Was Jesus's body laid in a tomb (after crucifixion)?
• Gary Habermas (NT Scholar at Liberty): “Certainly the majority of scholars think that Jesus’ body was placed in a tomb.” [“The Late Twentieth-Century Resurgence of Naturalistic Responses to Jesus' Resurrection” in Trinity Journal 22NS (2001): 179-196.]
• Bart Ehrman ([Opposes Christianity] NT & Religion professor at UNC: “I think we can say that after Jesus’ death, with some (probably with some) certainty, that he was buried, possibly by this fellow, Joseph of Arimathea, and that three days later he appeared not to have been in his tomb” [Lecture 4: “Oral and Written Traditions about Jesus” in From Jesus to Constantine: A History of Early Christianity (The Teaching Company, 2003).]
- The church would not likely have accepted a report like this without evidence. [Forthcoming]
- There are three reasons to think the church had not simply fallen for a lie:
• …There are no plausible candidates in general who would form such a lie.
• …There are no plausible candidates who the Jerusalem church would trust that would form such a lie.
• …The Jerusalem church learned the truth in a confidence-inspiring way (eyewitness testimony). - There are three reasons to think this church was not lying for apologetics:
• …The early church did not care much for empty tomb apologetics
• …The early church did not use empty tomb apologetics.
• …The report was successfully circulating in the church. This is relevant because, in c. AD 30 Jerusalem, the success of any “Jesus's body was placed in a tomb” report from the Jerusalem church depended on x's approval.
In c. AD 30, The Jerusalem Church's official position was “yes, Jesus's body was placed in a tomb”1
So what? Couldn't it simply be that…
• …they accepted this belief without evidence?1
• …they were accidentally endorsing a lie that they had fallen for?2
• …they lyingly said this (intending to invent empty tomb apologetics)?3
In AD 30, the public stance of the Jerusalem Jews was that “Yes, Jesus's body is gone from its tomb” (crying “theft!”).
But so what? Couldn't it simply be it be that…
• …they accepted this belief without evidence?1
• …they were accidentally endorsing a lie that they had fallen for?2
• …they lyingly said this (intending to invent empty tomb apologetics)?3