If that were not enough, we have additional confirmation of the main points of Mark’s account by comparing it with John’s account (John 19:38-42). For although Luke and Matthew may have read and used Mark’s account of the burial in writing their own accounts, John’s account seems to be independent of the other three. John’s story coincides with the main features of Mark’s story: that late on the day of preparation, Joseph of Arimathea asked for and received permission from Pilate to take the body of Jesus, that he did so, wrapping the body in linen, and that he laid the body in a tomb. This historical core does not show legendary traces and seems to be a straightforward, factual report.
d) The burial of Jesus by Joseph of Arimathea is probably historical. Arimathea is likely to be the town Ramathaion-zophim, just north of Jerusalem. Joseph is said to be a member of the Council, that is, the Sanhedrin, which was a sort of Jewish Supreme Court that tried cases dealing with Jewish law. The Great Sanhedrin, which tried important life-and-death cases, consisted of seventy-one prominent and influential men. Even the most skeptical scholars acknowledge that Joseph was probably the genuine, historical individual who buried Jesus, since it is unlikely that early Christian believers would invent an individual, give him a name and nearby town of origin, and place that fictional character on the historical council of the Sanhedrin, whose members were well known.
In addition, some of the gospels’ descriptions of Joseph receive confirmation through incidental details. For example, Matthew says that Joseph was “a rich man” (Matthew 27:57). That fact is confirmed by the type and location of the tomb in which he buried Jesus, as we shall see in a moment. To afford the kind of tomb described in the gospels, Joseph must have been wealthy, just as Matthew says. It is also probable that Joseph was at least some sort of sympathizer of Jesus. Although both Matthew and John state that Joseph was a disciple of Jesus (Matthew 27:57; John 19:38; John adds, “a secret one, for fear of the Jews”), that description is often said to be a legendary development of Mark’s more simple expression that Joseph was “waiting for the kingdom of God” (Mark 15:43). Now Mark’s expression could mean that Joseph was merely a pious Jew who was waiting for the Messiah. On the other hand, the coming of the kingdom of God are the very words Mark uses to describe Jesus’ gospel (Mark 1:14-15), and it is not evident that Mark thought a person could really be looking for the coming of the kingdom of God without being a believer in Jesus. Thus, his expression could mean the same thing stated more clearly by Matthew and John.
More important, however, Joseph’s actions as described by Mark do seem to show that Joseph had a special care for Jesus. Mark says he went in bravely (or dared to go) to Pilate and asked for the body of Jesus. The authorities did not ordinarily give over the corpse of a victim executed for a major crime, so it took courage for Joseph to ask for Jesus’ body. According to Mark, Joseph apparently gave Jesus a proper burial. There is no indication of hurry in Mark’s burial account; Joseph buys a shroud, wraps the body in it, lays it in the tomb, and rolls a stone across the door. As Joseph rolls the stone over the door to the tomb, there is a sense of completeness and finality—there is no hint of a hasty or unfinished burial. Now all that is very remarkable, for the Jewish practice of burying executed criminals was simply to throw the bodies into shallow, dirt graves in a plot reserved for that purpose. Outside the city were two sites for the burial of criminals, one for those stoned or burned and one for the decapitated or hanged.6 There the bodies could be disposed of in dirt graves. Instead of getting rid of Jesus’ corpse in that way, Joseph wrapped and laid the body in a tomb, which, we shall see, was of the most expensive variety and probably his own. These are not the actions of a cold delegate of the Sanhedrin who had been assigned to dispose of the bodies.
That Joseph was giving special care to Jesus’ body is also evident from the fact that he apparently did nothing to dispose of the bodies of the two thieves crucified with Jesus (Mark 15:27, 32). It seems Joseph was content to leave their burial to the Romans. But he took it upon himself to care specifically for Jesus’ body. That he dared to go to Pilate and ask specifically for Jesus’ body strongly suggests that Joseph did indeed have sympathies with Jesus.
Finally it is important to remember that Matthew and John state independently that Joseph was a disciple of Jesus. They did not both come upon this idea out of the blue; they had sources of information, and these sources may well be correct. John says elsewhere that many of the authorities believed in Jesus but were afraid to confess the fact openly (John 12:42-43), and he describes Joseph in the same terms. Joseph’s actions as described by Mark indicate that Joseph did indeed have deep feelings for Jesus and that he was therefore at least a secret sympathizer of the man, if not a secret disciple.
e) Jesus’ burial in a tomb is probably historical. Archaeological discoveries have revealed three different types of rock tombs used in Jesus’ time.7 (1) Kōkīm tombs, in which tunnels about six feet deep were bored into the walls of the tomb, three in each wall, into which the bodies were inserted headfirst; (2) acrosolia tombs, which had semicircular niches in the walls about two and one-half feet above the floor and two to three feet deep containing either a shelf or trough for the body; and (3) bench tombs, in which a bench went around the inner walls of the tomb and served as a resting place for the body. The tombs were sealed with a stone slab to keep out animals. In a very expensive tomb, a round, disc-shaped stone could be rolled down a slanted groove and across the door of the tomb. Although it would be easy to close the tomb, it would require several men to roll the stone back up the groove to open it. Only a few tombs with such disc-shaped stones have been discovered in Palestine, but they all date from Jesus’ day.
When one compiles the incidental details concerning Jesus’ tomb from the gospels, it becomes evident that either an acrosolia or bench tomb is in mind, with a roll-stone for the door.8 This is very interesting because such tombs were scarce in Jesus’ day and were reserved for persons of high rank, such as members of the Sanhedrin. Furthermore, near the church that stands at the traditional site for Jesus’ grave, acrosolia tombs from Jesus’ time have been found.
In addition, John states that the tomb was located in a garden (John 19:41). The word means plantation, or orchard, and such a site could contain rock tombs. In fact one of the gates in the North Wall of Jerusalem was called the Garden Gate, and the tombs of the Jewish high priests John Hyrcanus and Alexander Jannaeus were in that area.9 So it could have been a prestigious burial place.
Two more details deserve to be mentioned. First, according to Matthew, Luke, and John, the tomb was new and unused (Matthew 27:60; Luke 23:53; John 19:41). This is very likely, since the body of a condemned criminal could not be placed in an occupied tomb without defiling the bodies of the family members reposing there. Therefore, Joseph would have to find an unoccupied tomb. Second, Matthew says the tomb was Joseph’s own tomb (Matthew 27:60). This also is very probable, since Joseph would not be at liberty to lay the body of a criminal in just anybody’s rock tomb. All the gospels give the impression that Joseph had a specific tomb in mind, and that is best explained by the fact that the tomb in which he laid Jesus was his own property.