Even the best history textbooks invariably present the past from a specific perspective. The bible contains stories that weren’t written down until at least 30 years after the supposed events happened, the only corroboration (Josephus) is thought to have been revised afterwards, and the text itself has lots of internal inconsistencies. You just can’t consider it to be authoritative in a historical sense – it’s obviously written by a true believer to influence other true believers. And anything that was heresy to the beliefs of those in charge was removed (council of Nicaea).

I don’t think there exists good evidence that Jesus existed, and even if he did, I don’t think there’s good evidence that he was divine. Etc, etc.

You’re asking me to account for something that I think is fiction.

Posted: October 26th 2009

See all questions answered by Eric_PK

Basic answer, taking all intended assumptions as read: because the authorities probably weren’t the ones who removed it.

The Empty Tomb™ is a major focus of Gospel apologetics, though it’s never been found or identified. What strikes me about it is that according to the story, the authorities sealed the tomb with a heavy rock which any large group of men could shift in an hour, rather than ensuring that only the authorities could get in – for example by using a lock. It wasn’t guarded either, or even patrolled, since the fact that the stone had moved was news to everyone on Sunday morning. So the opportunity for covert exhumation was certainly there.

After that, use your imagination. There are a million ways to dispose of a body, and forensic science wasn’t up to much in the first century.

Posted: October 25th 2009

See all questions answered by SmartLX