers “the pros and cons for these proposed processes”(Rucker, 1).
Physical Processes Surrounding the Disappearance of the Body
“While understanding that God is the ultimate cause of Jesus’ resurrection and thus of the disappearance of Jesus’ body from the tomb, it is legitimate to consider various physical processes or mechanisms that were operative in the disappearance of Jesus’ body from the tomb, such as the following options” (Rucker, page 5). He then defines the seven processes as follows: (Rucker page 6)
1. The molecules in Jesus’ body broke into their constituent atoms which then passed through the shroud and into the walls of the tomb.
2. The atoms in Jesus’ body disintegrated into their neutrons, protons, and electrons, which passed through the shroud and into the walls of the tomb.
3. The atoms in Jesus’ body disintegrated, with the entire mass of his body being converted into energy – specifically electromagnetic energy such as light, ultraviolet, and X-rays. The photons of this electromagnetic energy penetrated through the shroud and into the walls of the tomb.
4. The atoms in Jesus’ body disintegrated, with the entire mass of his body being converted into neutrinos and antineutrinos which would have penetrated through the shroud and through the walls of the tomb.
5. Jesus’ body was transported out of the shroud and the tomb into some other location in this physical universe by a wormhole.
6. Jesus’ body disappeared from inside the shroud by a transition into an alternate dimensionality.
7. Jesus’ body disappeared by an unknown mechanism not related to, and not an extrapolation of any known physical phenomenon or law of physics.
The Conclusion
Rucker concludes the paper with three main results from his findings on how the body of Jesus could have disappeared from the tomb.
The results are as follows and can be found on page 21 of the paper: Rucker 21
- Disappearance of the body from the tomb due to processes involving disintegration of the body, or involving one or more wormholes, ought to be rejected based on the large energies involved, the cessation of the body’s existence, and the multiplicity of very unusual events required.
- Disappearance of the body from the tomb due to a transition of Jesus’ body into an alternate dimensionality ought to be adopted as the best alternative because the characteristics of Jesus’ resurrection and post-resurrection appearances agree with the characteristics of transitions between alternate dimensionalities, there is no requirement for large energies to be involved, the body would not cease to exist after a transition into an alternate dimensionality, and radiation could be given off in the process of the transition to possibly cause the image on the shroud and shift the C14 date. Jesus’ post-resurrection appearances would then also be best understood as transitions between alternate dimensionalities.
- Disappearance of the body from the tomb due to an unknown process which is beyond an extrapolation from modern physics is also possible but pros and cons of this option could not be considered because of its vagueness.
With these results Rucker makes it simpler to think about how Jesus could have disappeared from his tomb while bringing interesting ideas and data to the research field. I highly recommend giving The Disappearance of Jesus’ Body Part 2: Physical Considerations, a full read to understand his conclusions in detail not featured in this blog.
Final Thoughts
Overall this paper is a fascinating read. As a recovering engineer, I find these analyses always fun to read (But then I found the 9-11 Commission Report also fascinating). They bring up memories of sitting in my Professor Edelman’s lecture hall, trying to make heads or tails of his lecture on Physics.
I especially liked his story on Mr. Dotman. It describes how an individual could potentially pass from two-dimensional space to a three-dimensional space and so on. I always had trouble understanding the thought experiment of a universe with more than three physical dimensions and one-time dimension. His description and story helped a bunch.
As to the proving or disproving of the seven hypotheses, unless something is missing, it seems pretty certain that the first five have problems describing how the body disappeared. The sixth hypothesis makes the most sense, especially if God is all-powerful, then He must have the ability to work in more than three dimensions. The seventh hypothesis is kind of an “all other” bucket, so it alludes to the fact that the hunt still continues.
What is certain is that our understanding of science is not yet far enough advanced for us to describe what happened in a scientific way. Maybe that’s the hubris of man trying to understand God’s ways. I like this paper because it rules out different mechanisms simply because of the likely physics surrounding the proposed disappearance mechanisms.
Find Out More
Rucker, A. Robert. The Disappearance of Jesus’ Body Part 2: Physical Considerations. 2016.
Recent Comments