[1] This 200-year-old hypothesis continues to be the subject of debate in popular circles, but the biblical scholarly literature considers it uncontroversial that Jesus died during his crucifixion.
[citation needed] In this interpretation of the events described in the Gospels, Jesus was resuscitated by Joseph of Arimathea, with whom he shared a connection through a secret order of the Essenes.
[citation needed] A third rationalist theologian, Heinrich Paulus, wrote in works from 1802 onwards that he believed that Jesus had fallen into a temporary coma and somehow revived without help in the tomb.
Though abandoned by modern scholars as a fringe theory, the hypothesis has remained popular in various works of pseudohistory, such as Michael Baigent, Richard Leigh and Henry Lincoln's 1982 book Holy Blood, Holy Grail, Barbara Thiering's 1992 Jesus and the Riddle of the Dead Sea Scrolls, and Michael Baigent's 2006 The Jesus Papers.
[27] The actual Islamic position on the subject of crucifixion more closely resembles the Substitution hypothesis, highlighted in verse of the Qur'an: "and for their saying, 'We killed the Messiah, Jesus, son of Mary, the messenger of Allah.'
"[28] According to the late 19th century writings of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, the founder of the Ahmadiyya movement, the theological basis of the Ahmadi belief is that Jesus was only "in a swoon"[29][full citation needed] when he was taken down from the cross.
[36] The transfer of Jesus' body by the local authorities into the hands of a rich influential follower and execution of a quick burial lend support to the swoon hypothesis, allowing a swooned Jesus to be removed from the cross, quickly hidden away from public scrutiny with room to recover from his ordeal in an above ground burial chamber on private property.
[25] In contrast, modern skeptics of swooning claims, such as diagnostician Dr. Alexander Metherell, assert that Jesus having survived crucifixion is "impossible" and "a fanciful theory without any possible basis in fact.
[38] The swoon hypothesis has been criticized by many, including medical experts who, based on the account given in the New Testament, conclude that Jesus was definitively dead when removed from the cross.
[39] Many others consider it unlikely that Jesus would be capable of inspiring faith in those who saw him after barely surviving a crucifixion, including the 19th century rationalist theologian David Strauss, who wrote: "It is impossible that a being who had stolen half dead out of the sepulchre, who crept about weak and ill and wanting medical treatment... could have given the disciples the impression that he was a conqueror over death and the grave, the Prince of life: an impression that lay at the bottom of their future ministry.
The scourging produced deep stripelike lacerations and appreciable blood loss, and it probably set the stage for hypovolemic shock, as evidenced by the fact that Jesus was too weakened to carry the crossbar (patibulum) to Golgotha.