Pearson Edexcel Level 3 Advanced GCE in Religious Studies – Anthology
93
3 That the body was removed by the Jewish authorities to prevent the possible
veneration of the tomb.
4 That life was not really extinc t, and that Jesus rec overed in the c ool of the
grave.
5 That the women mistook the grave in the unc ertain light.6 That the grave was not visited at all and that the story about the women was
a l at er ac c ret ion.
T his is a very wide field of presupposit ions and, so far as I know, inc ludes
every serious alternative to the Gospel thesis which has been put forward. Let us
look at them in turn for a few moments.
1 That Joseph of Arimathea removed the Body.
At first sight the suggestion that the man who, by universal c onsent, begged
the body of Jesus from the Roman Proc urator, might himself have removed it for
private reasons to another place, is one which seems to carry considerable weight.
The inferences drawn by a number of writers from the rather slender details given
in the Gospels are that the tomb was probably purc hased by Joseph for his own
use, that its proximity to the scene of the Crucifixion suggested its temporary
employment during the Sabbath, and that at the earliest possible moment Joseph
would wish to remove the remains to a more permanent resting-plac e. All t his is
very understandable and, if the theory stood alone, it would present a quite
remarkable and c onvinc ing aspec t of self-c onsistenc y and strength. But we c annot
leave a serious historic al hypothesis in this state. It has to be worked out and
superimposed upon the situation whic h it attempts to explain. The far, as well as
the near consequences have to be explored and by its power to satisfy the whole of
t hese c ondit ions it must finally be judged.
Now a closer examination of this hypothesis reveals certain weaknesses and
inc onsist enc ies whic h affec t it s probabilit y very gravely. In t he first plac e t he hour
required for this suppositious removal (necessarily between the close of the
Sabbath and the first sign of dawn) is in itself a rather strange time for a respec ted
leader of the people to choose for a perfectly legitimate operation which could have
been performed much better and more expeditiously at the break of day. It should
never be forgotten that upon this theory Joseph of Arimathea and the little party of
women were independently and quite unknown to eac h other planning to perform a
servic e whic h would bring them to the tomb at the earliest possible moment
c onsistent with the observanc e of the Sabbath. Having regard to the diffic ulties
presented by the darkness that moment was unquestionably the break of day.
Theoretically, therefore, Mary Magdalene and her friends upon reaching the tomb
ought to have c ome upon the party of Joseph already at work.
There is no trace, however, of this dramatic meeting taking place. We are
compelled, therefore, to put the supposed removal further back into the night. We
have to think of a party of men operating with lamps or torc hes, working under the
maximum diffic ulties, pic king their way through the unlighted regions beyond the
city wall, carrying a heavy body, probably for some considerable distance, and
depositing it in another grave. We have to think of them going to the trouble of
removing all t he grave-c lothes first, leaving these in the tomb and removing the