Today's post, courtesy of Marc Tapscott, offers a more scholarly look at the significance of the empty tomb for the Resurrection of Jesus.
Tapscott asserts that the empty tomb of Jesus is the single most consequential fact in all of history. I'd quibble with him on a technicality. It wasn't the empty tomb per se which was the most significant fact but rather what the empty tomb signified, i.e. the resurrection of Jesus, but set that aside.
What of the possibility that the body was stolen from the tomb? Tapscott writes:
There are only three candidate groups who logically might have had a motive for stealing the body of Jesus. First, there are the disciples themselves. Critics have long claimed the disciples stole the body and then invented the Resurrection myth.One point I might add to Tapscott's argument: If thieves stole the body why would they take the time to unravel the grave cloths and remove the body from them, leaving the grave linens in the tomb? Wouldn't they have been in a great hurry to get out of there before the guards found them out?
Here's why that claim is preposterous: the disciples scattered when Jesus was arrested. They were terrified that they would be next. Peter's thrice denial of even knowing Jesus is indicative of the group's cowardice.
Why is that significant? None of the disciples is known to have had any military training, yet we are to believe that this scattered crew of cowards somehow found the courage to overcome a crack unit of the Roman Legion that was guarding the tomb, or buy them off, then hide Jesus' body where it would never be found, and afterwards go out and tell everybody that Jesus was God?
The second candidate group would be Jesus' enemies, chiefly, the Pharisees and Sadducees who were the religious leaders of Israel. Throughout His three-year ministry, Jesus had tangled with these religious leaders who accused Him of blasphemy for claiming to be God-become-man. That's why they demanded that Pilate order Jesus crucified.
But let's say they did steal Jesus' dead body because they were quite aware that He had said He would "rise again." (Mark 9:31). Weeks after Jesus' crucifixion and burial Peter spoke to thousands of people on the Day of Pentecost, explicitly claiming Jesus was alive. Three thousand people became Jesus's followers that day and the Christian church was born.
But if they had stolen His body from the tomb, as soon as Peter began claiming the Resurrection, Jesus's enemies would have rolled his stinking, rotting corpse down Jerusalem's Main Street to prove He was dead, not alive.
Then they would likely have arrested Peter and any of the rest of the disciples they could lay their hands on and crucified them. Instead of the day it was born, Pentecost would have been the day the Christian church died.
And the third candidate group for stealing Jesus' dead body? Grave robbers had been around for centuries and robbing the tombs of famous people was not uncommon. After all, as with the Pharaohs, who loaded up their tombs with valuables for the next world, robbers could make one big hit and be set for life.
But here's the problem: Nobody ever accused Jesus of being rich, so they had no reason whatsoever to think His tomb would be stuffed with gold, silver and precious jewels. Remember: He was so poor, He had to be buried in somebody else's tomb!
That tomb was owned by Joseph of Arimathea, who, being a member of the Jewish Sanhedrin, might well have been wealthy. So maybe the local robbers figured it was at least worth a shot?
But how likely was it that a band of grave robbers that would have been made up of only two or three men could have overcome the [soldiers] guarding Jesus's tomb?
Anyway, there's really only one reason for thinking that Jesus' body was stolen and that the Resurrection didn't really happen. That's the belief that miracles aren't possible, but we can only be sure that miracles aren't possible if we already believe that there's no God. If God exists then miracles surely are possible, and we should judge each report of a miracle on the basis of the historical evidence.
And the evidence for the Resurrection of Jesus is about as strong as any evidence for any historical event could possibly be.
Tapscott has more about this evidence for the Resurrection at the link.
