That all these details dovetail cannot be simply coincidental. But neither can it be intentional, for the details are entirely incidental and offhand. The tomb used for Jesus’ burial is consistently described as an acrosolia or bench tomb. Archaeology confirms that such tombs were used in Jesus’ day but only by wealthy or prominent persons. The tomb is described as having a roll-stone for a door. Again archaeology demonstrates the use of such tombs in Jesus’ day, but only by the rich. John says the tomb was situated in some sort of garden, a fact shown to be consistent with the location of the tombs of notables. At the same time, the different gospel writers mention that Joseph was a prominent Jewish leader, that he was wealthy, and that he owned the tomb in which he laid Jesus. In other words, he is exactly the sort of man who would own a tomb such as that described in the gospels. The gospels also say the tomb was unused, which is plausible in light of Jewish beliefs about defilement. Joseph is said to be a secret disciple, and that makes sense of his placing Jesus’ corpse in his own tomb. It is the interweaving of all those separate and incidental details that makes the historical credibility of Joseph’s burial of Jesus in his tomb so impressive.
f) Jesus was probably buried late on the day of preparation. The day of preparation was Friday, the day before the Jewish Sabbath, on which preparations for the Sabbath were made. According to one Jewish peculiarity of reckoning time, a day began at sundown and ended the next day at sundown. Thus, Luke could record the time of Jesus’ entombment this way: “It was the preparation day, and the Sabbath was about to begin” (Luke 23:54). That indicates that Joseph completed Jesus’ burial at sundown Friday evening. According to John, that year the annual Jewish feast of Passover fell on Saturday (John 19:14). That meant that the weekly Sabbath and Passover coincided that year, so that Saturday was doubly holy (or as John says, “that Sabbath was a high day” [John 19:31]). The fact that in Mark 15:46 Joseph is still able to buy the linen shroud from the dealers shows that the Passover had not yet begun; Mark and John thus agree that Jesus was crucified and buried on the eve of the Passover.
John adds an interesting detail missing in Mark. He records that because of the impending Sabbath-Passover, the Jews asked Pilate to have the legs of those crucified broken. For the same reason Joseph placed the body of Jesus in the tomb in the garden (John 19:31, 42). Why is John so concerned about the fact that the Sabbath was about to begin? According to the Old Testament law a man executed by hanging could not be allowed to remain on the tree overnight (Deuteronomy 21:22-23) because he was accursed by God and would therefore defile the land.10 The Jews applied that principle to crucifixion as well.11 Thus they could not allow Jesus or the thieves to remain on the crosses overnight. So they asked the Romans to break their legs. By having the victims’ legs broken, the Jews could insure that they would not remain on the crosses overnight.
That, however, created a new problem. Although Jewish law permitted burial after nightfall,12 it did not permit burial on a Sabbath. Since the Sabbath-Passover began at sunset, the Jews had to get rid of the bodies before nightfall. It would have been most convenient to dump the bodies in the criminals’ common graveyard. But Joseph chose to give Jesus a proper burial, which was possible apparently because the tomb he owned was near. Thus, according to all the gospels, Joseph finished the burial of Jesus just as evening came.
It is sometimes objected that the time was insufficient for Joseph to request the body, take it down from the cross, buy the shroud, wrap the body, and lay it in the tomb before sunset. Since Jesus died about three o’clock in the afternoon, that meant Joseph had three hours in which to work. Although there was no time to waste, it is not at all obvious that this amount of time was insufficient for the job. After all, when the gospels say Joseph took down Jesus’ body and carried it away, that does not mean he himself climbed the ladder and pulled out the nails. He in fact would probably not have touched the corpse, since then he would have been defiled and could not eat the Passover (Numbers 19:11). As a man of authority, he no doubt had servants to help him. It is noteworthy that Mark 16:6 refers to a plurality of persons: “Here is the place where they laid him.” Servants probably were the ones who actually bought the linen shroud. The burial itself need not have been very elaborate: the hands and feet had to be tied, perhaps the jaw bound, then dry spices, probably fragrant resin and powdered sandalwood to offset the stench of decay, were packed around the body, which was then wrapped in the sheet. According to John, the tomb in which the body was laid was nearby, and all the gospels agree that when Joseph finished, the Sabbath was about to begin. Hence, the pace of events of the burial is quite realistic and bears the marks of authenticity.
The fact that Jesus was buried late on the day of preparation, as all the gospels state, is therefore historically plausible in light of Jewish regulations concerning the handling of executed criminals and the burial procedures described.
g) The observation of the burial by the women is historically probable. According to the gospels, women followers of Jesus witnessed the crucifixion, burial, and empty tomb of Jesus:
Crucifixion
(Mark 15:40)
Burial
(Mark 15:47)
Empty Tomb
(Mark 16:1)
And there were also some women looking on from afar, among whom were Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James the Less and Joses, and Salome.
Mary Magdalene and Mary the mother of Joses were looking on to see where He was laid.
Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James, and Salome, bought spices, at they might come and anoint Him.
It is probable that all three lists of names were part of the source material used by Mark. Mark could not have built the first list out of the other two, since then the phrase, “the Less” (“the younger”) remains unexplained. The second and third lists presuppose both each other and the first list, since Mary the mother of James the younger and of Joses is identified by one son in the second list and by the other in the third list. It is unlikely that the second and third lists were built from the first, however, because then Salome’s absence from the second list would remain unexplained. According to Josef Blinzler in his important study of this problem, all three lists are old and unchanged from Mark’s source material.13
A little reflection shows how plausible this is. If the women were at the crucifixion, it is unlikely that they would not have remained to see the burial. But then the tomb must have been empty, since the grave site was known. On the other hand, if they were at the burial, they must have been at the crucifixion, since they would not show up suddenly for the entombment. And again, the knowledge of the grave site insures the empty tomb. Finally, if they were at the empty tomb, then they must have been at the burial in order to know the tomb’s location. And if they were at the burial they were probably at the crucifixion. Hence, any of the three roles of the women presupposes the other two.
If this is the case, then the historical probability is that the women did witness these events, for it is difficult to see how persons who were well known in the early Christian fellowship could be named as witnesses to events that everyone knew they did not see. After all, people like Mary Magdalene and the other Mary with her two sons were real people or they were not. If they were, then how could they be falsely associated with events they never witnessed in an account that came out of the Christian fellowship of which they themselves were members? If on the other hand they were fictitious characters, then how could they have been invented as witnesses when everyone would know they never existed? The most likely solution is that we have here reliable lists of witnesses to the events in question.