The Empty Tomb Is A Historical Fact, Most Scholars Agree

The Empty Tomb Is A Historical Fact, Most Scholars Agree

James Bishop

By James Bishop| Was Jesus’ tomb really found empty, or is this just a myth?  The empty tomb is absolutely central to the Christian faith because the entire truth of Christianity rests upon Jesus having been raised from the dead.  This makes inquiry into this historical question all the more important.As it turns out, the empty tomb is widely considered to be an established fact of the ancient world.  Not all scholars agree as to what caused the tomb to become empty, but as far as the tomb itself actually being left without the body of Jesus, this is pretty well-established even among critical scholars. 

According to a comprehensive survey of New Testament scholars, it is large consensus (roughly 75%) that Jesus’ tomb somehow became empty (1).  A study by New Testament scholar Gary Habermas published in the peer-reviewed Journal for the Study of the Historical Jesus found that:

APPROXIMATELY 75% FAVOR ONE OR MORE OF THESE ARGUMENTS FOR THE EMPTY TOMB, WHILE APPROXIMATELY 25% THINK THAT ONE OR MORE ARGUMENTS OPPOSE IT. THUS, WHILE FAR FROM BEING UNANIMOUSLY HELD BY CRITICAL SCHOLARS, IT MAY SURPRISE SOME THAT THOSE WHO EMBRACE THE EMPTY TOMB AS A HISTORICAL FACT STILL COMPRISE A FAIRLY STRONG MAJORITY.

Just because most scholars believe this is true does not make it true, but the reason why so many believe the tomb as found empty is because of historical evidence (which we are about to look at).  The point being, one needs to explain how Jesus’ tomb became empty, and then why the disciples, and the skeptics James and the enemy Paul, claimed that Jesus had appeared to them in his resurrected body.

Paul informs us in his early creed that Jesus also appeared to 500 others. This is a belief that several early followers were martyred for and never, as far as our historical data tells us, recanted their faith that Jesus’ had in fact appeared to them. Whatever the case, they certainly believed it.

The Austrian scholar Jacob Kremer informs us that “By far most exegetes hold firmly to the reliability of the biblical statements concerning the empty tomb” (2). Likewise, scholar Van Daalen argues that:

“IT IS EXTREMELY DIFFICULT TO OBJECT TO THE EMPTY TOMB ON HISTORICAL GROUNDS; THOSE WHO DENY IT DO SO ON THE BASIS OF THEOLOGICAL OR PHILOSOPHICAL ASSUMPTIONS” (3).

Exegete, apologist, and professional philosopher William Craig concludes that there is “powerful evidence that the tomb of Jesus was actually found empty on Sunday morning by a small group of his women followers. As a plain historical fact this seems to be amply attested” (4)

All our canonical gospels (Mark 16, Matthew 28, Luke 24, John 20) mention the empty tomb, Paul implies it in an early creed (1 Cor. 15:1-11), and it is further implied by Peter’s sermon in Acts. There are as many as three, or even four independent traditions within the Gospels that attest to the empty tomb.  This certainly heightens the probability of the tomb being found empty.

Scholar Gary Habermas captures this well saying that Jesus’ “empty tomb is reported in at least three, if not four, of these Gospel sources. This helps to understand why these items are taken so seriously by contemporary critical scholars” (5). One tradition can be found within Mark, known as the pre-Markan Passion Narrative, “The idea of a pre-Markan passion narrative continues to seem probable to a majority of scholars” (6)

According to William Craig this source is likely dependent on eyewitness testimony, “The burial account is part of Mark’s source material for the story of Jesus’ Passion. This is a very early source which is probably based on eyewitness testimony and dates to within several years of Jesus’ crucifixion.” (7).

It likewise attests to the empty tomb, “Mark’s Passion source didn’t end with Jesus’ burial, but with the story of the empty tomb, which is tied to the burial account verbally and grammatically.”

More...