Easter is upon us again! part 4

By Stephen Mitchell

The fifth and final statement (see previous 3 posts) on the resurrection that almost all reputable scholars accept:

5. The empty tomb.

How do we know it was empty? There are three lines of evidence that Habermas and Licona present. These are: The Jerusalem factor, enemy attestation, and the testimony of women.

What is the Jerusalem Factor? It is the simple fact that Jerusalem is not only where Jesus was crucified and buried, it is also where His resurrection was first preached. Anyone could have simply walked outside the city to the tomb and verified it for themselves. Even though the public preaching did not come, as far as we know, until fifty days after His death, He still would have been recognizable. “First, in the arid climate of Jerusalem, a corpse’s hair, stature, and distinctive wounds would have been identifiable, even after fifty days. Second, regardless of the condition of his body, the enemies of Jesus would still have found benefit in producing the corpse. Even a barely recognizable corpse could have dissuaded some believers, possible weakening and ultimately toppling the entire movement. Since that was the goal, Jesus’ enemies had every reason to produce his body, regardless of its condition. It is true that, upon viewing the corpse, many Christians would have claimed that it was a hoax. Nevertheless, there still would have been a huge exodus of believers who would have lost confidence in Christianity upon seeing an occupied tomb and a decaying corpse” (Habermas and Licona, p. 70).

There is also the claim of Him being seen by more than five hundred during the first forty days following His death and resurrection. All any of them would have had to do is walk outside Jerusalem and look into His tomb. Since the persecutor  Paul claimed that most of those were still alive and could be spoken to several years later, anyone could have checked on the story. With the evidence of so many today traveling to see the supposed empty tomb, I would imagine that very many of those during the first forty days did the same. The first century records make the claim that at least two of the men did so: Peter and John. It was a short run for those men to the tomb so anyone who could walk could go see for themselves.

What about the enemy attestation? “The empty tomb is attested not only by Christian sources. Jesus’ enemies admitted it as well, albeit indirectly. Hence, we are not employing an argument from silence. Rather than point to an occupied tomb, early critics accused Jesus’ disciples of stealing the body (Matt. 28:12-13)” (Habermas and Licona, p. 71).

The story was still being circulated more than a hundred years later. The Christian author, Justin Martyr, in his 2nd century writing Dialogue with Trypho, which is his record of a discussion he had with a Jewish man, noted “yet you not only have not repented, after you learned that He rose from the dead, but, as I said before, you have sent chosen and ordained men throughout all the world to proclaim that a godless and lawless heresy had sprung from one Jesus, a Galilæan deceiver, whom we crucified, but his disciples stole him by night from the tomb, where he was laid when unfastened from the cross, and now deceive men by asserting that he has risen from the dead and ascended to heaven” (Book 4, chapter 8, section 15).

The story that the Disciples stole Jesus’ body is an implicit admission that the tomb was empty.

What about the testimony of women? In all four first century Christian accounts of the resurrection, women were the first to the tomb and the first to give testimony that the tomb was empty. Why is this significant? In the first century Jewish culture, women were not considered reliable witnesses. Josephus, the first century Jewish historian, wrote, “But let not the testimony of women be admitted, on account of the levity and boldness of their sex, nor let servants be admitted to give testimony on account of the ignobility of their soul.” The Talmud also noted, “Any evidence which a woman [gives] is not valid.” Having women be the primary witness was a huge mistake for that culture, unless, of course, it was true. But women would be going to the tomb since, in that culture, the women prepared the bodies for burial and Jesus was taken down right at sunset so they would not have been able to finish their work on Jesus’ body. They would, in fact, have been the first to the tomb. In other words, the accounts have the mark of historical validity. One does not make up stories and have as their primary witnesses a group of people whose witness would not be accepted. And Luke recorded that the Disciples reacted according to their culture of disdaining the witness of women. “Now they were Mary Magdalene and Joanna and Mary the mother of James; also the other women with them were telling these things to the apostles.  But these words appeared to them as nonsense, and they would not believe them” (Luke 24:10-11). Even the Romans had a similar view of women as witnessed by the early second century Roman historian Suetonius in his work, The Twelve Caesars.

So it certainly seems to be a reasonable conclusion that the tomb was empty.

In the last post in this series I will look at the way Habermas and Licona show us how these four facts plus one will work together to defend the historicity of the resurrection of Jesus.

Gary R. Habermas and Michael R. Licona, The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus (Grand Rapids: Kregel Publications, 2004)

Flavius Josephus, Antiquities of the Jews