How
to Know God Exists Series
The Resurrection Part 5 -
The Empty Tomb
As we end our recent study on the
resurrection as a fact of history, we look at one of the most
daunting problems posed to the skeptics - the empty tomb of
Jesus. The absence of Jesus' dead body from its burial place
gives incredible support to the disciples' claims that He had
risen from the dead. It is therefore not surprising that this
point is attacked continuously by doubters. Was the tomb empty?
And if so, could it have become empty through some other means
than Jesus' resurrection?
If we can show that the empty
tomb did in fact exist and that there is no good naturalistic
explanation for Jesus' missing body, then we have strong
evidence for a supernatural explanation. This not only argues
for God's existence but also legitimizes the truth of
Christianity.
Was the Tomb Empty?
There exist many objections to
Jesus' tomb being empty at all. Most notably, the Jesus
Seminar's John Dominic Crossan puts forth the belief that Jesus
was never buried in a rock tomb but his body was placed in a
common grave and probably eaten by dogs.1
However, Crossan
fabricates this explanation because there is absolutely no
evidence on which to base his specific account. Although, as
Crossan himself admits, burial for crucified criminals was rare
it did occur and we have both written and physical evidence to
support it. 2
Tomb commonly assumed empty by
both Christians and Jews.
So was there a tomb that Jesus
was buried in? Crossan and others argue that the whole tomb
event had to be added later because the most primitive reports
of the resurrection never cited it. However, this is an argument
from silence. Even though Peter doesn't specifically mention the
empty tomb in his speech in Acts 2, that doesn't mean it didn't
exist. It is quite likely that an empty tomb didn't need to be
stated because it was "front page news" if you will.
J.P. Moreland says, "In the
early speeches of Acts, no mention is made of the empty tomb...
Why is the empty tomb not mentioned in those speeches? The best
answer seems to be that the fact of the empty tomb was common
ground between believers and unbelievers."3
Likewise Paul's recount of the
resurrection belief in 1 Corinthians does not prove that there
was no empty tomb, but just that the writer felt no pressing
need to mention it. The tomb was assumed to be empty - a fact we
can derive from our next point.
The stolen body story
corroborates Jesus' tomb being empty.
Another explanation given is the
women in Mark's account simply went to a random tomb or found
the wrong tomb. However, the early accusations by the Jews of
Jesus' disciples stealing His body demonstrate that this cannot
be the case.
Dr. William Lane Craig writes,
"In Matthew 28, we find the
Christian attempt to refute the earliest Jewish polemic against
the resurrection. That polemic asserted that the disciples stole
away the body. The Christians responded to this by reciting the
story of the guard at the tomb, and the polemic in turn charged
that the guard fell asleep. Now the noteworthy feature of this
whole dispute is not the historicity of the guards but rather
the presupposition of both parties that the body was missing.
The earliest Jewish response to the proclamation of the
resurrection was an attempt to explain away the empty tomb.
Thus, the evidence of the adversaries of the disciples provides
evidence in support of the empty tomb."4
As we mentioned in a previous
article (see http://www.comereason.org/newsletters/may01.htm
)
because the Jews were opposed to the idea of Jesus being raised,
this lends credence to Jesus' tomb specifically being empty. It
makes no sense for the Jews to lie about Jesus' body being
stolen when producing the body or showing the tomb would be
their strongest argument against the resurrection. The same is
true for the women being mistaken. We must conclude that the
tomb of Jesus was truly empty and it was available for all to
examine.
How Do You Explain it?
So, if the tomb of Jesus really was empty, how is it explained?
Did the disciples steal Jesus' body? Given Matthew's account of
the tomb being sealed and a guard placed there, it wouldn't seem
likely. There's also the problem of the disciples having to roll
back that huge stone in order to accomplish their goal , and
they would have had to do so without being detected. However it
seems to be the best naturalistic explanation, so many doubters
claim it must be so.
But Dr. Craig notes the biggest
obstacle to believing this scenario. "Perhaps the most
serious objection to [the idea of someone stealing Jesus' body]
is that it seeks to explain only half of the evidence (namely,
the empty tomb) and completely ignores the other half (that is,
the appearances). A second hypothesis to explain must be added.
But if explanatory scope is the criterion for preferring one
hypothesis to another, then the resurrection... is to be
preferred."5
In looking at the evidence: the
historicity of the resurrection accounts, the trustworthiness of
the reports from the disciples, the fact that eyewitnesses saw
the resurrected Christ, their changed lives and the fact of the
empty tomb, one can see that it is reasonable to believe that
Jesus rose bodily from the dead. Since He claimed He would do as
much beforehand, it also shows that His claims of deity are true
and that the Christian God exists.
I hope you've enjoyed this
exploration. We'll look next month at the cumulative argument
for the existence of God. Until then, God bless.
|
