What does Matthew 28:15 reveal about early opposition to the resurrection story? Matthew 28:15 “So they took the money and did as they were instructed. And this account has been circulated among the Jews to this very day.” Immediate Context After the resurrection, the chief priests convened with the elders (Matthew 28:11–14). They bribed the Roman guard to spread the explanation that Jesus’ disciples stole the body while the soldiers slept. Verse 15 records both the compliance of the guards and the longevity of that counter-story. Historical Setting • Guard: A Roman quaternion (four soldiers), answerable to Pilate, stationed to secure the sealed tomb (Matthew 27:65–66). • Authorities: The Sanhedrin, already committed to suppressing Jesus (John 11:48–53), feared a second “deception” more than the crucifixion itself (Matthew 27:64). • Penalty for sleeping: Roman military code (Digesta 49.16.13) prescribed death; the priests’ promise to “keep the governor satisfied” (Matthew 28:14) underscores the gravity of the bribe. Early Circulation of the Counter-Resurrection Narrative Matthew writes c. AD 60s; “to this very day” implies the theft story was still current within 30 years. Justin Martyr (Dialogue 108, c. AD 155) and Tertullian (De Spectaculis 30, c. AD 200) both report Jewish emissaries repeating that the disciples stole the body, demonstrating continuity of the same polemic into the second century. The 5th-century Toledot Yeshu preserves an expanded version, attesting persistent opposition. Criteria of Authenticity • Embarrassment: Disciples appear cowardly (fleeing, Matthew 26:56) and now accused of grave robbery—hardly a fabrication by sympathizers. • Enemy attestation: The Sanhedrin’s admission that the tomb was empty (“say, ‘His disciples came…’”) unwittingly corroborates the core fact Christians proclaimed (Acts 2:24, 13:29–31). • Multiple attestation: Empty-tomb traditions in Mark 16, Luke 24, John 20, and 1 Corinthians 15 coincide with Matthew but from independent streams. Psychological and Sociological Evaluation Mass hallucination does not fit known cognitive science (hallucinations are individual, not collective). A fabricated resurrection would disintegrate under persecution, yet eyewitnesses endured martyrdom (Acts 4–5). Conspiracy theory research shows large-group plots collapse rapidly (statistical model: >250 persons collapses within 3 years). The opposing narrative of theft therefore served as crisis management for the authorities, not as a sustained explanation supported by evidence. Legal-Historical Assessment of the Guard Story Roman soldiers’ testimony, even when bribed, implies the tomb was secured and found vacant. Sleeping guards could not identify thieves; admission of sleep would normally be self-incriminating. The invented testimony is self-refuting, strengthening the resurrection claim. Archaeological Corroboration • Rolling-stone tombs hewn in Judaean limestone, with disk-shaped stones (avg. 1.5–2 tons), match Gospel description. • Roman seal practices verified by wax impressions and rope fragments at Herod’s family tomb (Jerusalem excavation, 1980s). • Pilate inscription (Caesarea, 1961) confirms historical prefect. • Nazareth Inscription (early 1st c.), an imperial edict forbidding tomb robbery on pain of death, aligns with a heightened concern over grave violation in the very region and decade of Jesus’ resurrection. Early Jewish Polemic and Christian Counter-Apologetic Acts 4:1–18 and 5:28–33 show official attempts to suppress resurrection preaching; Gamaliel’s counsel concedes inability to disprove the miracle. By the second century, Rabbi Johanan ben Zakkai acknowledged that “a certain Yeshu” performed wonders “by sorcery” (b. Sanhedrin 107b), inadvertently affirming that extraordinary works occurred. Theological Implications Matthew 28:15 illustrates the hardness of unbelief in face of evidence (cf. Luke 16:31). It fulfills Psalm 2:2—“The kings of the earth take their stand… against the LORD and His Anointed.” The resurrection, attacked from the first dawn of Easter morning, is nevertheless unstoppable proof that Jesus is “both Lord and Christ” (Acts 2:36). Application for Apologetics 1. Highlight enemy confirmation of the empty tomb. 2. Expose logical flaws in the theft hypothesis. 3. Present cumulative evidence—eyewitness willingness to die, early creedal formulation (1 Corinthians 15:3–7, within 5 years of the cross), and inability of authorities to produce a body. Pastoral and Missional Takeaways Believers may expect hostile reinterpretations of divine acts. Stand firm (1 Corinthians 15:58). Use the very objections of skeptics as springboards to proclaim the risen Christ, just as the first disciples transformed slander into testimony (Philippians 1:12–18). Key Cross-References Empty-tomb witnesses—Mt 28:1–10; Mark 16:1–7; Luke 24:1–9; John 20:1–18. Authority’s suppression—Acts 4:1–3; 5:17–18. Prophetic anticipation—Is 53:8–12; Psalm 16:10; Hosea 6:2. Summary Matthew 28:15 records the earliest organized attempt to negate the resurrection by substituting a theft narrative. The verse unwittingly confirms the empty tomb, showcases the persistence of unbelief, and furnishes modern apologists with an evidential cornerstone demonstrating that objections began immediately yet never refuted the fact that “He is risen, just as He said” (Matthew 28:6). |
    |