Week 7: The Empty Tomb

Week 7: The Empty Tomb – The Missing Body

Main Teaching

Having firmly established that Jesus died by crucifixion, we now proceed to the next crucial piece of historical data. The resurrection claim is not just that Jesus's spirit lived on, but that his body was raised. Therefore, a necessary condition for the resurrection is an empty tomb. This week, we will examine the strong historical case for our second Minimal Fact: On the Sunday following the crucifixion, the tomb in which Jesus was buried was found empty by a group of his women followers. While this fact does not have the near-unanimous consent of the crucifixion, it is still accepted by a significant majority—around 75%—of critical scholars who have written on the subject. This is a remarkable level of agreement for any event in ancient history, let alone a miraculous one. We can build a powerful cumulative case for the empty tomb using a simple acronym: J.E.T.S. J - Jerusalem Proclamation E – Enemy Attestation T – Testimony of Women S – Simple Story

Part 1: The Case for the Empty Tomb (J.E.T.S.)

J – Jerusalem Proclamation The disciples' proclamation of the resurrection began in the city of Jerusalem, just a few weeks after the crucifixion. This is a crucial and often overlooked point. If you are going to proclaim that a man has risen from the dead, the very last place you would want to do it is in the city where he was publicly executed and buried, especially if his body is still in the tomb. Their enemies—the Roman and Jewish authorities—had every motive, means, and opportunity to stop the new Christian movement in its tracks. All they had to do was go to the tomb of Joseph of Arimathea, produce the corpse of Jesus, and parade it through the streets of Jerusalem. This single act would have instantly falsified the disciples' claim and ended Christianity before it began. The fact that they never did this, and that the movement flourished in the very city where the evidence could be most easily checked, speaks volumes. The Christian faith could not have survived for a single day in Jerusalem if the tomb had not been empty. E – Enemy Attestation The earliest counter-argument from the enemies of Christianity provides a hostile, back-handed admission that the tomb was, in fact, empty. Their response was not, "He's still in the tomb. " Instead, as recorded in Matthew 28:11-15 and confirmed by later Christian writers like Justin Martyr in the mid-second century, the official story circulated by the Jewish authorities was, "His disciples came by night and stole him away while we were asleep. " Think about the implications of this charge. By inventing the theft story, Jesus's opponents were conceding the central fact: the tomb was empty. The debate in the first century was not whether the tomb was empty, but why it was empty. This "enemy attestation" is a powerful piece of historical evidence, because the authorities would have had no reason to invent a story about a stolen body if the body was still securely in the tomb. T – Testimony of Women

All four Gospel accounts are unanimous on one key detail: the first people to discover the empty tomb were women, specifically Mary Magdalene and other female followers of Jesus. In the patriarchal culture of first-century Judaism and the wider Roman world, a woman's testimony was considered so unreliable that it was not even admissible in most court cases. The first-century Jewish historian Josephus summarized the prevailing view: "Let not the testimony of women be admitted, on account of the levity and boldness of their sex. " If you were inventing a story in that culture and wanted it to be believed, you would make respected men—like Peter or John—your primary witnesses. The inclusion of women in this key role is an embarrassing and counter-productive detail from a public relations standpoint. The only plausible reason it is included in all four accounts is that the authors were constrained by the historical facts. It's what really happened, and they faithfully reported it, even though it weakened their case in the eyes of their contemporaries. Jewish New Testament scholar Geza Vermes, who does not believe in the resurrection, calls this the strongest argument for the authenticity of the empty tomb account. S – Simple Story The earliest accounts of the empty tomb, particularly in the Gospel of Mark (which most scholars believe is the earliest Gospel), are remarkably simple, brief, and lack the kind of legendary embellishments and theological reflections that tend to accumulate over time in fabricated stories. The narrative is stark and even ends abruptly in its oldest manuscripts, with the women fleeing in fear and telling no one. This lack of polished, triumphant detail points to its historical core.

Part 2: The Implied Testimony of Paul

While the Apostle Paul does not explicitly mention the empty tomb in his letters, his testimony in the 1 Corinthians 15 creed strongly implies it. The creed states that Jesus "was buried" and then "was raised. " For a first-century Jew, the idea of a resurrection was always a bodily concept. It meant the dead body coming back to life. The notion of a "spiritual resurrection" where the body remains in the grave would have been a contradiction in terms. When Paul says a man who "was buried" was then "raised, " any contemporary listener would have automatically understood that the grave was left empty.

Part 3: Refuting the Alternative Explanations

The evidence strongly indicates that the tomb was empty. This fact alone does not prove the resurrection, but it is a necessary piece of the puzzle. It creates a historical problem that demands an explanation. The two most common naturalistic explanations are easily refuted. 1. The Disciples Stole the Body This is the ancient theory promoted by the authorities, but it fails because it cannot account for the disciples' subsequent transformation. These men, who had been hiding in fear, suddenly became bold proclaimers of the resurrection, willing to endure persecution, torture, and martyrdom. People will die for what they believe to be true, but they will not die for what they know to be a lie. This theory requires us to believe that all of them were part of a conspiracy and maintained that lie to their brutal deaths—a psychologically incredible scenario. Furthermore, as we will see in the worksheet, the presence of a Roman guard makes this theory a physical impossibility. 2. The Wrong Tomb Theory This suggests the women and disciples, in their grief and disorientation, simply went to the wrong tomb. This is highly implausible for several reasons: • If they had gone to the wrong tomb, the Jewish and Roman authorities would have quickly gone to the correct tomb, produced the body, and exposed the whole affair as a tragic mistake. • Joseph of Arimathea, the owner of the tomb, was a member of the Sanhedrin and a well- known public figure. The location of his family tomb would not have been a secret, and he could have easily corrected their error. • It asks us to believe that everyone involved—the women, Peter, John, the Jewish leaders, the Roman authorities—all forgot where the body of this highly controversial figure was buried just a few days earlier. The evidence strongly indicates that the tomb was empty. It creates a historical problem that demands an answer, an answer that the subsequent appearances of Jesus would provide.

Extra Notes & Resources for Deeper Study

Key Thinkers to Know:

• Gary Habermas: A Distinguished Research Professor at Liberty University, he is the world's leading expert on the resurrection of Jesus and a primary proponent of the Minimal Facts Approach. • Michael Licona: A New Testament scholar and professor at Houston Christian University, he co-authored The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus with Habermas and has written extensively on the topic. • William Lane Craig: A philosopher and theologian who has written and debated extensively on the evidence for the resurrection, including a robust defense of the empty tomb. • Geza Vermes (1924-2013): A renowned Jewish scholar who, while not a believer in the resurrection, argued that the testimony of the women was the strongest evidence for the historical reliability of the empty tomb story. Recommended Reading: • For a clear and accessible introduction: o Gary Habermas and Michael Licona, The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus. This is the best and most comprehensive popular-level book on the subject. o Lee Strobel, The Case for Christ. Chapters 12 and 13 cover the evidence for the empty tomb and the resurrection appearances in an easy-to-follow interview format. • For a more in-depth academic treatment: o William Lane Craig, The Son Rises: The Historical Evidence for the Resurrection of Jesus. A thorough philosophical and historical defense. o N.T. Wright, The Resurrection of the Son of God. A massive and definitive scholarly work on the topic, for those who want the deepest dive possible.

Online Resources: • GaryHabermas.com: Contains a wealth of articles, lectures, and debates by Dr. Habermas. • RisenJesus.com: The website of Dr. Michael Licona, with many videos and resources. • ReasonableFaith.org: Dr. William Lane Craig's site has numerous articles and videos defending the historicity of the empty tomb.

Discussion Questions

1. Of the four points in the "J.E.T.S. " argument, which one do you find the most persuasive, and why? 2. The Gospels' inclusion of women as the first witnesses to the empty tomb was counter- cultural. In our group, let's discuss why this detail, once seen as a weakness, is now considered by historians to be a powerful sign of the story's authenticity. 3. Why is the "enemy attestation" (the fact that the Jewish leaders claimed the body was stolen) such a strong argument for the empty tomb? 4. If you were a disciple who knew you had stolen the body, would you be willing to be tortured and killed for that lie? What does the disciples' martyrdom tell us? 5. How does the empty tomb, by itself, challenge a purely naturalistic worldview? What possibilities does it open up?

Further Study Worksheet: "The Roman Guard"

The theory that the disciples stole the body of Jesus must contend with a significant obstacle mentioned in the Gospel of Matthew: the Roman guard. According to Matthew 27:62-66, the chief priests and Pharisees, remembering that Jesus had predicted his resurrection, went to Pontius Pilate and requested that the tomb be secured. Pilate granted their request, saying, "You have a guard of soldiers. Go, make it as secure as you can. " The text says, "So they went and made the tomb secure by sealing the stone and setting a guard. " Let's break down what this involved: • The Guard: A Roman guard unit typically consisted of four to sixteen highly trained, professional soldiers. These were not local police; they were a disciplined fighting force. • The Penalty for Failure: For a Roman soldier, falling asleep on duty or deserting one's post was a capital offense. The entire unit could be executed if their watch was compromised. These men were highly motivated to do their job properly. • The Seal: The tomb was secured with a large stone, likely weighing between one and two tons. A rope was then stretched across the stone and affixed to the tomb wall at both ends with wax or clay, which was then stamped with an official Roman seal. Breaking this seal was a direct offense against the authority of the Roman Empire, punishable by death. Now, consider the disciples' situation. They were a small group of fishermen and tax collectors, defeated, terrified, and demoralized. The "stolen body" theory requires us to believe that this frightened group somehow formulated a plan, snuck up on a highly trained and motivated Roman guard in the middle of the night, overpowered them or found them all asleep (an incredible dereliction of duty), broke the Roman seal, silently rolled away a massive stone, entered the tomb, unwrapped the body, and carried it away, all without waking anyone or leaving any evidence. The scenario is beyond implausible. The presence of the Roman guard and seal makes the theory that the disciples stole the body—the only ancient explanation for the empty tomb besides the resurrection—historically untenable.

Supplemental Study

Week 7: The Burial of Jesus by Joseph of Arimathea

The historical foundation of the empty tomb story is the burial of Jesus itself. If we don't know where Jesus was buried, then a claim about an empty tomb is meaningless. The Gospels are unanimous that Jesus was buried in a tomb belonging to Joseph of Arimathea. Remarkably, this specific detail is considered a strong historical fact by a wide range of scholars, including many skeptics. Why is the Burial Story So Credible? Several lines of evidence support the historicity of Jesus's burial by Joseph of Arimathea: 1. It's Part of the Earliest Tradition: The burial of Jesus is mentioned in the ancient creed Paul quotes in 1 Corinthians 15, which dates to within a few years of the crucifixion. This shows the burial was a core part of the story from the very beginning, not a later invention. 2. The Criterion of Embarrassment: The Gospels identify Joseph of Arimathea as a member of the Sanhedrin—the very council of Jewish leaders that had condemned Jesus to death. It is highly unlikely that the early Christians would invent a story where one of their enemies does the right and honorable thing for Jesus while his own disciples are nowhere to be found. This detail is embarrassing to the disciples and unexpectedly positive toward the Sanhedrin, making it unlikely to be a fabrication. 3. Lack of Competing Stories: There are no competing burial traditions from the first century. If the story of Joseph burying Jesus was a later invention, we would expect to find other, earlier stories circulating about what happened to Jesus's body (e.g., that he was thrown in a common grave for criminals). The fact that only one story exists—the burial by Joseph— suggests it is the original, historical account. The Implications for the Empty Tomb: If it is a historical fact that Jesus was buried in the private tomb of a well-known member of the Sanhedrin, this has massive implications for the empty tomb claim.

• The Tomb's Location was Known: This was not an unknown, unmarked grave. Its location would have been known to Joseph, the other Sanhedrin members, the Roman authorities, and Jesus's followers. • It Refutes the "Wrong Tomb" Theory: The idea that the women and disciples simply got lost and went to the wrong tomb becomes absurd. If they had, the authorities could have easily pointed to the correct, still-occupied tomb of Joseph of Arimathea. • It Makes the Jerusalem Proclamation Possible: Because the tomb's location was known, the disciples' bold preaching in Jerusalem that the tomb was empty becomes a falsifiable claim. They were, in essence, inviting their opponents to go and check the tomb of their own colleague, Joseph, to verify that the body was gone. The historical certainty of the burial provides the necessary anchor for the historical case for the empty tomb.