What does Matthew 28:14 reveal about the early opposition to the resurrection? Text and Immediate Context Matthew 28:14 : “And if this report reaches the governor, we will satisfy him and keep you out of trouble.” The verse sits inside verses 11–15, where the chief priests bribe the Roman guards to spread the story that Jesus’ disciples stole His body while the soldiers slept. The promise in v. 14 shows the priests’ resolve to shield the guards from Pilate’s discipline—an admission that the guards’ truthful testimony would support the resurrection. Historical Setting: Temple Elite, Roman Guards, and Pilate Jewish leaders (ἀρχιερεῖς, “chief priests”) controlled Temple affairs and held political sway with Pilate (cf. John 19:12). Roman discipline for sleeping on duty could be death (Dio Cassius, Roman History 69.24). Offering protection implies real risk, highlighting the gravity of the events these guards witnessed. Nature of the Opposition: Acknowledgment of an Empty Tomb The priests never dispute the tomb’s emptiness. By manufacturing a theft explanation they tacitly concede: 1. Jesus was buried in a known, accessible tomb (cf. Matthew 27:57-61). 2. The body was missing less than three days later. 3. Guards saw phenomena they could not refute (28:2-4). Even hostile parties, therefore, contribute hostile-supportive testimony—corroborating the central fact of an empty tomb (cf. Habermas & Licona, The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus, pp. 65-77). Tactics Employed: Bribery, Propaganda, Political Shield • Financial inducement (28:12) shows desperation to alter the narrative. • Controlled messaging: “Tell them…” (28:13) reveals deliberate propaganda. • Political leverage: priests assume they can “satisfy” Pilate, exposing their influence network. The strategy mirrors later attempts to discredit the resurrection by offering alternate stories (e.g., “swoon,” “hallucination,” or “mythic embellishment”). Early Spread of the ‘Stolen Body’ Theory Justin Martyr (Dialogue 108, c. A.D. 155) records Jewish leaders sending emissaries across the Mediterranean claiming the disciples stole the body. Tertullian (De Spectaculis 30, c. A.D. 200) and Augustine (Tractate on John 120.5, c. A.D. 420) mention the same polemic. The Toledot Yeshu (medieval but preserving older tradition) also repeats it. Matthew 28:14 thus documents the fountainhead of a rumor that persisted for centuries. Archaeological Corroboration The Nazareth Inscription (1st century imperial edict threatening capital punishment for tomb-robbery) may reflect concerns stirred in the empire by reports of Jesus’ missing body—showing how quickly resurrection claims affected imperial policy. Contrast with Apostolic Eyewitness Chain Paul’s creed (1 Corinthians 15:3-7) predates Matthew and affirms over 500 witnesses. Luke’s “many proofs” (Acts 1:3) and John’s emphasis on physicality (John 20:27) stand opposite the theft story. Opponents produced no corpse, while believers produced living eyewitnesses. Summary Matthew 28:14 reveals an organized, well-funded, politically connected effort to bury the resurrection by bribery and propaganda. It confirms the empty tomb, documents the genesis of the stolen-body theory, and unintentionally strengthens the credibility of the resurrection by displaying the opponents’ inability to produce contrary evidence. |
    |