CHAPTER 3
MARK’S ACCOUNT
AND THE EMBARRASSMENT
OF WOMEN WITNESSES
Mark’s empty tomb story is simple and lacks signs of legendary development. His account of the women’s discovery of the empty tomb is remarkably reserved and unembellished by theological motifs that would likely characterize a later legendary story.
For example, it is really quite amazing that the resurrection itself is not actually described or even witnessed, and there is no theological reflection on Jesus’ conquering sin and death, no use of divine titles for Christ, no quotation of fulfilled prophecy, no description of the Risen Lord. Mark’s narrative is very different than what one might expect from a Christian legend—just contrast Mark’s account with the way in which Jesus’ resurrection is vividly portrayed in modern passion plays!
To appreciate how restrained Mark’s narrative is, we need only read the account in the second-century apocryphal Gospel of Peter. It describes Jesus’ triumphant exit from the tomb as a gigantic figure whose head reaches above the clouds, supported by giant angels, followed by a talking cross, heralded by a voice from heaven, and all witnessed by a Roman guard, the Jewish leaders, and a multitude of spectators! This is how real legends look: They’re richly decorated with theological and apologetical motifs. By contrast, Mark’s account is stark in its simplicity.
And then, the Women Witnesses
The tomb was discovered empty by a group of Jesus’ female followers. In order to appreciate this point, we need to understand two things about the place of women in first-century Jewish society.
First, women were not regarded as credible witnesses. The negative attitude toward the testimony of women is evident in the Jewish historian Josephus’ description of Jewish rules for admissible testimony: “Let not the testimony of women be admitted, on account of the levity and boldness of their sex.”4 No such regulation is to be found in the Hebrew Scriptures; it is rather a reflection of the patriarchal society of first-century Judaism. It is noteworthy that the only times Josephus cites female witnesses in his histories is after the battles of Gamala and Masada when he is forced to recur to women for the simple reason that they were the only survivors of these slaughters.
Second, women occupied a low rung on the Jewish social ladder. Compared to men, women were, frankly, second-class citizens. The rabbis said: “Sooner let the words of the Law be burnt than delivered to women!”5 and again: “Happy is he whose children are male, but unhappy is he whose children are female!”6 The daily prayer of every Jewish man included the blessing, “Blessed are you, Lord our God, ruler of the universe, who has not created me a Gentile, a slave, or a woman.”7
Given their lower social status and lack of credibility as witnesses, it is quite amazing that it is women who are the discoverers of and principal witnesses to the fact of the empty tomb! If the empty tomb story were a legend, then male disciples would have been made to be the ones who discover the empty tomb. The fact that women—whose testimonies were deemed worthless—were the chief witnesses to the fact of the empty tomb can only be plausibly explained if, like it or not, they actually were the discoverers of the empty tomb, and the Gospel writers faithfully record what (for them) was an awkward and embarrassing fact.