This conclusion is confirmed by the chronological succession of one event after another: the events follow each other in chronological order, and the appearances are joined by “then . . . then . . . then . . . last of all” (1 Corinthians 15:5-8). Each event is distinct, and they are arranged chronologically. This makes it probable that the burial referred to here is a particular event.
These considerations suggest that the second line of this old saying refers to the burial of Jesus. But was that burial the same event as that described in the gospels? I think the decisive answer to that question comes by comparing the saying with the sermons in Acts, especially Acts 13:28-31, and with the resurrection narratives in the gospels. Notice that the order of events is identical and that the second line of the summary corresponds with the account of the burial in the tomb.
1 Cor. 15:3-5
Acts 13:28-31
Mark 15:37-16:8
Christ died
Though they found no ground for putting Him to death, they asked Pilate that He be executed.
And Jesus uttered a loud cry, and breathed His last.
He was buried
They took him down from the cross and laid Him in a tomb.
And Joseph bought a linen sheet, took Him down, wrapped Him in the linen sheet, and laid Him in a tomb.
He was raised
But God raised Him from the dead.
“He has risen; He is not here; behold, here is the place where they laid Him.”
He appeared
And for many days He appeared to those who came up with Him from Galilee to Jerusalem, the very ones who are now His witnesses to the people.
“But go, tell His disciples and Peter, ‘He is going before you into Galilee; there you will see Him.’”
This remarkable correlation shows convincingly that the burial mentioned in the summary statement quoted by Paul refers to the event that is described in the gospels as Jesus’ burial in the tomb.
If such is the case, then it is virtually impossible to deny the historicity of Jesus’ burial in the tomb. In the first place, given the age and origin of the Christian saying, there was simply no time for legend to arise. The saying records what was common knowledge concerning Jesus’ burial, among all residents of Jerusalem at that time. Second, the women who witnessed the burial (Mark 15:47) were members of the early Christian fellowship in which the saying was drafted. Thus, if the women’s observing the burial in the tomb proves to be historical, then their testimony guarantees the accuracy of the saying. (I shall examine the evidence for the women’s role later.) Third, Paul’s own quotation of the saying confirms its accuracy. When Paul quoted those old sayings, he knew the broader context that the sayings summarized. (Look, for example, at his detailed knowledge of Jesus’ words at the Last Supper as Paul records them in 1 Corinthians 11:23-26.) That alone makes it probable that he knew the burial story summarized by the second line of the saying. This conclusion is confirmed by his two-week visit to Jerusalem in A.D. 36, for he would certainly have learned by then what happened to Jesus after He had been crucified. Thus, in quoting the saying that refers to the burial of Jesus in the tomb, Paul sets his stamp of approval on its accuracy. Hence, the information furnished by Paul in 1 Corinthians 15:3-5 provides early and reliable evidence that Jesus was buried in the tomb as the gospels report.
b) The burial account was part of the source material used by Mark in his description of Jesus’ sufferings and death and is therefore very early. Reading through the gospels, one notices that they seem to be made up of many somewhat disconnected, self-sufficient stories about Jesus. But the part about Jesus’ sufferings, crucifixion, death, and burial, is related in a smooth, continuous narrative. That suggests that the narrative is all of one piece and already existed before the gospel writers sat down to write their gospels. The story of Jesus’ sufferings and death was thus part of the source material they used in writing their gospels. Mark’s gospel is generally held by biblical scholars to be the earliest of the four gospels. Although its exact date is disputed, it is dated by most scholars around A.D. 70. That means that the story of Jesus’ sufferings and death is even older than that, since it was one of Mark’s sources. Because the story describes the final days of Jesus’ life in Jerusalem, it is likely that the account goes back to the early days of the Christian fellowship there. That makes it a very valuable historical source, since its age and place of origin make it improbable that legend could have yet arisen so as to obliterate the facts.
It is now universally acknowledged that the burial account was part of that story, which was used as source material by Mark. There is no break at all between Mark’s description of Jesus’ death (Mark 15:33-41) and his description of Jesus’ burial (Mark 15:42-47). It is a continuous narrative, and there is no reason to think that Mark’s source ended abruptly with Jesus’ death without telling of His burial. That means that the burial account is very old and therefore probably historically reliable. The story of the burial is as reliable as the story of the crucifixion itself, since they were really part of the same story.
Moreover, since the burial account is part of the story of Jesus’ sufferings and death, and since that story is quite old, we can be sure Paul knew the story. He was a contemporary of the story and was in close contact with his Christian friends and fellow-workers in the fellowship in Jerusalem. This confirms the fact that the burial referred to in the Christian saying that Paul quotes is identical to the burial of Jesus in the tomb, as described in the gospel story. The age and origin of the Christian saying on the one hand and the age and origin of the story of Jesus’ sufferings and death on the other hand together insure the historical reliability of the account of Jesus’ burial. And we also have the testimony of the apostle Paul to vouch for the account’s accuracy.
c) The story itself is simple and lacks signs of significant legendary development. Perhaps at this point it would be helpful to give Mark’s account of the buriaclass="underline"
And when evening had already come because it was the preparation day, that is, the day before the Sabbath, Joseph of Arimathea came, a prominent member of the Council, a man who was himself waiting for the kingdom of God; and he gathered up courage and went in before Pilate, and asked for the body of Jesus. And Pilate wondered if He was dead by this time, and summoning the centurion, he questioned him as to whether He was already dead. And ascertaining this from the centurion, he granted the body to Joseph. And Joseph bought a linen sheet, took Him down, wrapped Him in the linen sheet, and laid Him in a tomb which had been hewn out in the rock; and he rolled a stone against the entrance of the tomb. And Mary Magdalene and Mary the mother of Joses were looking on to see where He was laid. [Mark 15:42-47]
The account is simple and straightforward and does not appear to be colored by legendary influences. Even the radical skeptic Rudolf Bultmann wrote of this narrative, “This is an historical account which creates no impression of being a legend apart from the women who appear again as witnesses in v. 47, and vv. 44, 45 which Matthew and Luke in all probability did not have in their Mark.”4 The highly respected commentator on Mark, Vincent Taylor, says that Bultmann’s judgment is “a notable understatement.” Taylor asserts, “The narrative belongs to the best tradition.”5 That means that the burial account is basically a factual report of what took place.