The resurrection: the empty tomb and the first appearances

Read with these questions

What is the difference between finding a body missing and claiming to have seen someone alive?^{18 19}

What would you need to know before combining several accounts into one sequence?^{8 20}

Read the passage

Text

Mark 16:1–8

^16:1When the Sabbath was over, Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James, and Salome bought spices so they could go and anoint the body of Jesus. ²Very early on the first day of the week, just after sunrise, they went to the tomb. ³They were asking one another, “Who will roll away the stone from the entrance of the tomb?” ⁴But when they looked up, they saw that the stone had been rolled away, even though it was extremely large. ⁵When they entered the tomb, they saw a young man dressed in a white robe sitting on the right side, and they were alarmed. ⁶But he said to them, “Do not be alarmed. You are looking for Jesus the Nazarene, who was crucified. He has risen! He is not here! See the place where they put Him.

Continue reading (2 more verses)

^16:7But go, tell His disciples and Peter, ‘He is going ahead of you into Galilee. There you will see Him, just as He told you.’” ⁸So the women left the tomb and ran away, trembling and bewildered. And in their fear they did not say a word to anyone.

Read it in the chapter reader →Compare translations and the original words →

The story, step by step

Text

A faithful retelling, step by step. Nothing added, nothing smoothed over.

Mark 16:1–5
In Mark, Mary Magdalene, Salome and Mary the mother of James buy spices to anoint Jesus. They go to the tomb just after sunrise, asking one another who will roll the stone away from the entrance. When they look up, they see that the very large stone has already been rolled back. Inside, they find a young man dressed in white.
Read it in context
^16:1When the Sabbath was over, Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James, and Salome bought spices so they could go and anoint the body of Jesus. ²Very early on the first day of the week, just after sunrise, they went to the tomb. ³They were asking one another, “Who will roll away the stone from the entrance of the tomb?” ⁴But when they looked up, they saw that the stone had been rolled away, even though it was extremely large. ⁵When they entered the tomb, they saw a young man dressed in a white robe sitting on the right side, and they were alarmed.
Mark 16:6–8
The young man tells them that Jesus has been raised. He sends them to tell the disciples, naming Peter in particular, that Jesus is going ahead of them to Galilee, where they will see him. The women flee from the tomb and say nothing to anyone because they are afraid. Mark 16:1–8 includes no appearance of Jesus.
Read it in context
^16:6But he said to them, “Do not be alarmed. You are looking for Jesus the Nazarene, who was crucified. He has risen! He is not here! See the place where they put Him. ⁷But go, tell His disciples and Peter, ‘He is going ahead of you into Galilee. There you will see Him, just as He told you.’” ⁸So the women left the tomb and ran away, trembling and bewildered. And in their fear they did not say a word to anyone.
Matthew 28:1–8
Soldiers guard the tomb in Matthew, after the chief priests and Pharisees ask Pilate to secure it. Mary Magdalene and the other Mary come to see the tomb. An earthquake strikes, and an angel rolls back the stone and sits on it. The guards shake with fear and become like dead men. The angel sends the women to tell the disciples that Jesus is going to Galilee. They hurry away to tell them, afraid yet filled with joy.
Read it in context
^28:1After the Sabbath, at dawn on the first day of the week, Mary Magdalene and the other Mary went to see the tomb. ²Suddenly there was a great earthquake, for an angel of the Lord descended from heaven, rolled away the stone, and sat on it. ³His appearance was like lightning, and his clothes were white as snow. ⁴The guards trembled in fear of him and became like dead men. ⁵But the angel said to the women, “Do not be afraid, for I know that you are looking for Jesus, who was crucified. ⁶He is not here; He has risen, just as He said! Come, see the place where He lay. ⁷Then go quickly and tell His disciples, ‘He has risen from the dead and is going ahead of you into Galilee. There you will see Him.’ See, I have told you.” ⁸So they hurried away from the tomb in fear and great joy, and ran to tell His disciples.
Matthew 28:9–10
Jesus meets the women on their way. They take hold of his feet and worship him. He tells them to tell his brothers to go to Galilee.
Read it in context
^28:9Suddenly Jesus met them and said, “Greetings!” They came to Him, grasped His feet, and worshiped Him. ¹⁰“Do not be afraid,” said Jesus. “Go and tell My brothers to go to Galilee. There they will see Me.”

Continue the retelling (7 more paragraphs)

Matthew 28:11–15
The chief priests and elders then pay the soldiers to say that the disciples stole the body while the soldiers slept. Matthew says that this story of theft is still told among Jews in his own day.
Read it in context
^28:11While the women were on their way, some of the guards went into the city and reported to the chief priests all that had happened. ¹²And after the chief priests had met with the elders and formed a plan, they gave the soldiers a large sum of money ¹³and instructed them: “You are to say, ‘His disciples came by night and stole Him away while we were asleep.’ ¹⁴If this report reaches the governor, we will satisfy him and keep you out of trouble.” ¹⁵So the guards took the money and did as they were instructed. And this account has been circulated among the Jews to this very day.
Luke 24:1–10
In Luke, the women arrive at early dawn with the spices they have prepared. The stone has been rolled away, but they cannot find the body. Two men in dazzling clothes ask why they are looking for the living among the dead. They remind the women of what Jesus said in Galilee: the Son of Man must be crucified and rise on the third day. The women report to the Eleven; Luke names Joanna among the women.
Read it in context
^24:1On the first day of the week, very early in the morning, the women came to the tomb, bringing the spices they had prepared. ²They found the stone rolled away from the tomb, ³but when they entered, they did not find the body of the Lord Jesus. ⁴While they were puzzling over this, suddenly two men in radiant apparel stood beside them. ⁵As the women bowed their faces to the ground in terror, the two men asked them, “Why do you look for the living among the dead? ⁶He is not here; He has risen! Remember how He told you while He was still in Galilee: ⁷‘The Son of Man must be delivered into the hands of sinful men, and be crucified, and on the third day rise again.’” ⁸Then they remembered His words. ⁹And when they returned from the tomb, they reported all these things to the Eleven and to all the others. ¹⁰It was Mary Magdalene, Joanna, Mary the mother of James, and the other women with them who told this to the apostles.
Luke 24:11–12
The apostles dismiss the women's words as nonsense and do not believe them. Peter runs to the tomb and stoops to look inside. He sees only the linen cloths and goes home wondering what has happened. Luke tells of no separate appearance of Jesus to the women who visited the tomb.
Read it in context
^24:11But their words seemed like nonsense to them, and they did not believe the women. ¹²Peter, however, got up and ran to the tomb. And after bending down and seeing only the linen cloths, he went away, wondering to himself what had happened.
John 20:1–2
In John, Mary Magdalene reaches the tomb while it is still dark and sees that the stone has been moved. She tells the disciples that the body has been taken. She says, "we do not know" where it has been put, though John names no other woman at the tomb.
Read it in context
^20:1Early on the first day of the week, while it was still dark, Mary Magdalene went to the tomb and saw that the stone had been removed from the entrance. ²So she came running to Simon Peter and the other disciple, the one whom Jesus loved. “They have taken the Lord out of the tomb,” she said, “and we do not know where they have put Him!”
John 20:3–9
Peter and the other disciple, the one Jesus loved, run to the tomb. The other disciple arrives first and looks in, but Peter is the first to enter. The linen cloths lie there, with the cloth from Jesus' head rolled up separately. The other disciple then enters and, in John's words, "saw and believed". The narrator adds that they did not yet understand the Scripture that Jesus must rise from the dead.
Read it in context
^20:3Then Peter and the other disciple set out for the tomb. ⁴The two were running together, but the other disciple outran Peter and reached the tomb first. ⁵He bent down and looked in at the linen cloths lying there, but he did not go in. ⁶Simon Peter arrived just after him. He entered the tomb and saw the linen cloths lying there. ⁷The cloth that had been around Jesus’ head was rolled up, lying separate from the linen cloths. ⁸Then the other disciple, who had reached the tomb first, also went in. And he saw and believed. ⁹For they still did not understand from the Scripture that Jesus had to rise from the dead.
John 20:11–16
Mary looks into the tomb and sees two angels dressed in white. They sit where the body had lain, one by its head and the other by its feet. She turns and sees Jesus but does not recognise him. Taking him for the gardener, she asks where he has put the body. When Jesus calls her by name, she recognises him and answers "Rabboni", which John explains as "Teacher".
Read it in context
^20:11But Mary stood outside the tomb weeping. And as she wept, she bent down to look into the tomb, ¹²and she saw two angels in white sitting where the body of Jesus had lain, one at the head and the other at the feet. ¹³“Woman, why are you weeping?” they asked. “Because they have taken my Lord away,” she said, “and I do not know where they have put Him.” ¹⁴When she had said this, she turned around and saw Jesus standing there; but she did not recognize that it was Jesus. ¹⁵“Woman, why are you weeping?” Jesus asked. “Whom are you seeking?” Thinking He was the gardener, she said, “Sir, if you have carried Him off, tell me where you have put Him, and I will get Him.” ¹⁶Jesus said to her, “Mary.” She turned and said to Him in Hebrew, “Rabboni!” (which means “Teacher”).
John 20:17–18
Jesus tells Mary not to hold on to him because he has not yet ascended to the Father. He sends her to tell his brothers that he is ascending to "my Father and your Father". Mary goes to the disciples and announces, "I have seen the Lord."
Read it in context
^20:17“Do not cling to Me,” Jesus said, “for I have not yet ascended to the Father. But go and tell My brothers, ‘I am ascending to My Father and your Father, to My God and your God.’” ¹⁸Mary Magdalene went and announced to the disciples, “I have seen the Lord!” And she told them what He had said to her.

The world of the story

Jewish hopes of resurrection Scholarship

JosephusJosephusA Jewish historian (37–after 100 CE), according to Steve Mason and the Jewish Encyclopedia. Mason explains that his Antiquities, completed in 93/94 CE, retells Judean history from creation to the eve of the war against Rome.From: Mason; Mason; Gottheil; Mason; MasonAll terms → says the Pharisees believed the souls of the virtuous "shall have power to revive and live again", while the Sadducees held "that souls die with the bodies". Daniel 12:2 speaks of many who sleep in the dust awaking, to everlasting life or to shame, a passage Stephen L. Cook says "became a key text" for some Jews. The martyred brothers of 2 Maccabees 7 die hoping God will raise them, and Cook notes that 4Q521 lists resurrections among the Messiah's signs.^{7 sources}7 sources21. Whiston 22. Whiston 23. Whiston 24. Daniel 12:2 25. Cook 26. 2 Maccabees 7:9 27. 2 Maccabees 7:14

Paul's received account Scholarship

Paul says he handed on what he had received: Christ died, was buried and was raised on the third day, and appeared to Cephas, the Twelve, more than five hundred at once, James, all the apostles and last to Paul himself. Habermas reports Jerome Murphy-O'Connor's statement that literary analysis has produced "complete agreement" among critical scholars that Paul is quoting here; how far the quotation runs is a separate question. The list names no woman and tells of no tomb discovery.^{4 sources}4 sources7. 1 Corinthians 15:3–8 28. 1 Corinthians 15:6 16. Habermas 2005 29. 1 Corinthians 15:3

Which Scriptures did "the third day" mean? Scholarship

Paul ties the rising on the third day to the Scriptures without naming a passage. Joel White writes that many scholars take Hosea 6:2 as the primary or even only referent, but that "there is no way of knowing" what texts the formula's authors meant; Jonah is the other main candidate he names. Genesis Rabbah 56:1 links Hosea's third day to "the revival of the dead", and Targum Jonathan renders it "the day of the resurrection of the dead"; both are later rabbinicRabbinicRelating to the rabbis, the Jewish movement of teachers that Sara Ronis describes as emerging after the Romans destroyed Jerusalem’s temple in 70 CE, with teachings and discussions collected in the Talmud.From: RonisAll terms → texts.^{6 sources}6 sources7. 1 Corinthians 15:3–8 30. White 2015 31. White 2015 32. Rabbah 33. text 34. Hosea 6:2

Show 3 more background topics (Women as the first witnesses; Mary Magdalene in later tradition; The Gospel of Peter)

Women as the first witnesses Scholarship

William Lane Craig argues that the women's discovery is "highly probable", since given women's low status as witnesses the best explanation of the story is that they really found the tomb; Geza Vermes, as van Rensburg reports, made a similar argument. Jeffery Jay Lowder grants that women's testimony was restricted but argues they could testify when no men were available. Bart Ehrman argues the women "fit in perfectly" with Mark's literary purposes, and Claudia Setzer, quoted by Smith, finds the evangelists seeming to "erase partially the women's role".^{6 sources}6 sources35. Craig 1985 36. Rensburg 2010 37. Rensburg 2010 38. Lowder 17. Is There Historical Evidence for the Resurrection of Jesus? A Debate between William Lane Craig and Bart D. Ehrman (College of the Holy Cross, 28 March 2006), transcript, reasonablefaith.org 2006 39. Smith 2010

Mary Magdalene in later tradition Scholarship

Mark, Matthew and John all name Mary Magdalene at the tomb. Smith calls her in John 20 the "apostle to the apostles", a title later than John that first appears, in some form, in a commentary attributed to Hippolytus; the Orthodox Church honours her as "Myrrhbearer and Equal of the Apostles". The Catholic Encyclopedia (1910) says the Greek Fathers generally distinguished her from Mary of Bethany and the sinful woman of Luke 7, while most Latins held them one person, an identity it says cannot be demonstrated.^{7 sources}7 sources2. Mark 16:1 3. Matthew 28:1 4. Luke 24:10 5. John 20:1–2 40. Smith 2010 41. America 42. (1910)

The Gospel of Peter Scholarship

A codex found in 1886–87 in a grave at Akhmim, Egypt, apparently copied in the sixth or seventh century, preserves part of the Gospel of Peter. Arbogast, Dupertuis and Grout report recent scholarship preferring a mid-second-century date, and call it the only extant early gospel to narrate the resurrection itself. Crossan, as van Rensburg reports, dates a "Cross Gospel" within it to the 40s. Powell counts it among early Christian writings that increasingly blamed Jews and lessened Roman blame.^{7 sources}7 sources43. Arbogast 2022 44. Arbogast 2022 45. Robinson) 1897 46. Rensburg 2010 47. Rensburg 2010 48. Powell 49. Powell

Where it fits

Mark 16:6–8 — A young man announces that Jesus has been raised and promises a meeting in Galilee. The women flee and say nothing; this ending includes no appearance of Jesus.^{1 50 51}
Matthew 28:9–10 — Jesus first appears to the women in Matthew's account. They take hold of his feet and receive a message for his brothers.⁵²
Luke 24:11 — The apostles initially dismiss the women's report as nonsense.⁵³

Show 2 more key verses

John 20:16–18 — Mary recognises Jesus when he calls her by name. He sends her to tell the disciples.^{4 sources}4 sources6. John 20:16 54. John 20:17 55. John 20:18 56. 1 Corinthians 9:1
1 Corinthians 15:3–8 — Paul passes on a tradition he received about Jesus' death, burial, raising and appearances. He does not tell of anyone finding the tomb empty.⁷

Where else Scripture speaks of it

Text

Mark 14:28 The young man's message to the disciples and Peter echoes Jesus' earlier promise to go ahead of them to Galilee.
²⁸But after I have risen, I will go ahead of you into Galilee.”
Read in context →
Mark 16:9–20 The longer ending of Mark adds appearances of Jesus; Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Vaticanus end the Gospel at 16:8.
^16:9Early on the first day of the week, after Jesus had risen, He appeared first to Mary Magdalene, from whom He had driven out seven demons. ¹⁰She went and told those who had been with Him, who were mourning and weeping. ¹¹And when they heard that Jesus was alive and she had seen Him, they did not believe it. ¹²After this, Jesus appeared in a different form to two of them as they walked along in the country. ¹³And they went back and reported it to the rest, but they did not believe them either. ¹⁴Later, as they were eating, Jesus appeared to the Eleven and rebuked them for their unbelief and hardness of heart, because they did not believe those who had seen Him after He had risen. ¹⁵And He said to them, “Go into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature. ¹⁶Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned. ¹⁷And these signs will accompany those who believe: In My name they will drive out demons; they will speak in new tongues; ¹⁸they will pick up snakes with their hands, and if they drink any deadly poison, it will not harm them; they will lay their hands on the sick, and they will be made well.” ¹⁹After the Lord Jesus had spoken to them, He was taken up into heaven and sat down at the right hand of God. ²⁰And they went out and preached everywhere, and the Lord worked through them, confirming His word by the signs that accompanied it.
Read in context →
Luke 24:34 Luke reports an appearance to Simon without narrating it; Paul names Cephas first in his list.
³⁴and saying, “The Lord has indeed risen and has appeared to Simon!”
Read in context →

Show 4 more passages

Acts 10:40–41 Peter's speech describes chosen witnesses who ate and drank with the risen Jesus.
^10:40God raised Him up on the third day and caused Him to be seen— ⁴¹not by all the people, but by the witnesses God had chosen beforehand, by us who ate and drank with Him after He rose from the dead.
Read in context →
Daniel 12:2 Daniel's awakening of the dead concerns many people, to differing ends.
²And many who sleep in the dust of the earth will awake, some to everlasting life, but others to shame and everlasting contempt.
Read in context →
Hosea 6:2 Joel White discusses Hosea's third day as a proposed scriptural referent for Paul's formula, while saying its intended texts cannot be known.
²After two days He will revive us; on the third day He will raise us up, that we may live in His presence.
Read in context →
1 Corinthians 9:1 Paul's question whether he has not seen the Lord is close in wording to Mary Magdalene's announcement in John 20:18.
¹Am I not free? Am I not an apostle? Have I not seen Jesus our Lord? Are you yourselves not my workmanship in the Lord?
Read in context →

How the traditions read it

Tradition

How different traditions have read the story, in their own terms.

Catholic · The Catechism on event, sign and mystery

The Catechism teaches that the Resurrection cannot be interpreted as outside the physical order and must be acknowledged as a historical fact, yet that no one saw it happen and that it transcends history. The empty tomb "in itself" is no direct proof, since the body's absence could be explained otherwise, but it is "an essential sign for all". Mary Magdalene and the holy women were "the first messengers" of the Resurrection to the apostles, and the disciples' doubt rules out the idea that their faith produced it.^{5 sources}5 sources57. Church 1997 58. Church 1997 19. Church 1997 59. Church 1997 60. Church 1997

Orthodox · The Orthodox Church in America and the myrrhbearers

The Orthodox Church in America teaches Christ's real death and actual resurrection, but says resurrection "does not simply mean bodily resuscitation", and that the angel moved the stone to show that Jesus was not there. The Sunday of the Myrrhbearing Women honours those who cared for his body as the first witnesses of the Resurrection; a hymn sung that day has the angel tell them that Christ "has shown Himself a stranger to corruption".^{61 62}

Protestant: Lutheran · The Augsburg Confession

The Augsburg Confession (1530) confesses that Christ "truly rose again the third day".⁶³

Show 10 more interpretations (Protestant: Reformed, Protestant: Anglican, Protestant: evangelical…)

Protestant: Reformed · The Westminster Confession

The Westminster Confession (1646) teaches that Christ rose on the third day "with the same body in which he suffered", and ascended with it.⁶⁴

Protestant: Anglican · N. T. Wright's historical argument

Wright proposes that historians must conclude that the tomb was empty and that the followers met someone they were convinced was Jesus, bodily alive in a transformed way. He argues that every other explanation of Christianity's rise is "far less convincing" than resurrection, while writing that "cautious agnosticism is always an option".^{65 66}

Protestant: evangelical · William Lane Craig's four facts

Craig rests his case on four facts he says must be explained: Jesus' burial, the discovery of the empty tomb, the appearances and the origin of the disciples' belief; resurrection is his explanation, a separate step. He argues that the women's discovery is "highly probable" and that the Jewish theft charge "presupposes the empty tomb".^{67 35 68}

Academic (critical) · Daniel A. Smith on how the stories grew

Smith argues that traditions of Jesus' absence from the tomb and traditions of his appearances first circulated separately and merged "only gradually and incrementally", and that a first-century Jew or Greek would have read an inexplicably empty tomb as "assumption" into heaven rather than resurrection. His book does not try to prove or disprove the resurrection, but he does judge particular episodes, calling the guard story "improbable and unhistorical".^{4 sources}4 sources18. Smith 2010 69. Smith 2010 70. Smith 2010 71. Smith 2010

Skeptic/secular · Jeffery Jay Lowder on the empty tomb

Lowder, while tentatively granting that Joseph of Arimathea's tomb was empty, puts the odds that it was empty at "just slightly better than 50%" and denies that Craig's arguments make the Markan story probable. He replies that the Jewish polemic may have arisen only after the first detailed empty-tomb story, so it "cannot count as independent confirmation" of that story. Mark's ending, with the women telling no one, "could easily be interpreted", he argues, as Mark explaining why no one had heard his empty-tomb story until some time had passed.³⁸

Jewish: modern · Pinchas Lapide, as reported by Jonathan William

William reports that the Orthodox Jewish scholar Pinchas Lapide concluded that the best explanation of the earliest Jewish sources is that Jesus' resurrection occurred in history, and treated Paul's formula as Jewish oral tradition received from the first witnesses. Lapide held that the resurrection does not show Jesus to be Israel's Messiah, because Jewish messianic hope does not include the Messiah's resurrection.^{5 sources}5 sources72. William 2020 73. William 2020 74. William 2020 75. William 2020 76. Williams

Jewish: rabbinic · Resurrection of the dead, without a claim about Jesus

The Mishnah (Sanhedrin 10:1) excludes from the World-to-Come one who says there is no resurrection of the dead derived from the TorahTorahHebrew for “instruction, teaching”; Christophe Nihan and Julia Rhyder describe it as the main ancient Israelite name for the Genesis–Deuteronomy collection.From: Nihan; JacobsAll terms →. Genesis Rabbah links Hosea's third day to the revival of the dead. These concern the end-time raising of the dead, not Jesus.^{77 32}

Latter-day Saints · The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints

The Church teaches that resurrection is the reuniting of spirit and body in an immortal state, and that the risen Lord had a body of flesh and bones. The Joseph Smith Translation, in the Church's published selections and footnotes, gives two angels at the tomb in all four Gospels.^{6 sources}6 sources78. Saints 79. Saints 80. Saints 81. Saints 82. Saints 83. Saints

Jehovah's Witnesses · A spirit resurrection and materialised bodies

Jehovah's Witnesses teach that Jesus was raised as a spirit and took human form to appear, and that God "evidently disposed of" his fleshly body, possibly by disintegrating it. Because the bodies he took were not identical, they teach, even Mary at the tomb recognised him only by what he said or did.^{4 sources}4 sources84. (jw.org)85. (jw.org)86. Witnesses 87. Witnesses

Islamic · The Qur'an and its interpreters

Qur'an 4:157–158 denies that those who claimed to have killed Jesus killed or crucified him and says God took him up to Himself; Ibn KathirIbn KathirAn Arab historian and scholar who taught at Damascus (1301–1373), according to the first Encyclopaedia of Islam. He wrote a universal history and a commentary on the Qur’an.From: Islam; Islam; IslamAll terms → relates, from many among the Salaf, that a young man made to look like Jesus was crucified. In Qur'an 19:33 Jesus speaks of the day he dies and the day he is raised alive, which Ibn Kathir reads as a creature's life, death and resurrection. Younes reports a Shi'a Isma'ili reading that denies only that the People of the Book crucified him.^{7 sources}7 sources88. Qur'an 89. Qur'an 90. Qur'an 91. 1373)92. Qur'an 93. 1373)94. Younes 2024

Common misunderstandings

Text

Things people commonly believe the text says, checked against it.

A common belief among believers
Myth All four Gospels give the same details of the visit to the tomb.
Actually They name different women and messengers, time the visit differently around dawn, and differ over who first meets Jesus: Mark narrates no appearance, Matthew has Jesus meet the women, Luke narrates none to the women, and John has him meet Mary Magdalene.^{16 sources}16 sources2. Mark 16:1 3. Matthew 28:1 4. Luke 24:10 5. John 20:1–2 95. Mark 16:5 96. Matthew 28:2–5 97. Luke 24:4 98. John 20:12 9. Mark 16:2 10. Luke 24:1 11. John 20:1 51. Mark 16:1–8 52. Matthew 28:9–10 99. Luke 24:1–12 100. Luke 24:22–24 101. John 20:14–15
A common belief among believers
Myth Women could never serve as witnesses, so nobody would have invented women finding the tomb.
Actually Lowder grants that women's testimony was restricted but argues it was accepted when no men were available, citing the MishnahMishnahA collection of Jewish legal traditions compiled in the early third century CE, which Elizabeth Shanks Alexander calls the earliest text of rabbinic Judaism.From: Alexander; AlexanderAll terms → and Josephus; Ehrman argues that the women fit Mark's literary purposes. Craig and Vermes still argue that their selection points to a real discovery.^{5 sources}5 sources38. Lowder 17. Is There Historical Evidence for the Resurrection of Jesus? A Debate between William Lane Craig and Bart D. Ehrman (College of the Holy Cross, 28 March 2006), transcript, reasonablefaith.org 2006 35. Craig 1985 36. Rensburg 2010 37. Rensburg 2010
A common belief among believers
Myth The five hundred give five hundred separate testimonies that can be checked.
Actually Paul reports a single appearance to more than five hundred at once, most of them still living when he wrote, but names none of them, and no other New Testament passage explicitly reports that appearance.²⁸

Show 6 more misconceptions

A common belief among believers
Myth Every defender of the resurrection denies that group hallucinations happen.
Actually Jake O'Connell grants that modern collective religious visions are very likely collective hallucinations, and argues instead that their expected features do not fit the Gospel reports.^{102 103}
A common belief among believers
Myth Later reports of the theft charge independently confirm Matthew's guard.
Actually Justin and Tertullian report the charge as Christian writers, and Lowder argues that it could have arisen as a reply to the Christian tomb story; these reports do not establish its origin or truth.^{104 105 38}
A common belief among skeptics
Myth Because Paul's list leaves out the women, Paul denies that any woman saw Jesus.
Actually His list names no woman, but its groups do not identify every member, and it tells of burial and raising without narrating a tomb discovery.^{7 28}
A common belief among skeptics
Myth If Mark ends at the women's flight, Mark does not say that Jesus rose.
Actually The young man has already announced that Jesus has been raised and promised a meeting in Galilee; what Mark 16:1–8 lacks is a narrated appearance.^{1 51 50}
A common belief among skeptics
Myth Only believers accept that the tomb was empty.
Actually The sceptic Lowder tentatively grants an empty tomb, and others explain one without resurrection: Reimarus held theft "highly probable", Carrier calls theft plausible though of low probability, and Kirsopp Lake offered a wrong tomb as "a suggestion".^{6 sources}6 sources38. Lowder 106. Reimarus 1879 107. Reimarus 1879 108. Carrier 109. Lake 1907 110. Lake 1907
A common belief among skeptics
Myth The risen Jesus appeared only to people who already followed him.
Actually Craig identifies James as apparently not previously a believer and Paul as still a persecutor when Jesus appeared to them; neither is the judge Celsus asks about.^{67 111 112}

Words worth a closer look

Text

Where the wording in different Bibles diverges, and why.

Matthew 28:1 · “Late on the Sabbath, or after it”

The ASV, Douay-Rheims, Geneva 1599, KJV and YLT open Matthew 28:1 with "the end", "late" or "the eve" of the Sabbath, and Darby reads "late on sabbath"; the BSB and WEB say "after the Sabbath". The renderings do not fix a measured interval between Matthew's visit and the visits in the other Gospels.^{6 sources}6 sources113. this site's data 3. Matthew 28:1 12. this site's data 9. Mark 16:2 10. Luke 24:1 11. John 20:1

Compare the versions

YLTAnd on the eve of the sabbaths, at the dawn, toward the first of the sabbaths, came Mary the Magdalene, and the other Mary, to see the sepulchre,

WEBNow after the Sabbath, as it began to dawn on the first day of the week, Mary Magdalene and the other Mary came to see the tomb.

Show all 5 versions

KJVIn the end of the sabbath, as it began to dawn toward the first day of the week, came Mary Magdalene and the other Mary to see the sepulchre.

ASVNow late on the sabbath day, as it began to dawn toward the first day of the week, came Mary Magdalene and the other Mary to see the sepulchre.

YLTAnd on the eve of the sabbaths, at the dawn, toward the first of the sabbaths, came Mary the Magdalene, and the other Mary, to see the sepulchre,

BSBAfter the Sabbath, at dawn on the first day of the week, Mary Magdalene and the other Mary went to see the tomb.

WEBNow after the Sabbath, as it began to dawn on the first day of the week, Mary Magdalene and the other Mary came to see the tomb.

Open in compare →

Mark 16:6 · “He is risen, or he was raised” egerthe

The database tags egerthe in Mark 16:6 as an aorist passive verb, so "he is risen" can also be rendered "he was raised". Daniel A. Smith says the passive suggests the raising was done by God, and notes that the announcement comes before the empty tomb is shown.^{114 115 116}

Open in compare →

Luke 24:11 · “Nonsense, or idle tales” leros

For the disciples' verdict on the women's report in Luke 24:11, the ASV, Douay-Rheims, KJV and YLT say "idle" talk or tales, while the BSB and WEB say "nonsense". The Greek word, leros, occurs in only one verse of the database's tagged Greek New Testament. Marianne Bjelland Kartzow argues there are good reasons to place it in the semantic field of gossip.^{4 sources}4 sources117. this site's data 53. Luke 24:11 118. this site's data 119. Kartzow 2010

Compare the versions

YLTand their sayings appeared before them as idle talk, and they were not believing them.

WEBThese words seemed to them to be nonsense, and they didn’t believe them.

Show all 5 versions

KJVAnd their words seemed to them as idle tales, and they believed them not.

ASVAnd these words appeared in their sight as idle talk; and they disbelieved them.

YLTand their sayings appeared before them as idle talk, and they were not believing them.

BSBBut their words seemed like nonsense to them, and they did not believe the women.

WEBThese words seemed to them to be nonsense, and they didn’t believe them.

Open in compare →

Show 3 more translation notes (“Touch me not, or do not hold me”, “Rabboni”, “Appeared, or was seen”)

John 20:17 · “Touch me not, or do not hold me” hapto

The KJV and ASV read "Touch me not", the BSB "Do not cling to Me", the WEB "Don't hold me" and YLT "Be not touching me"; the Joseph Smith Translation reads "Hold me not". The database tags the verb as a present middle imperative. Daniel A. Smith says it can mean touch or hold, and that the present tense suggests stopping an action already under way, though ancient authors did not always keep such distinctions. AugustineAugustineA North African theologian (354–430), born at Tagaste, who served as bishop of Hippo from 396 until his death, according to the Catholic Encyclopedia.From: Portalié; PortaliéAll terms → argued the words cannot forbid women to touch Jesus, since Matthew's women hold his feet.^{8 sources}8 sources120. this site's data 54. John 20:17 121. Saints 83. Saints 122. this site's data 123. Smith 2010 124. 7)125. Matthew 28:9

Compare the versions

WEBJesus said to her, “Don’t hold me, for I haven’t yet ascended to my Father; but go to my brothers and tell them, ‘I am ascending to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God.’”

YLTJesus saith to her, 'Be not touching me, for I have not yet ascended unto my Father; and be going on to my brethren, and say to them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father, and to my God, and to your God.'

John 20:17

KJVJesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God.

ASVJesus saith to her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended unto the Father: but go unto my brethren, and say to them, I ascend unto my Father and your Father, and my God and your God.

BSB“Do not cling to Me,” Jesus said, “for I have not yet ascended to the Father. But go and tell My brothers, ‘I am ascending to My Father and your Father, to My God and your God.’”

WEBJesus said to her, “Don’t hold me, for I haven’t yet ascended to my Father; but go to my brothers and tell them, ‘I am ascending to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God.’”

Open in compare →

John 20:16 · “Rabboni”

John explains Mary's "Rabboni" as "Teacher". The WEB footnote calls it a transliteration of the AramaicAramaicA Semitic language closely related to Hebrew. The HarperCollins Bible Dictionary notes that parts of Ezra, Daniel and Jeremiah and a phrase in Genesis are written in Aramaic; Jesus probably spoke a Western Aramaic dialect.From: Daniel 2:4; Powell; Perrin; PowellAll terms → word for "great teacher", and where John says she spoke in Hebrew the BSB notes "Or in Aramaic".^{6 126}

John 20:16

BSBJesus said to her, “Mary.” She turned and said to Him in Hebrew, “Rabboni!” (which means “Teacher”).

KJVJesus saith unto her, Mary. She turned herself, and saith unto him, Rabboni; which is to say, Master.

Open in compare →

1 Corinthians 15:5 · “Appeared, or was seen” ophthe

Daniel A. Smith notes that the Greek ophthe, translated "appeared" in Paul's list, literally means "was seen" or even "was caused to be seen". The verb itself does not say what kind of seeing it was; Smith adds that Paul calls his own experience God revealing his Son.^{127 128}

1 Corinthians 15:5

BSBand that He appeared to Cephas and then to the Twelve.

KJVAnd that he was seen of Cephas, then of the twelve:

Open in compare →

Who wrote it, and when

Scholarship

Questions about who wrote it, when, and from what sources.

Are the four accounts independent of one another?

Daniel A. Smith argues that five consecutive identical Greek words in Luke 24:12 and John 20:5 show that John's author used Luke for the tomb inspection, and judges it "very probable" that John's appearance to Mary draws on Matthew 28:9–10; if so, Matthew and John may not be independent witnesses to it. Craig argues that John's tomb traditions are independent, and Marshall treats John's appearance to Mary as independent.^{129 130}

How did Mark's Gospel end?

Marius Nel writes that the most important manuscripts, including Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Vaticanus, end Mark at 16:8, and that Eusebius and JeromeJeromeA Latin Church Father associated with the Vulgate, born in the fourth century and deceased in 420. Birth dates differ: Louis Saltet gives about 340–342, while Dionisio Candido gives 347.From: Saltet; CandidoAll terms → knew 16:9–20 but said it was missing from almost all the Greek copies they knew; some manuscripts add a shorter ending. Tönsing finds it "fairly clear" that the Mark used by Matthew and Luke ended at 16:8. Croy, quoted by Nel, holds the longer ending secondary; Nel notes that not all agree, and Burgon (1871) and the WEB's translators defend it.^{7 sources}7 sources131. Nel 2020 132. Tönsing 2022 133. Nel 2020 134. Nel 2020 135. Burgon 1871 136. this site's data 137. Mark 16:9–20

Did Luke originally include Peter's run to the tomb?

The SBLGNT apparatus records Westcott and Hort bracketing Luke 24:12, one of the shorter "Western non-interpolations" of Luke 24, while Tregelles, NA28 and the Robinson-Pierpont text print it. Smith reports Ehrman's view that the verse was added to stress "that the Christ who died in the body was also raised in the body", but follows Neirynck's argument from Lukan style in judging it original.^{6 sources}6 sources138. this site's data 139. Luke 24:12 140. Smith 2010 141. Smith 2010 142. Smith 2010 143. Smith 2010

History and evidence

Evidence

Each historical claim judged on its own, never a verdict on the whole story.

Open
Women who followed Jesus found his tomb empty.
Craig argues that the women's discovery is "highly probable" and that the theft charge "presupposes the empty tomb"; Vermes, as van Rensburg reports, also supported the tomb's historicity.
Why this verdict
What the text narrates
Confidence: medium
Craig argues that the women's discovery is "highly probable" and that the theft charge "presupposes the empty tomb"; Vermes, as van Rensburg reports, also supported the tomb's historicity. Allison, as Habermas reports, allows only a "tentative" probable empty tomb, and the sceptic Lowder tentatively grants it. Crossan, as van Rensburg reports, contends that Mark invented the story, and Ehrman argues that the women serve Mark's literary purposes.^{8 sources}8 sources35. Craig 1985 68. Craig 1985 36. Rensburg 2010 37. Rensburg 2010 144. Habermas 2008 38. Lowder 46. Rensburg 2010 17. Is There Historical Evidence for the Resurrection of Jesus? A Debate between William Lane Craig and Bart D. Ehrman (College of the Holy Cross, 28 March 2006), transcript, reasonablefaith.org 2006
Contested · Craig and Vermes argue for the discovery; Allison and the sceptic Lowder tentatively accept an empty tomb; Crossan argues that Mark invented the story, and Ehrman reads the women as Mark's literary choice. (as of 2026-11-08)
What would change this verdict: Evidence from outside the Gospels about where Jesus was laid and what was found there.
Supported
Paul's list of appearances quotes a formula older than his letter.
Paul introduces the material as received and handed on.
Why this verdict
Claims about the text
Confidence: medium
Paul introduces the material as received and handed on. Habermas reports Murphy-O'Connor's statement of "complete agreement" among critical scholars that Paul introduces a quotation, and reports critical scholars placing Paul's receiving of it in the mid-30s; the CatechismCatechism of the Catholic ChurchAn official summary of Catholic teaching that John Paul II ordered published in 1992, declaring it a sure norm for teaching the faith. He approved and promulgated its Latin typical edition in 1997.From: II; II; II; II; IIAll terms → dates the letter to about AD 56. Lapide, as William reports, read it as Jewish oral tradition from the first witnesses. Robert M. Price argued that 15:3–11 is a later insertion into the letter.^{8 sources}8 sources7. 1 Corinthians 15:3–8 16. Habermas 2005 29. 1 Corinthians 15:3 15. Habermas 2005 14. Church 1997 74. William 2020 145. Price 1995 146. Price 1995
Cross-community agreement · Murphy-O'Connor (as Habermas reports him), the evangelical Habermas and the Jewish scholar Lapide (as William reports him) treat the passage as an earlier formula; Robert M. Price dissents. (as of 2026-11-08) · Minority: Robert M. Price, who argues that 1 Corinthians 15:3–11 was inserted after Paul.
What would change this verdict: Evidence dating the formula independently of the letter, or manuscript evidence for an insertion.
Open
The reported appearances were encounters with Jesus bodily raised.
Lüdemann, a sceptic quoted by Craig, held it "historically certain" that Peter and the disciples had experiences of Jesus appearing to them; the dispute is over what they were.
Why this verdict
What the text narrates
Confidence: medium
Lüdemann, a sceptic quoted by Craig, held it "historically certain" that Peter and the disciples had experiences of Jesus appearing to them; the dispute is over what they were. Wright argues for encounters with Jesus bodily alive in a transformed way. Lüdemann, as van Rensburg reports, explained Peter's as self-deception arising from grief. Allison, as Habermas reports, is sure the disciples saw Jesus yet finds apparitions of the dead insufficient to explain it. Paul's verb ophthe does not specify the kind of seeing.^{9 sources}9 sources147. Is There Historical Evidence for the Resurrection of Jesus? A Debate between William Lane Craig and Bart D. Ehrman (College of the Holy Cross, 28 March 2006), transcript, reasonablefaith.org 2006 65. Wright 2002 148. Rensburg 2010 149. Rensburg 2010 150. Rensburg 2010 151. Habermas 2008 152. Habermas 2008 127. Smith 2010 128. 1 Corinthians 15:5–8
Contested · Wright and Licona argue for objective encounters; Lüdemann and Carrier propose visionary experiences; Allison is sure the disciples saw Jesus but finds apparitions an insufficient explanation. (as of 2026-11-08)
What would change this verdict: Evidence that could tell an objective encounter from a subjective experience in reports this old.
Open
Mark's Gospel originally ended at 16:8, with the women's flight and silence.
Sinaiticus and Vaticanus end at 16:8, and Croy, quoted by Nel, holds the longer ending secondary; Burgon (1871) defended it.
Why this verdict
Claims about the text
Confidence: medium
Sinaiticus and Vaticanus end at 16:8, and Croy, quoted by Nel, holds the longer ending secondary; Burgon (1871) defended it. Whether Mark meant to stop there is disputed: Tönsing argues he deliberately left open whether Peter or Mary Magdalene saw Jesus first, while Wright thinks Mark wrote more that is now lost and Croy, as Tönsing reports, speaks of the Gospel's "mutilation". Tönsing writes that the debate over why Mark ends at 16:8 "is not yet settled".^{9 sources}9 sources131. Nel 2020 133. Nel 2020 134. Nel 2020 135. Burgon 1871 153. Tönsing 2022 154. Wright 155. Tönsing 2022 156. Tönsing 2022 157. Tönsing 2022
Contested · Tönsing and Smith read 16:8 as the intended ending; Wright and Croy argue for a lost ending; Burgon defended the longer ending as Mark's own. (as of 2026-11-08)
What would change this verdict: A manuscript preserving an earlier ending of Mark.
No outside evidence · silence partly expected
Soldiers guarded Jesus' tomb, as Matthew narrates.
Among the canonical Gospels only Matthew has the guard; Wenham concedes the others' silence is "probably the most surprising thing" if it happened as Matthew says.
Why this verdict
What the text narrates
Confidence: medium
Among the canonical Gospels only Matthew has the guard; Wenham concedes the others' silence is "probably the most surprising thing" if it happened as Matthew says. The Gospel of Peter, dated by Arbogast, Dupertuis and Grout to the mid-second century, expands the story with a named centurion, seven seals and elders keeping watch. Smith judges the guard story unhistorical and Carrier calls it fiction; Wenham and Craig argue for a basis in tradition, Craig granting that critics nearly universally reject it.^{10 sources}10 sources71. Smith 2010 158. Matthew 27:62–66 159. Matthew 28:11–15 160. Wenham 1973 161. Robinson) 1897 44. Arbogast 2022 162. Carrier 163. Wenham 1973 164. Craig 1984 165. Craig 1984
Contested · Smith, Luz (as Smith reports him) and Carrier reject the episode's historicity; Wenham and Craig defend a basis in tradition. (as of 2026-11-08)
What would change this verdict: An early account of the guard independent of Matthew.
Supported
Christian writers after Matthew report a Jewish charge that the disciples stole the body.
Justin (Dialogue with Trypho 108, c. 160) accuses his interlocutor's community of spreading the claim that the disciples stole the body, and Tertullian (Apology 21) reports that the Jewish leaders "gave it out".
Why this verdict
Claims others made
Confidence: high
Justin (Dialogue with Trypho 108, c. 160) accuses his interlocutor's community of spreading the claim that the disciples stole the body, and Tertullian (Apology 21) reports that the Jewish leaders "gave it out". Tertullian also mocks a story that a gardener moved the body; a gardener story returns in the medieval Toledot Yeshu, as the Jewish Encyclopedia (1906) summarises it. These are reports of the charge, not independent evidence of its origin or truth.^{4 sources}4 sources104. 1 105. Thelwall 166. 3 167. Jacobs 1906
Cross-community agreement · Craig and the sceptic Lowder both take the theft polemic as attested; Craig reads it as confirming the empty tomb, Lowder as a reply that cannot independently confirm the story. (as of 2026-11-08)
Against
The Nazareth Inscription was a Roman response to reports of Jesus' empty tomb.
The inscription records an edict of a "Caesar" making the removal of corpses and the disturbing of tombs capital offences.
Why this verdict
Claims others made
Confidence: medium
The inscription records an edict of a "Caesar" making the removal of corpses and the disturbing of tombs capital offences. Harper and colleagues (2020) write that it had been "most often connected" with Roman reactions to the empty-tomb reports; their isotope analysis traces the marble to Kos, and they propose a tomb desecration there as the setting. That weakens the older connection without disproving every link to Christianity.^{4 sources}4 sources168. Harper 2020 169. al. 2020 170. al. 2020 171. Wenham 1973
Contested · Harper and colleagues propose a Kos setting in place of the older connection they describe; Wenham noted in 1973 that scholars disagreed whether the inscription had anything to do with Christian origins. (as of 2026-11-08)
What would change this verdict: Secure evidence of where and why the edict was first set up.
Outside what evidence can settle
God raised Jesus from death into transformed, immortal life.
The Catechism teaches a historical event that no one witnessed and that transcends history; the Westminster Confession speaks of the same body, the Orthodox Church in America of more than bodily resuscitation, and Jehovah's Witnesses of a spirit resurrection.
Why this verdict
Theological claims
Confidence: high
The Catechism teaches a historical event that no one witnessed and that transcends history; the Westminster Confession speaks of the same body, the Orthodox Church in America of more than bodily resuscitation, and Jehovah's Witnesses of a spirit resurrection. Wright argues for resurrection as the best explanation while allowing cautious agnosticism; Ehrman argues that history cannot establish a miracle.^{8 sources}8 sources58. Church 1997 64. Assembly 1646 61. America 84. (jw.org)85. (jw.org)66. Wright 2002 65. Wright 2002 8. Is There Historical Evidence for the Resurrection of Jesus? A Debate between William Lane Craig and Bart D. Ehrman (College of the Holy Cross, 28 March 2006), transcript, reasonablefaith.org 2006

Hard questions

The strongest case, the strongest responses, then a plain assessment of where the logic holds.

Can historical evidence establish that Jesus rose from the dead?

Whether history can conclude to the resurrection turns on disputed method; Ehrman and Vermes say it cannot, Craig, Wright and Lapide argue for it, and Allison thinks neither proof nor disproof is available.

See the argument

The strongest case

In a 2006 debate with William Lane Craig, Bart Ehrman argued that historians can establish only what probably happened, and that a miracle is by definition the least probable occurrence, so history cannot show that the resurrection probably happened; he added that he was not claiming it did not happen or that miracles are impossible. Geza Vermes, as van Rensburg reports, held that the empty tomb and the appearances "convince only the already converted", leaving historians only speculation.^{10 sources}10 sources8. Is There Historical Evidence for the Resurrection of Jesus? A Debate between William Lane Craig and Bart D. Ehrman (College of the Holy Cross, 28 March 2006), transcript, reasonablefaith.org 2006 172. Rensburg 2010 173. Is There Historical Evidence for the Resurrection of Jesus? A Debate between William Lane Craig and Bart D. Ehrman (College of the Holy Cross, 28 March 2006), transcript, reasonablefaith.org 2006 66. Wright 2002 65. Wright 2002 72. William 2020 73. William 2020 174. Habermas 2008 57. Church 1997 58. Church 1997

P1. Paul hands on a received tradition of Jesus' death, burial, raising and appearances, and the Gospels narrate an empty tomb and meetings with the risen Jesus.^{5 sources}5 sources7. 1 Corinthians 15:3–8 1. Mark 16:1–7 52. Matthew 28:9–10 55. John 20:18 56. 1 Corinthians 9:1No listed response challenges this premise
P2. Ehrman argues: whatever these reports show, a miracle is by definition the least probable explanation, so historical method cannot conclude that it probably happened.

→ Conclusion. History cannot establish the resurrection as what probably happened.

Strongest responses

Protestant: evangelical challenges P2

Weigh the alternatives too. William Lane Craig replied that Ehrman's argument ignores the probability of the natural alternatives, which could outweigh the resurrection's low intrinsic probability; he framed the reply with Bayes's theorem and called Ehrman's argument a version of Hume's.¹⁷³

Protestant: Anglican challenges the conclusion

The best explanation, though not a compelling one. N. T. Wright argues that every other explanation of Christianity's rise is "far less convincing" than the early Christians' own, that Jesus really rose, leaving an empty tomb. He also writes that he has found no argument that would force a sceptic to admit it, and that "cautious agnosticism is always an option".^{66 65}

Jewish: modern challenges the conclusion

A historical event, but not proof of messiahship. Jonathan William reports that the Orthodox Jewish scholar Pinchas Lapide concluded that the best explanation of the earliest Jewish sources is that Jesus' resurrection occurred in history, while holding that it does not show Jesus to be Israel's Messiah.^{4 sources}4 sources72. William 2020 73. William 2020 75. William 2020 76. Williams

Catholic challenges the conclusion

A historical fact that transcends history. The Catechism teaches that it is impossible not to acknowledge the Resurrection as a historical fact, while holding that no one witnessed the event itself and that it transcends history, "at the very heart of the mystery of faith".^{57 58}

Academic (critical) challenges the framing

Scepticism runs both ways. Dale Allison, as Habermas reports, thinks the resurrection cannot be proved because alternatives can always be suggested, but that this scepticism "runs both ways": a categorical disproof depends on excluding divine or paranormal possibilities.¹⁷⁴

Plain assessment

Ehrman's rule turns on a miracle's low prior probability; Craig answers that the rival explanations' probabilities also count. Wright and Lapide judge resurrection the best explanation of the sources, Wright without claiming to compel agreement. Vermes leaves historians only speculation, and Allison holds that neither proof nor categorical disproof is available. The Catechism affirms a historical event that also transcends history.

What would change this assessment: An agreed method for weighing a miracle claim against natural explanations of the same reports.

Assessment uses: Weigh the alternatives too · The best explanation, though not a compelling one · A historical event, but not proof of messiahship · A historical fact that transcends history · Scepticism runs both ways · Protestant: Anglican · God raised Jesus from death into transformed, immortal life.

Was Jesus' tomb really found empty?

Craig and Vermes argue the women's discovery is historical, Allison and the sceptic Lowder tentatively accept an empty tomb, and Crossan and Ehrman doubt that anyone found or checked it.

See the argument

The strongest case

John Dominic Crossan, as van Rensburg reports, contends that Mark invented the empty-tomb story and that Jesus' followers, having fled, did not know where his corpse had been placed. Bart Ehrman's reconstruction has belief in Jesus' exaltation and then visions come first, by which time "nobody could go to the tomb to check". Daniel A. Smith notes that Paul nowhere mentions the empty tomb, and argues that saying Paul took it for granted "is to sidestep the problem".^{16 sources}16 sources46. Rensburg 2010 175. Is There Historical Evidence for the Resurrection of Jesus? A Debate between William Lane Craig and Bart D. Ehrman (College of the Holy Cross, 28 March 2006), transcript, reasonablefaith.org 2006 127. Smith 2010 69. Smith 2010 7. 1 Corinthians 15:3–8 35. Craig 1985 68. Craig 1985 36. Rensburg 2010 37. Rensburg 2010 38. Lowder 144. Habermas 2008 19. Church 1997 176. Habermas 2005 177. Habermas 2005 178. Habermas 2005 179. post 2015

P1. Paul's list says Jesus was buried and raised but tells of no tomb discovery, and nowhere in his letters does Paul mention the empty tomb.^{7 127 69}No listed response challenges this premise
P2. Crossan argues: the tomb story is Mark's invention, not a memory of what Jesus' followers found.

→ Conclusion. The Gospels' empty tomb need not reflect any discovery by Jesus' followers.

Strongest responses

Protestant: evangelical challenges P2

The women and the theft charge. William Lane Craig argues that the discovery by women is "highly probable", because given women's low status as witnesses the best explanation of the story is that they really found the tomb. He adds that the Jewish counter-charge of theft "presupposes the empty tomb", and that Paul's "buried" then "raised" implies it.^{35 68 7}

Jewish: modern challenges P2

Inventors would not have chosen women. Geza Vermes, as van Rensburg reports, supported the empty tomb's historicity partly because inventors would hardly have used female witnesses, who "had no standing in a male-dominated Jewish society".^{36 37}

Academic (critical) challenges the conclusion

A tentatively probable empty tomb. Dale Allison, as Habermas reports, allows only the "tentative" conclusion that the empty tomb is a probable event; Habermas himself rates the case "far stronger".¹⁴⁴

Skeptic/secular challenges the conclusion

Probably empty, though Craig's case is overstated. The sceptic Jeffery Jay Lowder tentatively grants that the tomb was empty, putting the odds at "just slightly better than 50%", while arguing that Craig's case from the women is "overstated".³⁸

Plain assessment

Smith presses Paul's silence, while Craig reads "buried" then "raised" as implying an empty tomb. Craig and Vermes argue from the women; Lowder calls that case overstated but still tentatively grants an empty tomb, as Allison does. The Catechism itself says the body's absence could be explained otherwise. Habermas counts about 75% of the publications he examined on the question as favouring arguments for the tomb; Taylor Carr criticised his method in 2015.

What would change this assessment: Evidence from outside the Gospels about where Jesus was laid and what was found there.

Assessment uses: The women and the theft charge · Inventors would not have chosen women · A tentatively probable empty tomb · Probably empty, though Craig's case is overstated · Catholic · Women who followed Jesus found his tomb empty.

Can the different women, messengers and places fit one sequence?

The accounts differ in visitors, messengers and places; Augustine, Marshall and the OCA propose combined sequences no single Gospel gives, while Ehrman and Reimarus judge the differences too great for certainty about the details.

See the argument

The strongest case

Bart Ehrman lists the accounts' differences (who went to the tomb, what they saw, whether the disciples were to stay in Jerusalem or go to Galilee) and answers each with "it depends which account you read"; he argues that the sources are not consistent enough for historical certainty. In fragments published by Lessing, Hermann Samuel Reimarus argued that the resurrection witnesses "distinctly and grossly contradict one another". Richard Carrier argues that Matthew's angel opening the tomb before the women conflicts with the other three Gospels, where the stone is already moved when they arrive.^{14 sources}14 sources8. Is There Historical Evidence for the Resurrection of Jesus? A Debate between William Lane Craig and Bart D. Ehrman (College of the Holy Cross, 28 March 2006), transcript, reasonablefaith.org 2006 180. Reimarus 1879 162. Carrier 181. 6 182. 6 41. America 20. Marshall 1973 183. Marshall 1973 129. Smith 2010 130. Smith 2010 184. Matthew 28:2–3 185. Mark 16:4 186. Luke 24:2 11. John 20:1

P1. The Gospels name different women and messengers, and Mark and Matthew point the disciples to Galilee while Luke narrates appearances around Jerusalem.^{13 sources}13 sources2. Mark 16:1 3. Matthew 28:1 4. Luke 24:10 5. John 20:1–2 95. Mark 16:5 96. Matthew 28:2–5 97. Luke 24:4 98. John 20:12 187. Mark 16:7 188. Matthew 28:16–17 189. Luke 24:49–52 190. John 20:19 191. John 21:1No listed response challenges this premise
P2. Ehrman argues: since each answer depends on which account one reads, the accounts are not consistent enough to give historical certainty about the details.

→ Conclusion. The Easter accounts cannot be combined with confidence into one record of what happened.

Strongest responses

Early church: Latin challenges P2

One angel, then two. Augustine, in a chapter whose heading asserts the absence of discrepancies, harmonised the angels by proposing that the women first saw one angel and then, on going further in, "saw other two angels standing, as Luke informs us".^{181 182}

Protestant: evangelical challenges P2

Appearances in both regions. I. Howard Marshall argues that, since Jesus died and the church began in Jerusalem, a tradition of appearances in Galilee "is very odd, unless they actually took place". He describes the usual conservative harmonisation as Jerusalem, then Galilee, then Jerusalem again, and notes that no single tradition reflects that threefold division.^{183 20}

Orthodox challenges P2

The women came separately. The Orthodox Church in America's life of Mary Magdalene fits the visits together by saying the women went to the tomb at dawn "not all together, but each from her own house".⁴¹

Plain assessment

The differences are in the texts; the dispute is over what follows from them. Augustine and the OCA life supply sequences that no single narrator gives. Marshall concedes that the combined itinerary is in no single tradition, while arguing that Galilean appearances are unlikely to have been invented. Smith's argument that John drew on Luke and Matthew bears on how many independent accounts there are to compare.

What would change this assessment: Evidence fixing the order of the visits, or showing which accounts depend on which.

Assessment uses: One angel, then two · Appearances in both regions · The women came separately · Are the four accounts independent of one another?

Did Matthew create the guard story to answer the theft charge?

Only Matthew among the canonical Gospels has the guard, and the later Gospel of Peter expands it; Smith, Luz and Carrier judge it unhistorical, while Wenham and Craig argue for a basis in tradition.

See the argument

The strongest case

Daniel A. Smith judges Matthew's guard story "improbable and unhistorical", doubts that Romans would guard an executed criminal's grave, and thinks Matthew more likely created it to explain where the Jewish claim that the disciples stole the body came from. He reports Ulrich Luz calling the Jewish authorities' role in it "historically grotesque". Richard Carrier argues that it looks like a Christian invention answering later sceptics, noting that Acts and the letters of Peter and Paul never mention it.^{11 sources}11 sources71. Smith 2010 192. Smith 2014 162. Carrier 44. Arbogast 2022 161. Robinson) 1897 193. Smith 2010 163. Wenham 1973 194. Wenham 1973 164. Craig 1984 165. Craig 1984 38. Lowder

P1. Among the canonical Gospels only Matthew tells of the guard and the bribe; the later Gospel of Peter expands the guard with a named centurion, seven seals and elders keeping watch.^{4 sources}4 sources158. Matthew 27:62–66 159. Matthew 28:11–15 71. Smith 2010 161. Robinson) 1897No listed response challenges this premise
P2. Smith argues: Matthew more likely created the guard episode to explain the theft charge than preserved a report of a real guard.

→ Conclusion. Matthew's guard is not evidence that the tomb was secured against theft.

Strongest responses

Protestant: evangelical challenges P2

Matthew had other traditions. David Wenham concedes that the guard's absence from the other Gospels is "probably the most surprising thing" if events happened as Matthew says. He argues that Matthew had non-Markan traditions, so where he differs he "cannot simply be concluded" to be improvising, and that a story invented to answer the charge would be "surprisingly elaborate, if not actually inept".^{160 194 163}

Protestant: evangelical challenges P2

The history of the polemic. William Lane Craig argues, from a reconstruction of the Jewish-Christian polemic behind Matthew's story, that it is "very difficult to believe the guard is unhistorical", while granting that critics nearly universally reject it.^{164 165}

Academic (critical) challenges P2

Matthew used a source. Smith reports that Davies and Allison think Matthew used a source for the guard episode rather than creating it, and Luz, as Smith reports, allows that there may have been an earlier tradition that the tomb was watched.^{192 71}

Plain assessment

Smith and Wenham read the same controversy as explaining invention or preservation. The Gospel of Peter, which Arbogast, Dupertuis and Grout date to the mid-second century, shows the story growing; Smith argues that Matthew composed the angel's descent rather than shortening such a tradition. Lowder answers Craig that a theft polemic arising after the tomb story cannot independently confirm it.

What would change this assessment: An early account of the guard independent of Matthew.

Assessment uses: Matthew had other traditions · The history of the polemic · Matthew used a source · The Gospel of Peter · Soldiers guarded Jesus' tomb, as Matthew narrates. · Skeptic/secular

Could visions explain the appearances?

Craig and Lüdemann agree the followers had experiences of Jesus appearing; whether grief-born visions explain them, as Lüdemann and Carrier argue, or not, as O'Connell, Allison and Licona argue, is disputed.

See the argument

The strongest case

Gerd Lüdemann, whom Craig quotes holding it "historically certain" that Peter and the disciples had experiences of Jesus appearing to them, explained Peter's vision, as van Rensburg reports, as self-deception arising from grief, "an example of unsuccessful mourning", which made it possible for the others to "see" Jesus too. Richard Carrier thinks it "most likely by far" that belief began with dreams, hallucinations or inspired readings of scripture, later embellished into legends.^{14 sources}14 sources147. Is There Historical Evidence for the Resurrection of Jesus? A Debate between William Lane Craig and Bart D. Ehrman (College of the Holy Cross, 28 March 2006), transcript, reasonablefaith.org 2006 148. Rensburg 2010 149. Rensburg 2010 150. Rensburg 2010 195. Carrier 102. O'Connell 2009 103. O'Connell 2009 151. Habermas 2008 152. Habermas 2008 60. Church 1997 196. Licona 2012 127. Smith 2010 128. 1 Corinthians 15:5–8 197. Licona 2012

P1. Paul lists appearances to individuals and to groups, one of more than five hundred at once, and puts his own experience last in the same list.^{7 28}No listed response challenges this premise
P2. Lüdemann and Carrier argue: grief-driven or visionary experiences, passed on to others and later embellished, account for these reports without a bodily resurrection.

→ Conclusion. The appearance reports do not require that Jesus was raised bodily.

Strongest responses

Protestant: evangelical challenges P2

Group visions would look different. Jake O'Connell grants that modern collective religious visions are very likely collective hallucinations, but argues that hallucinations would have produced glorious as well as ordinary appearances of Jesus, whereas the Gospels relate only ordinary ones. His argument also relies on the church having kept any reports of glorious appearances.^{102 103}

Academic (critical) challenges P2

Apparitions do not fully explain them. Dale Allison, as Habermas reports, concludes, "I am sure that the disciples saw Jesus after his death", while finding that apparitions of the dead do not fully explain these appearances.^{151 152}

Catholic challenges P2

The disciples doubted. The Catechism points to the disciples' doubt, the "idle tale" of Luke and Matthew's "some doubted", and concludes that "the hypothesis that the Resurrection was produced by the apostles' faith (or credulity) will not hold up".^{60 53 188}

Protestant: evangelical challenges the conclusion

An objective encounter. Michael Licona proposes that, after a supernatural event of indeterminate nature and cause, Jesus appeared to individuals and groups, friends and foes, in at least an objective vision and perhaps in ordinary sight of his bodily raised corpse.¹⁹⁷

Plain assessment

Craig and Lüdemann agree that the followers had experiences, though not on their cause. O'Connell, Allison and the Catechism argue that the reports resist a hallucination account, though O'Connell grants that group hallucinations occur. C. Behan McCullagh, quoted by Licona, advises that if we cannot tell how Jesus appeared, "it seems wisest to leave the method unexplained"; Smith notes that Paul's verb does not say what kind of seeing it was.

What would change this assessment: Evidence that could tell an objective encounter from a subjective experience in reports this old.

Assessment uses: Group visions would look different · Apparitions do not fully explain them · The disciples doubted · An objective encounter · Appeared, or was seen · The reported appearances were encounters with Jesus bodily raised.

Why did the risen Jesus not appear to his judge and his enemies?

Origen answers Celsus, Tertullian and Aquinas defend a chosen few, and Smith links the selection to authority; Craig's examples include a persecutor but not the judge, and only the later Gospel of Peter has opponents watch the tomb.

See the argument

The strongest case

The pagan critic Celsus, as OrigenOrigenA Christian scholar and teacher of Alexandria, born in 185 and deceased probably in 253 or 254, according to the Catholic Encyclopedia. Marco Rizzi explains that he interpreted the Septuagint allegorically, like Philo.From: Prat; Prat; Prat; Rizzi; PratAll terms → (c. 248) reports him, argued that if Jesus wished to show divine power he ought to have appeared to those who ill-treated him, to his judge and to everyone.^{8 sources}8 sources111. 4 112. 4 67. Is There Historical Evidence for the Resurrection of Jesus? A Debate between William Lane Craig and Bart D. Ehrman (College of the Holy Cross, 28 March 2006), transcript, reasonablefaith.org 2006 198. Robinson) 1897 199. Robinson) 1897 105. Thelwall 200. Province)127. Smith 2010

P1. In Acts, Peter says God made the risen Jesus visible only to witnesses he had chosen beforehand, not to the whole people, and that they ate and drank with him.²⁰¹No listed response challenges this premise
P2. Celsus argues: a real demonstration of divine power would have included the judge, the tormentors and everyone.

→ Conclusion. Appearances to chosen witnesses fall short of the demonstration Jesus should have given.

Strongest responses

Early church: Greek challenges P2

No obligation to his tormentors. Origen replies that Jesus had no obligation to appear to his judge and those who ill-treated him, and that he spared them possible harm.^{111 112}

Early church: Latin challenges P2

So that faith would be faith. Tertullian says the risen Lord did not go into the public gaze "lest the wicked should be delivered from their error", so that faith might hold its ground in difficulty.¹⁰⁵

Catholic challenges P2

Known through witnesses. Thomas AquinasThomas AquinasA philosopher, theologian and Doctor of the Church, born in 1225 or 1227 and deceased in 1274, according to the 1912 Catholic Encyclopedia. He wrote the Summa theologica.From: Kennedy; KennedyAll terms → argues that because Christ rose by a glorious resurrection, it "was not manifested to everyone, but to some, by whose testimony it could be brought to the knowledge of others".²⁰⁰

Protestant: evangelical challenges the framing

Not only to followers. William Lane Craig counts appearances to people who were not followers: James, Jesus' brother, apparently not previously a believer, and Paul, still a persecutor when Jesus appeared to him.⁶⁷

Academic (critical) challenges the framing

Selection gave authority. Daniel A. Smith argues that because Christ did not appear to everyone, those who claimed such an experience could also claim to be validated by God for mission and leadership.¹²⁷

Plain assessment

Craig's examples are a brother and a persecutor, not the judge Celsus names. Unlike the canonical Gospels, the later Gospel of Peter has opponents watch: the elders and the centurion see three men come out of the tomb, and Pilate, told of it, orders the soldiers to say nothing. Origen answers Celsus directly; Tertullian and AquinasThomas AquinasA philosopher, theologian and Doctor of the Church, born in 1225 or 1227 and deceased in 1274, according to the 1912 Catholic Encyclopedia. He wrote the Summa theologica.From: Kennedy; KennedyAll terms → give their own reasons for the selection, and Smith links it to claims of authority.

What would change this assessment: Early evidence of an appearance to Jesus' judge or to the authorities.

Assessment uses: No obligation to his tormentors · So that faith would be faith · Known through witnesses · Not only to followers · Selection gave authority · The Gospel of Peter

Check yourself

Does Mark's tomb scene narrate an appearance of Jesus before the women flee?

No. A young man announces that Jesus has been raised and promises a meeting in Galilee.^{51 1}

Mark 16:1–8

Which of the four Gospels tells of a guard at the tomb and soldiers paid to say the body was stolen?

Matthew alone; the chief priests and elders pay the soldiers to say the disciples stole the body while they slept.^{158 159}

Matthew 27:62–66 Matthew 28:11–15

When does Mary recognise Jesus in John?

When he calls her by name, after she has taken him for the gardener.^{101 6}

John 20:14–16

What does Paul's list of appearances leave out about the tomb and the women?

It narrates no tomb discovery and names no woman; that does not show who was absent from the groups it lists.⁷

1 Corinthians 15:3–8

For reflection

How would your standard for weighing a miracle against natural explanations affect your conclusion?^{8 173}

How persuasive is testimony from chosen witnesses compared with the public demonstration Celsus asks for?^{4 sources}4 sources201. Acts 10:40–41 111. 4 112. 4 200. Province)

Keep going

The crucifixion and burial of Jesus

Paul's received account places Jesus' death and burial before his raising and appearances.⁷

1 Corinthians 15:3–4

Cite this page

Plain citation

The resurrection: the empty tomb and the first appearances. Know the Text. Seek lens, version 1, revised 2026-11-08, Fact-checked. https://knowthetext.com/seek/stories/resurrection/

Chicago-style note

Know the Text, “The resurrection: the empty tomb and the first appearances,” Seek lens, version 1, revised 2026-11-08, Fact-checked, https://knowthetext.com/seek/stories/resurrection/.

BibTeX

@misc{knowthetext-resurrection,
  author = {{Know the Text}},
  title = {The resurrection: the empty tomb and the first appearances},
  howpublished = {Know the Text, Seek lens},
  url = {https://knowthetext.com/seek/stories/resurrection/},
  year = {2026},
  note = {Version 1; revised 2026-11-08; Fact-checked}
}

Sources

201 sources from 129 works

1
Mark 16:1–7↩^a ↩^b ↩^c ↩^d ↩^e
2
Mark 16:1↩^a ↩^b ↩^c ↩^d
3
Matthew 28:1↩^a ↩^b ↩^c ↩^d ↩^e ↩^f
4
Luke 24:10↩^a ↩^b ↩^c ↩^d
5
John 20:1–2↩^a ↩^b ↩^c ↩^d
6
John 20:16↩^a ↩^b ↩^c ↩^d
7
1 Corinthians 15:3–8↩^a ↩^b ↩^c ↩^d ↩^e ↩^f ↩^g ↩^h ↩ⁱ ↩^j ↩^k ↩^l ↩^m
“Is There Historical Evidence for the Resurrection of Jesus? A Debate between William Lane Craig and Bart D. Ehrman (College of the Holy Cross, 28 March 2006), transcript, reasonablefaith.org” (2006)
- 8
  Ehrman's opening statement↩^a ↩^b ↩^c ↩^d ↩^e ↩^f
- 17
  Ehrman's first rebuttal↩^a ↩^b ↩^c ↩^d
- 67
  Craig's opening statement↩^a ↩^b ↩^c ↩^d
- 147
  Craig's opening statement, quoting Lüdemann↩^a ↩^b
- 173
  Craig's first rebuttal↩^a ↩^b ↩^c
- 175
  Ehrman's closing statement↩
9
Mark 16:2↩^a ↩^b ↩^c
10
Luke 24:1↩^a ↩^b ↩^c
11
John 20:1↩^a ↩^b ↩^c ↩^d
12
Checked in this site's verse database: Editions reading "after the Sabbath" at Matthew 28:1↩^a ↩^b
How this was derived
SELECT group_concat(work_id, ', ') FROM (SELECT work_id FROM verses WHERE std_ref = 'Matt.28.1' AND text LIKE '%after the Sabbath%' ORDER BY work_id)
13
Eve-Marie Becker, “Dating Mark and Matthew as Ancient Literature (Tübingen repository)” (2011), p. 143↩
Catholic Church, Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2nd ed. (1997), Part 1, Section 2, Ch. 2, Art. 5, Para. 2 (scborromeo.org reprint) (1997)
- 14
  para. 639↩^a ↩^b
- 19
  para. 640↩^a ↩^b ↩^c
- 57
  para. 643↩^a ↩^b ↩^c
- 58
  para. 647↩^a ↩^b ↩^c ↩^d
Gary R. Habermas, “Resurrection Research from 1975 to the Present: What are Critical Scholars Saying? (Journal for the Study of the Historical Jesus 3.2), garyhabermas.com” (2005)
- 15
  section "Third", with n. 47↩^a ↩^b
- 16
  section "Third"↩^a ↩^b ↩^c
- 176
  introduction↩
- 177
  section "A second research area"↩
- 178
  n. 35↩
Daniel A. Smith, Revisiting the Empty Tomb: The Early History of Easter (Fortress 2010; Western University repository PDF) (2010)
- 18
  p. 2↩^a ↩^b
- 39
  p. 145↩
- 40
  p. 144↩
- 69
  p. 4↩^a ↩^b ↩^c
- 70
  p. 5↩
- 71
  p. 128↩^a ↩^b ↩^c ↩^d ↩^e
- 116
  p. 90↩
- 123
  p. 146↩
- 127
  p. 3↩^a ↩^b ↩^c ↩^d ↩^e ↩^f ↩^g
- 129
  p. 140↩^a ↩^b
- 130
  p. 141↩^a ↩^b
- 140
  p. 115 (Excursus)↩
- 141
  p. 116 (Excursus)↩
- 142
  p. 118 (Excursus)↩
- 143
  p. 117 (Excursus)↩
- 193
  p. 123↩
I. Howard Marshall, “The Resurrection of Jesus in Luke (Tyndale Bulletin 24)” (1973)
- 20
  p. 56↩^a ↩^b ↩^c
- 183
  p. 58↩^a ↩^b
Flavius Josephus (tr. William Whiston, 1737), Antiquities of the Jews (Project Gutenberg 2848; public domain)
- 21
  Antiquities 18.1.3↩
- 22
  Antiquities 18.1.4↩
23
Flavius Josephus (tr. William Whiston, 1737), The Wars of the Jews (Project Gutenberg 2850; public domain), Jewish War 2.8.14↩
24
Daniel 12:2↩
25
Stephen L. Cook, “Resurrection (Bible Odyssey, Society of Biblical Literature)”↩
26
2 Maccabees 7:9↩
27
2 Maccabees 7:14↩
28
1 Corinthians 15:6↩^a ↩^b ↩^c ↩^d
29
1 Corinthians 15:3↩^a ↩^b
Joel White, “'He was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures' (1 Corinthians 15:4) (Tyndale Bulletin 66.1)” (2015)
- 30
  pp. 106-107↩
- 31
  p. 107↩
32
Bereshit Rabbah (tr. The Sefaria Midrash Rabbah, 2022), Bereshit Rabbah 56:1 (Sefaria API, English), Genesis Rabbah 56:1↩^a ↩^b
33
Targum Jonathan on the Prophets (Mikraot Gedolot text, Sefaria), Targum Jonathan on Hosea 6:2 (Sefaria API), Hosea 6:2↩
34
Hosea 6:2↩
35
William Lane Craig, “The Historicity of the Empty Tomb of Jesus (New Testament Studies 31), reasonablefaith.org” (1985), point 5↩^a ↩^b ↩^c ↩^d ↩^e ↩^f
Hanré Janse van Rensburg, The resurrection revived: a critical examination (MTh thesis, University of Pretoria) (2010)
- 36
  p. 100↩^a ↩^b ↩^c ↩^d ↩^e
- 37
  p. 100, quoting Vermes 2008:140↩^a ↩^b ↩^c ↩^d ↩^e
- 46
  p. 82↩^a ↩^b ↩^c
- 47
  p. 82, quoting Crossan↩
- 148
  p. 110↩^a ↩^b
- 149
  p. 110, quoting Lüdemann 2004:165↩^a ↩^b
- 150
  p. 111, quoting Lüdemann 2004:166↩^a ↩^b
- 172
  p. 101, quoting Vermes 2008↩
38
Jeffery Jay Lowder, “Historical Evidence and the Empty Tomb Story (Secular Web; revised from Journal of Higher Criticism 2001)”↩^a ↩^b ↩^c ↩^d ↩^e ↩^f ↩^g ↩^h ↩ⁱ
41
Orthodox Church in America, “Myrrhbearer and Equal of the Apostles Mary Magdalene (oca.org, Lives of the Saints, July 22)”↩^a ↩^b ↩^c
42
Catholic Encyclopedia (1910), “St. Mary Magdalen (New Advent; public domain)”↩
Kathleen Arbogast, Rubén R. Dupertuis and Zoe Grout, “Gospel of Peter (Bible Odyssey, SBL; CC BY-NC-ND)” (2022)
- 43
  para. 1↩
- 44
  para. 4↩^a ↩^b ↩^c
Gospel of Peter (tr. J. Armitage Robinson), “The Gospel According to Peter, Ante-Nicene Fathers vol. IX, ed. Allan Menzies (Wikisource; public domain)” (1897)
- 45
  sections 9-10 (vv. 35-42)↩
- 161
  section 8 (vv. 28-33 in the usual verse numbering)↩^a ↩^b ↩^c
- 198
  section 10 (vv. 38-40)↩
- 199
  section 11 (vv. 45-49)↩
Mark Allan Powell, “The Crucifixion of Jesus and the Jews (Bible Odyssey, SBL)”
- 48
  para. 4↩
- 49
  para. 6↩
50
Mark 16:8↩^a ↩^b
51
Mark 16:1–8↩^a ↩^b ↩^c ↩^d
52
Matthew 28:9–10↩^a ↩^b ↩^c
53
Luke 24:11↩^a ↩^b ↩^c
54
John 20:17↩^a ↩^b
55
John 20:18↩^a ↩^b
56
1 Corinthians 9:1↩^a ↩^b
59
Catholic Church, Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2nd ed. (1997), para. 641 (scborromeo.org reprint) (1997), para. 641↩
60
Catholic Church, Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2nd ed. (1997), para. 644 (scborromeo.org reprint) (1997), para. 644↩^a ↩^b ↩^c
61
Orthodox Church in America, “The Orthodox Faith: Resurrection (oca.org)”, para. 6↩^a ↩^b
62
Orthodox Church in America (Thomas Hopko), “The Orthodox Faith, vol. 2: Worship, The Church Year, Post-Easter Sundays (oca.org)”↩
63
Augsburg Confession (1530), Augsburg Confession, Article III (bookofconcord.org) (1530), Article III, 4↩
64
Westminster Assembly, Westminster Confession of Faith (1646), OPC text (1646), ch. 8.4↩^a ↩^b
N. T. Wright, “Jesus' Resurrection and Christian Origins (Gregorianum 83.4), ntwrightpage.com” (2002)
- 65
  section on historical method↩^a ↩^b ↩^c ↩^d ↩^e
- 66
  conclusion↩^a ↩^b ↩^c ↩^d
68
William Lane Craig, “The Historicity of the Empty Tomb of Jesus (New Testament Studies 31, 1985; reasonablefaith.org)” (1985)↩^a ↩^b ↩^c ↩^d
Jonathan William, “The Resurrection of Jesus: Another Jewish Perspective (Kesher: A Journal of Messianic Judaism, 26 July 2020)” (2020)
- 72
  para. 8↩^a ↩^b ↩^c
- 73
  para. 1↩^a ↩^b ↩^c
- 74
  para. 3↩^a ↩^b
- 75
  para. 9↩^a ↩^b
76
Kevin M. Williams, “Review of Pinchas Lapide, The Resurrection of Jesus: A Jewish Perspective (Pneuma Review)”, review, para. 5↩^a ↩^b
77
Mishnah (tr. William Davidson Edition, Sefaria), Mishnah Sanhedrin 10:1 (Sefaria API, English), Sanhedrin 10:1↩
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, “Gospel Topics: Resurrection”
- 78
  para. 1↩
- 79
  para. 3↩
80
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, “Joseph Smith Translation, Mark 16:3-6 (churchofjesuschrist.org)”↩
81
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, “Joseph Smith Translation, Luke 24:2-4 (churchofjesuschrist.org)”↩
82
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, “Matthew 28, with JST footnotes (churchofjesuschrist.org)”↩
83
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, “John 20, with JST footnotes (churchofjesuschrist.org)”↩^a ↩^b
Jehovah's Witnesses (jw.org), “After Jesus' Resurrection, Was His Body Flesh or Spirit?”
- 84
  para. 2↩^a ↩^b
- 85
  para. 4↩^a ↩^b
86
Jehovah's Witnesses, “Insight on the Scriptures, "Flesh" (wol.jw.org)”↩
87
Jehovah's Witnesses, “After Jesus' Resurrection, Was His Body Flesh or Spirit? (jw.org)”↩
Qur'an, tr. Yusuf Ali (Y), Pickthall (P) and Shakir (S) (Project Gutenberg 16955), Three translations of the Koran side by side
- 88
  4:157 (P)↩
- 89
  4:157 (Y)↩
- 90
  4:158 (P)↩
91
Ibn Kathir (d. 1373), Tafsir, abridged English (quran.com API, tafsir 169), Tafsir Ibn Kathir on Q 4:157, on 4:157↩
92
Qur'an, tr. Yusuf Ali (Y), Pickthall (P) and Shakir (S) (Project Gutenberg 16955), Three translations of the Koran side by side (Project Gutenberg 16955), Q 19:33↩
93
Ibn Kathir (d. 1373), Tafsir, abridged English (quran.com API, tafsir 169), Tafsir Ibn Kathir on Q 19:33, Q 19:33↩
94
Mohamad Younes, “Revisiting the Crucifixion of Jesus within Islam (Australian Journal of Islamic Studies 9)” (2024), abstract, p. 104↩
95
Mark 16:5↩^a ↩^b
96
Matthew 28:2–5↩^a ↩^b
97
Luke 24:4↩^a ↩^b
98
John 20:12↩^a ↩^b
99
Luke 24:1–12↩
100
Luke 24:22–24↩
101
John 20:14–15↩^a ↩^b
Jake H. O'Connell, “Jesus' Resurrection and Collective Hallucinations (Tyndale Bulletin 60)” (2009)
- 102
  Summary↩^a ↩^b ↩^c
- 103
  p. 1↩^a ↩^b ↩^c
104
Justin Martyr (tr. ANF 1, New Advent), Dialogue with Trypho, ch. 108↩^a ↩^b
105
Tertullian (tr. S. Thelwall, ANF 3), Apology (New Advent; public domain translation), Apology 21↩^a ↩^b ↩^c ↩^d
Hermann Samuel Reimarus, ed. Charles Voysey, Fragments from Reimarus (London 1879), archive.org Cornell scan (1879)
- 106
  p. 46↩
- 107
  p. 47↩
- 180
  p. 47, sect. XXXVI↩
108
Richard Carrier, “Plausibility of Theft FAQ (richardcarrier.info)”↩
Kirsopp Lake, The Historical Evidence for the Resurrection of Jesus Christ (London 1907), archive.org Toronto scan (1907)
- 109
  p. 251↩
- 110
  p. 252↩
Origen (tr. ANF 4, New Advent), Against Celsus, Book II
- 111
  II.63↩^a ↩^b ↩^c ↩^d
- 112
  II.67↩^a ↩^b ↩^c ↩^d
113
Checked in this site's verse database: Editions reading "end", "late" or "eve" of the Sabbath at Matthew 28:1↩
How this was derived
SELECT group_concat(work_id, ', ') FROM (SELECT work_id FROM verses WHERE std_ref = 'Matt.28.1' AND (text LIKE '%end of the sabbath%' OR text LIKE '%late on the sabbath%' OR text LIKE '%eve of the sabbath%') ORDER BY work_id)
114
Checked in this site's verse database: Morphology of egerthe in Mark 16:6↩
How this was derived
SELECT morph FROM tokens WHERE std_ref = 'Mark.16.6' AND word_num = 13
115
Mark 16:6↩
117
Checked in this site's verse database: Luke 24:11 renderings in six editions↩
How this was derived
SELECT group_concat(work_id || ': ' || CASE WHEN text LIKE '%idle%' THEN 'idle' WHEN text LIKE '%nonsense%' THEN 'nonsense' ELSE 'other' END, ' | ') FROM (SELECT work_id, text FROM verses WHERE std_ref = 'Luke.24.11' AND work_id IN ('kjv','asv','drc','bsb','web','ylt') ORDER BY work_id)
118
Checked in this site's verse database: Verses using leros (G3026)↩
How this was derived
SELECT count(DISTINCT std_ref) FROM tokens WHERE root_strong = 'G3026'
119
Marianne Bjelland Kartzow, “Resurrection as Gossip: Representations of Women in Resurrection Stories of the Gospels (lectio difficilior 1/2010)” (2010)↩
120
Checked in this site's verse database: John 20:17 renderings in six editions↩
How this was derived
SELECT group_concat(work_id || ': ' || CASE WHEN text LIKE '%Touch me not%' THEN 'touch me not' WHEN text LIKE '%cling%' THEN 'cling' WHEN text LIKE '%hold me%' THEN 'hold' WHEN text LIKE '%touching%' THEN 'touching' ELSE 'other' END, ' | ') FROM (SELECT work_id, text FROM verses WHERE std_ref = 'John.20.17' AND work_id IN ('kjv','asv','drc','bsb','web','ylt') ORDER BY work_id)
121
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, “New Testament Student Manual, ch. 28, John 20-21 (churchofjesuschrist.org)”↩
122
Checked in this site's verse database: Morphology of haptou in John 20:17↩
How this was derived
SELECT morph FROM tokens WHERE std_ref = 'John.20.17' AND word_num = 7
124
Augustine (tr. NPNF1 7), Tractates on the Gospel of John, Tractate 121 (New Advent; public domain translation), Tractate 121.3↩
125
Matthew 28:9↩
126
Checked in this site's verse database: WEB footnote at John 20:16↩
How this was derived
SELECT n.body FROM verse_notes n JOIN verses v ON v.id = n.verse_id WHERE v.std_ref = 'John.20.16' AND v.work_id = 'web' AND n.body LIKE 'Rabboni%'
128
1 Corinthians 15:5–8↩^a ↩^b ↩^c
Marius Nel, “Pentecostal hermeneutical reconsideration of the longer ending of Mark 16:9-20 (Verbum et Ecclesia 41.1; CC BY)” (2020)
- 131
  p. 2↩^a ↩^b
- 133
  p. 1, n. 2, quoting Croy 2003:14↩^a ↩^b
- 134
  p. 1, n. 2↩^a ↩^b
J. Gertrud Tönsing, “Who was first? Mary Magdalene, Peter and the Ending of Mark (Scriptura 121)” (2022)
- 132
  p. 4↩
- 153
  abstract, p. 1↩
- 155
  p. 5↩
- 156
  pp. 1-2↩
- 157
  p. 2↩
135
John William Burgon, The Last Twelve Verses of the Gospel According to S. Mark (Oxford 1871), Project Gutenberg 26134 (1871), dedication↩^a ↩^b
136
Checked in this site's verse database: WEB footnote at Mark 16:9↩
How this was derived
SELECT v.osis_ref, n.body FROM verse_notes n JOIN verses v ON v.id = n.verse_id WHERE v.work_id = 'web' AND v.osis_ref = 'Mark.16.9' AND n.kind = 'footnote'
137
Mark 16:9–20↩
138
Checked in this site's verse database: SBLGNT apparatus at Luke 24:12↩
How this was derived
SELECT trim(replace(raw_entry, char(160), ' ')) FROM apparatus_entries WHERE std_ref = 'Luke.24.12' AND lemma LIKE 'Ὁ δὲ%'
139
Luke 24:12↩
Gary R. Habermas, “Dale Allison's Resurrection Skepticism: A Critique (Philosophia Christi 10.2)” (2008)
- 144
  p. 308↩^a ↩^b ↩^c
- 151
  p. 309, quoting Allison 346↩^a ↩^b ↩^c
- 152
  p. 309↩^a ↩^b ↩^c
- 174
  p. 305↩^a ↩^b
Robert M. Price, “Apocryphal Apparitions: 1 Corinthians 15:3-11 as a Post-Pauline Interpolation (Journal of Higher Criticism 2.2, 1995), Secular Web” (1995)
- 145
  title↩
- 146
  introduction↩
154
N. T. Wright, “Jesus' Resurrection and Christian Origins (Gregorianum 83, 2002; ntwrightpage.com)”↩
158
Matthew 27:62–66↩^a ↩^b ↩^c
159
Matthew 28:11–15↩^a ↩^b ↩^c
David Wenham, “The Resurrection Narratives in Matthew's Gospel (Tyndale Bulletin 24)” (1973)
- 160
  p. 47↩^a ↩^b
- 163
  p. 48↩^a ↩^b ↩^c
- 171
  p. 47 n. 76↩
- 194
  p. 41↩^a ↩^b
162
Richard Carrier, “Why I Don't Buy the Resurrection Story, part 2, VIII. Was the Tomb Guarded? (Secular Web)”↩^a ↩^b ↩^c
William Lane Craig, “The Guard at the Tomb (New Testament Studies 30), reasonablefaith.org” (1984)
- 164
  section on positive considerations↩^a ↩^b ↩^c
- 165
  section on objections↩^a ↩^b ↩^c
166
Tertullian (tr. ANF 3, New Advent), De Spectaculis, ch. 30↩
167
Joseph Jacobs, Kaufmann Kohler, Richard Gottheil, Samuel Krauss, JESUS OF NAZARETH, Jewish Encyclopedia vol. 7 (1906), jewishencyclopedia.com (1906), In Jewish Legend (Krauss)↩
168
Kyle Harper, Michael McCormick, Matthew Hamilton, Chantal Peiffert, Raymond Michels, Michael Engel, “Establishing the provenance of the Nazareth Inscription (Journal of Archaeological Science: Reports 30; HAL author version)” (2020), section 1↩
Kyle Harper et al., “Establishing the provenance of the Nazareth Inscription (Journal of Archaeological Science: Reports 30; HAL author version)” (2020)
- 169
  abstract↩
- 170
  section 4↩
179
Taylor Carr (guest post, ed. Jeffery Jay Lowder), “Gary Habermas Shows Why the 'Minimal Facts' of Jesus' Death Can't Establish the Resurrection (The Secular Outpost, Secular Web, 15 Sept 2015)” (2015), para. 10↩
Augustine (tr. NPNF1 6, New Advent), The Harmony of the Gospels, Book III, Chapter 24
- 181
  III.24↩^a ↩^b
- 182
  III.24, title↩^a ↩^b
184
Matthew 28:2–3↩
185
Mark 16:4↩
186
Luke 24:2↩
187
Mark 16:7↩
188
Matthew 28:16–17↩^a ↩^b
189
Luke 24:49–52↩
190
John 20:19↩
191
John 21:1↩
192
Daniel A. Smith, “'Look, the place where they put him' (Mk 16:6): The space of Jesus' tomb in early Christian memory (HTS Teologiese Studies 70.1; CC BY)” (2014), p. 4↩^a ↩^b
195
Richard Carrier, “Why I Don't Buy the Resurrection Story (6th ed., 2004), Secular Web”, introduction↩
Michael R. Licona, “In Reply to Habermas, McGrew, and McCullagh (Southeastern Theological Review 3.1)” (2012)
- 196
  p. 63, quoting McCullagh↩
- 197
  p. 63↩^a ↩^b
200
Thomas Aquinas (tr. Fathers of the English Dominican Province), Summa Theologiae III, q. 55, a. 1 (New Advent), III q.55 a.1↩^a ↩^b ↩^c
201
Acts 10:40–41↩^a ↩^b

Read with these questions

Read the passage

The story, step by step

Mark 16:1–5

Mark 16:6–8

Matthew 28:1–8

Matthew 28:9–10

Matthew 28:11–15

Luke 24:1–10

Luke 24:11–12

John 20:1–2

John 20:3–9

John 20:11–16

John 20:17–18

The world of the story

Jewish hopes of resurrection Scholarship

Paul's received account Scholarship

Which Scriptures did "the third day" mean? Scholarship

Women as the first witnesses Scholarship

Mary Magdalene in later tradition Scholarship

The Gospel of Peter Scholarship

Where it fits

Where else Scripture speaks of it

How the traditions read it

Catholic · The Catechism on event, sign and mystery

Orthodox · The Orthodox Church in America and the myrrhbearers

Protestant: Lutheran · The Augsburg Confession

Protestant: Reformed · The Westminster Confession

Protestant: Anglican · N. T. Wright's historical argument

Protestant: evangelical · William Lane Craig's four facts

Academic (critical) · Daniel A. Smith on how the stories grew

Skeptic/secular · Jeffery Jay Lowder on the empty tomb

Jewish: modern · Pinchas Lapide, as reported by Jonathan William

Jewish: rabbinic · Resurrection of the dead, without a claim about Jesus

Latter-day Saints · The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints

Jehovah's Witnesses · A spirit resurrection and materialised bodies

Islamic · The Qur'an and its interpreters

Common misunderstandings

Words worth a closer look

Matthew 28:1 · “Late on the Sabbath, or after it”

Mark 16:6 · “He is risen, or he was raised” egerthe

Luke 24:11 · “Nonsense, or idle tales” leros

John 20:17 · “Touch me not, or do not hold me” hapto

John 20:16 · “Rabboni”

1 Corinthians 15:5 · “Appeared, or was seen” ophthe

Who wrote it, and when

Are the four accounts independent of one another?

How did Mark's Gospel end?

Did Luke originally include Peter's run to the tomb?

History and evidence

Women who followed Jesus found his tomb empty.

Paul's list of appearances quotes a formula older than his letter.

The reported appearances were encounters with Jesus bodily raised.

Mark's Gospel originally ended at 16:8, with the women's flight and silence.

Soldiers guarded Jesus' tomb, as Matthew narrates.

Christian writers after Matthew report a Jewish charge that the disciples stole the body.

The Nazareth Inscription was a Roman response to reports of Jesus' empty tomb.

God raised Jesus from death into transformed, immortal life.

Hard questions

Can historical evidence establish that Jesus rose from the dead?

The strongest case

Strongest responses

Plain assessment

Was Jesus' tomb really found empty?

The strongest case

Strongest responses

Plain assessment

Can the different women, messengers and places fit one sequence?

The strongest case

Strongest responses

Plain assessment

Did Matthew create the guard story to answer the theft charge?

The strongest case

Strongest responses

Plain assessment

Could visions explain the appearances?

The strongest case

Strongest responses

Plain assessment

Why did the risen Jesus not appear to his judge and his enemies?