The Missing Body
The Missing Body
Because Paul explicitly reports only resurrection appearances, some argue that the empty tomb tradition was originally a myth.119 Weeden, for instance, is among those who doubt that the empty tomb tradition precedes Mark. His claim that there is no “hard evidence that the early church ever knew of Jesus’ grave’s being empty”120 suggests that it did not occur to him that anyone would have checked — an idea as unlikely in Roman antiquity as today. Others rightly question whether Mark could have been inventing 16:1-8 as apologetic. Whether one accepts the pre-Markan Semitic expressions some have proposed in the passage, its conclusion with the women’s fear and silence is hardly apologetic, and it lacks any mention of corroborating attestation from Joseph of Arimathea or others.121
The variant versions of the tomb discoveries in the other Gospels suggest multiple and likely pre-Markan empty tomb traditions. That Paul does not explicitly mention the empty tomb while spending four verses listing witnesses does not mean that he assumed that the body remained in the tomb. First, witnesses of the risen Jesus counted as much stronger evidence (an empty tomb does not by itself reveal what happened to the body), so there was no need to recount the empty tomb in his brief narration of eyewitness evidence.122
Further, Paul believed that Jesus was “buried” (1 Cor 15:4; cf. Rom 6:4; Col 2:12), and must therefore have assumed that the risen Jesus left the tomb: as noted above, Palestinian Jewish doctrine of resurrection meant transformation of whatever remained of the body. For the same reason, the thesis that Palestinian Jewish disciples and authorities would have simply ignored the tomb after the resurrection appearances strains all credulity. Indeed, many of Jesus’ followers might well have visited the tomb immediately after the sabbath (hence before most of the appearances), given the need to show respect to their teacher’s body. (As noted in the last chapter, we have archaeological evidence supporting the preservation of the site of the tomb to within roughly a decade of Jesus’ burial, when Jesus’ followers led the significant Jerusalem church not far from the site.)
Nor is there historical merit to the old “swoon” theory (that Jesus was not yet dead, hence revived enough to act “resurrected” but then died somewhere unknown). Crucified persons did not simply revive: Josephus had three friends taken from crosses, and despite medical attention, two died.123 Further, if one could revive, one would still be trapped within the tomb, which would soon lead to death.124 Those inventing an empty tomb tradition would hardly have included women as the first witnesses (see comment above), and Eduard Schweizer is right that “Jesus’ resurrection could hardly have been proclaimed in Jerusalem if people knew of a tomb still containing Jesus’ body.”125
Failure to find a body could reflect an ancient motif (see especially 2 Kgs 2:16-17; Gen 5:24 LXX),126 but need not be fictitious; such a narration is appropriate to the belief that the hero was still (or newly) alive, and in the case of the Gospels involves the recent, eyewitness past rather than the distant, legendary past as in most pagan parallels. Admitting historical evidence favoring an empty tomb is not purely the domain of Christian apologetic; for example, without addressing Jesus’ resurrection appearances, Vermes, a Jewish scholar closely acquainted with the primary evidence, opines that “the only conclusion acceptable to the historian” must be that the women actually found the tomb empty.127 Historian Michael Grant likewise contends that “if we apply the same sort of criteria that we would apply to any other ancient literary sources, then the evidence is firm and plausible enough to necessitate the conclusion that the tomb was indeed found empty.”128
Some suggest that tomb robbers could have stolen the body.129 If this happened shortly after this messianic figure’s martyrdom, and was followed by the disciples all having resurrection appearances, such a coincidence would prove fortuitous indeed for the formation of what became Christianity. But even discounting the improbability of this coincidence in general, most of our evidence for tomb robberies comes from Gentile rather than Jewish areas.130 Even assuming otherwise, the arguments for this position would remain weak. Whereas tomb-robbers normally carried off wealth, carrying off the body was so rare that it would shock those who heard of it.131 It is not impossible that someone would steal a body; corpses were used for magic132 and people suspected that witches sometimes stole bodies for magic.133 Indeed, corpses that died violent deaths were considered particularly potent for magic.134 Nevertheless our evidence for the theft of corpses appears in Gentile regions, never around Jerusalem.135
At least some opponents of the resurrection claim suggested that this was in fact the fate of Jesus’ corpse (Matt 28:13-15).136 Yet one would not expect disciples guilty of the corpse’s theft to maintain the truth of their claim in the face of death, nor others to withhold the body when bringing it forward to challenge the emerging Jesus movement might have secured substantial reward. If the disciples did not protect Jesus while he was alive, surely they would not have risked their lives to rob his tomb after his death.137 Other factors also militate against supposing that the disciples stole the body. Jewish scholar Geza Vermes notes that “From the psychological point of view, they would have been too depressed and shaken to be capable of such a dangerous undertaking. But above all, since neither they nor anyone else expected a resurrection, there would have been no purpose in faking one.”138 Those who have ever had their beliefs or deep hopes shattered will recognize that Jesus’ death should have disillusioned the disciples too much for them to wish to fake a resurrection (which would also be inconsistent if they expected one). Though the corpse remaining in the tomb would have easily publicly refuted a resurrection claim, had the authorities been able to produce it,139 an empty tomb by itself would not be self-explanatory.