THE RESURRECTION
OF JESUS
Chapter
20
You Can't
Keep a "Good Man" Down
And Jesus said to him, "Why do you call me good? No one is good except God alone" (Luke 18:19).
|
A |
student at
the University of Uruguay said to me, "Professor McDowell, why can't you
refute Christianity?"
I
answered, "For a very simple reason-the resurrection of Jesus
Christ."
After more than 700 hours of studying this subject and thoroughly investigating its foundation, I came to the conclusion that the resurrection of Jesus Christ is either one of the most wicked, vicious, heartless hoaxes ever foisted upon people, or it is the most important fact of history.
The
resurrection issue takes the question, "Is Christianity valid?" out
of the realm of philosophy and makes it a question of history. Does
Christianity have a historically acceptable basis? Is sufficient evidence
available to warrant belief in the resurrection?
Obvious Observations
In my attempt to refute Christianity, I made five acute observations of the resurrection that I previously had been totally unaware of.
OBSERVATION #1-Testimony of History
Before my research, I had never realized there was so much positive historical, literary and legal testimony supporting its validity.
ROMAN HISTORY SCHOLAR
Professor Thomas Arnold, for fourteen years the
headmaster of Rugby, author of the three-volume History of Rome, and holder of the chair of modern history at Oxford, was
well acquainted with the value of evidence in determining historical facts.
This great scholar said,
I have been used for many years to
study the histories of other times, and to examine and weigh the evidence of
those who have written about them, and I know of no one fact in the history of
mankind which is proved by better and fuller evidence of every sort, to the
understanding of a fair inquirer, than the great sign which God hath given us
that Christ died and rose again from the dead. 3/324
TEXTUAL CRITIC
Brooke Foss Wescott, English
scholar, said, "Taking all the evidence together, it is not too much to
say that there is no historic incident better or more variously supported than
the resurrection of Christ." 82/4-6
PROFESSOR OF ANCIENT HISTORY
Dr. Paul L. Maier, professor of ancient
history at Western Michigan University, concluded that, "If all the
evidence is weighed carefully and fairly, it is indeed justifiable, according
to the canons of historical research, to conclude that the tomb in which Jesus
was buried was actually empty on the morning of the first Easter. And no shred
of evidence has yet been discovered in literary sources, epigraphy or
archaeology that would disprove this statement." 56/A-10
CHIEF JUSTICE
Lord Caldecote, Lord Chief Justice of England, has written:
My faith began with and was grounded on what I thought was
revealed in the Bible. When, particularly, I came to the New Testament, the
Gospels and other writings of the men who had been friends of Jesus Christ
seemed to me to make an overwhelming case, merely as a matter of strict
evidence, for the fact therein stated ... The same approach to the cardinal
test of the claims of Jesus Christ, namely, His resurrection, has led me, as
often as I have tried to examine the evidence, to believe it as fact beyond
dispute.
LEGAL AUTHORITY
One man who was highly skilled at dealing with
evidence was Dr. Simon Greenleaf. He was the famous Royall Professor of Law at
Harvard University and succeeded Justice Joseph Story as the Dane Professor of
Law in the same university. The rise of Harvard Law School to its eminent
position among the legal schools of the United States is to be ascribed to the
efforts of these two men. Greenleaf produced his famous three-volume work, A Treatise on the Law of Evidence, which
still is considered one of the greatest single authorities on this subject in
the entire literature of legal procedure.
Greenleaf examined the value of the historical
evidence for the resurrection of Jesus Christ to ascertain the truth. He
applied the principles contained in his three-volume treatise on evidence. His
findings were recorded in his book, An
Examination of the Testimony of the Four Evangelists by the Rules of Evidence
Administered in the Courts of Justice.
Greenleaf came to the conclusion that, according to
the laws of legal evidence used in courts of law, there is more evidence for
the historical fact of the resurrection of Jesus Christ than for just about any
other event in history.
RATIONALISTIC LAWYER
Dr. Frank Morrison, a lawyer who had been brought up in a rationalistic environment, had come to the opinion that the resurrection was nothing but a fairy-tale happy ending which spoiled the matchless story of Jesus. He felt that he owed it to himself, and to others, to write a book that would present the truth about Jesus and dispel the myth of the resurrection.
Upon studying the facts, however, he, too, came to a
different conclusion. The sheer weight of the evidence compelled him to conclude
that Jesus actually did rise from the dead. Morrison wrote his book-but not the
one he had planned. It is titled, Who Moved
the Stone? The first chapter, very significantly, is called, "The Book
That Refused to Be Written."
LITERARY GENIUS
The
literary scholar, C. S. Lewis, former professor of Medieval and Renaissance
literature at Cambridge University, when writing about his conversion to
Christianity, indicated that he had believed Christians "to be
wrong."
The last thing Lewis wanted was to embrace
Christianity. However, "Early in 1926 the hardest boiled of all atheists I
ever knew sat in my room on the other side of the fire and remarked that the
evidence for the historicity of the Gospels was really surprisingly good. 'Rum
thing,' he went on. 'All that stuff of Frazer's about the Dying God. Rum thing.
It almost looks as if it had really happened once.'
"To understand the shattering impact of it, you
would need to know the man (who has certainly never since shown any interest in
Christianity). If he, the cynic of cynics, the toughest of the toughs, were not
-as I would still have put it -'safe,' where could I turn? Was there then no
escape?"
After evaluating the basis and evidence for
Christianity, Lewis concluded that in other religions there was "no such
historical claim as in Christianity." His knowledge of literature forced
him to treat the Gospel record as a trustworthy account. "I was by now too
experienced in literary criticism to regard the Gospels as myth."
Finally, contrary to his strong stand against
Christianity, Professor Lewis had to make an intelligent decision:
"You must picture me alone in that room in
Magdelen, night after night, feeling, whenever my mind lifted even for a second
from my work, the steady, unrelenting approach of Him whom I so earnestly
desired not to meet. That which I greatly feared had at last come upon me. In
the Trinity Term of 1929 1 gave in, and admitted that God was God, and knelt
and prayed: perhaps, that night, the most dejected and reluctant convert in all
England." 52/211, 215, 223
OBSERVATION #2-Resurrection Foretold
Christ actually predicted He would rise on the third
day. His claims are substantiated throughout the four Gospels. When Jesus was going
up to Jerusalem, He took the twelve disciples aside and said to them, "We
are going up to Jerusalem. And the Son of Man will be delivered to death. They
will deliver Him to the Gentiles to mock, and to scourge, and to crucify Him.
And on the third day He will be raised up" (Matthew 16:21; Mark 8:31; Luke
9:22).
Mark points out in his Gospel that "He began to
teach them that the Son of Man must suffer many things, and be rejected by the
elders, and the chief priests, and the scribes, and be killed, and after three
days rise again" (Mark 8:31).
John confirms this when he writes: "Jesus
answered and said to them, 'Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise
it up.' The Jews therefore said, 'It took forty-six years to build this Temple,
and will You raise it up in three days?' But He was speaking of the temple of
His body" (John 2:19-21).
OBSERVATION #3-Basis of Christianity
The historical fact of the resurrection is the very
basis for the truth of Christianity. To put it simply, the resurrection of
Jesus Christ and Christianity stand or fall together. One cannot be true
without the other.
The apostle Paul emphasized this point when he
wrote:
But if there is no
resurrection of the dead, not even
Christ has been raised; and if Christ has not been raised, then our preaching
is in vain; your faith also is in vain. Moreover we are even found to be false
witnesses of God, because we witnessed against God that He raised Christ, whom
He did not raise, if in fact the dead are not raised. For if the dead are not
raised, not even Christ has been raised; and if Christ has not been raised,
your faith is worthless (1 Corinthians 15:13-17).
OBSERVATION #4-Intelligent Faith
My fourth observation on Christianity was quite an
eye-opener. The more I studied the historical/biblical Christian faith the more
I realized it was an "intelligent faith." When an individual in the
Scriptures was called upon to exercise faith, it was to be that intelligent
faith. Jesus said, "You shall know the truth [not ignore it] and the truth
shall make you free" (John 8:32).
A lawyer asked Jesus, "Which is the greatest
commandment?"
Jesus replied, " [To] love the Lord your God
with all your heart ... and with all your mind" (Matthew 22:37).
Never is an individual called upon to commit
intellectual suicide in trusting Christ as Savior and Lord. Instead, a believer
is instructed to be ready always to give an answer (an intelligent one) as to
why he believes (1 Peter 3:15).
In his work, I Believe
in the Resurrection, Dr. George Eldon Ladd observes that faith does not
mean a leap in the dark, an irrational credulity, a believing against evidences
and against reason. It means believing in the light of historical facts,
consistent with evidences, on the basis of witnesses.
OBSERVATION #5-Historical Criteria
The resurrection of Christ must be examined by the
same criteria as is any other past event in history. The faith of the early
church was founded on experiences in the factual realm. For example, the
followers of Christ said He showed Himself alive to them by "many
convincing proofs" (Acts 1:3). Luke used the word tekmerion. That connotes a "demonstrable proof."
It became apparent to me that my research would have
to include the historical criteria for truth if I were to discover what really
happened that first Easter.
Sufficient Evidence Needed
Wolfhart Pannenberg is a professor of systematic
theology at the University of Munich, Germany. He has been concerned primarily
with questions of the relationship between faith and history. This brilliant
scholar says, "Whether the resurrection of Jesus took place or not is an
historical question, and ... at this point is inescapable. And so the question
has to be decided on the level of historical
argument."
The evidence must be approached with an honest, fair
view of history and the investigation must not be
prejudiced by preconceived notions or conclusions. There is a compelling need to let the evidence speak for itself.
Historian Ronald Sider writes about the need for objectivity in historical
research:
What does the critical historian
do when his evidence points very strongly to the reality of an event, which
contradicts his expectations and goes against the naturalistic view of reality?
I submit that he must follow his critically analyzed sources. It is
unscientific to begin with the philosophical presupposition that miracles
cannot occur. Unless we avoid such one-sided presuppositions, historical
interpretation becomes mere propaganda. We have a right to demand good evidence
for an alleged event, which we have not experienced, but we dare not judge
reality by our limited experience. And I would suggest that we have good
evidence for the resurrection of Jesus of Nazareth.
Proper Approach
The Erlangen historian Ethelbert Stauffer gives
further suggestions on how to approach history:
What do we (as historians) do when
we experience surprises which run counter to all our expectations, perhaps all
our convictions and even our period's whole understanding of truth? We say as one
great historian used to say in such instances: "It is surely
possible." And why not? For the critical historian nothing is impossible.
72/17
Historian Philip Schaff adds to the above: "The
purpose of the historian is not to
construct a history from preconceived notions and to adjust it to his own
liking, but to reproduce it from the best evidences and to let it speak for
itself."
The ultimate test historically concerning the
resurrection is whether the purported
facts are supported by the evidence.
Security Precautions
SECURITY PRECAUTION #1-The Trial
Jesus was brought for trial before the Roman
governor, Pontius Pilate. All available evidence shows Pilate to have been an
extremely cruel and merciless despot. Philo records that he was responsible
"for countless atrocities and numerous executions without any previous
trial."
Six Trials
One needs to realize that Jesus Christ went through
six distinct trials. One was before Annas, the high priest (John 18:13), another
was before Caiaphas (Matthew 26:57), the third before the Sanhedrin (Matthew
26:59), the fourth before Pilate (Matthew 27:2), the fifth before Herod (Luke
23:7), and the sixth was back before Pilate (Luke 23:11-25). There were three
Jewish trials and three Roman trials.
The Jewish legal system was made up of two different
Sanhedrins. One Sanhedrin was composed of 23 members who tried cases involving
capital punishment. 86/335 The
other Sanhedrin of 71 could serve as a trial court for cases involving the head
of state, the high priest, or for offenses against the state or the Temple. The
Sanhedrin of 71 could not try a case involving capital punishment. It was
probably the Sanhedrin of 23 that tried Jesus.
One
was located in every major city in Judea.
Finally after three Jewish trials and three Roman
trials, the Jewish authorities, in conjunction with the Roman authorities,
delivered Jesus to be crucified (Matthew 27:26).
Various "security precautions" were taken
to make sure that when Jesus was dead He would remain dead and buried.
SECURITY PRECAUTION #2-Death by Crucifixion
Alexander the Great introduced crucifixion into the
Mediterranean world-mainly Egypt and Carthage. From all indications, the Romans
learned the practice from the Carthaginians.
A Cruel Death
Death by crucifixion developed into one of the
world's most disgraceful and cruel methods of torture. Cicero called it
"the most cruel and hideous of tortures." 15/64 Will Durant wrote that
"even the Romans ... pitied the victims." 21/572
Flavius Josephus, the Jewish historian, who was an
advisor to Titus during the siege of Jerusalem, had observed many crucifixions
and called them "the most wretched deaths."
The Custom of Whipping
After the verdict of crucifixion was pronounced by
the court, it was customary to tie the accused to a post at the tribunal. The
criminal was stripped of his clothes, then severely whipped by the lictors or
scourgers.
The whip, known as a flagrum, had a sturdy handle to
which were attached long leather thongs of varying lengths. Sharp, jagged
pieces of bone and lead were woven into them. The Jews were limited by their
law to 40 lashes. The Pharisees, with their emphasis on strict adherence to the
law, would limit their lashes to 39, so that if they miscounted they would not
break their law. The Romans had no such limitations. Out of disgust or anger,
the Romans could totally ignore the Jewish limitation, and probably did so in
the case of Jesus.
A Medical Perspective
Dr. C. Truman Davis, a medical doctor who has meticulously studied crucifixion from a medical perspective, describes the effects of the Roman flagrum used in whipping:
The heavy whip is brought down with full force
again and again across [a persons] shoulders, back and legs. At first the heavy
thongs cut through the skin only. Then, as the blows continue, they cut deeper
into the subcutaneous tissues, producing first an oozing of blood from the
capillaries and veins of the skin, and finally spurting arterial bleeding from
vessels in the underlying muscles. The small balls of lead first produce large,
deep bruises, which are broken open by subsequent blows. Finally the skin of
the back is hanging in long ribbons and the entire area is an unrecognizable
mass of torn, bleeding tissue. When it is determined by the centurion in charge
that the prisoner is near death, the beating is finally stopped.
Eusebius, a third-century historian, confirms Dr. Davis's description when he writes: "The sufferer's veins were laid bare, and the very muscles, sinews, and bowels of the victim were open to exposure."
A Crown of Thorns
After placing the crown of thorns on Christ's head,
they began to mock Him saying, "Hail, the King of the Jews." They
also spit on Him and beat Him with a rod. Then they led Him away to be
crucified.
The Crossbar Burden
A man condemned to be crucified had to carry his own crossbar from prison to the place of his execution.
Dr. Pierre Barbet points out that "they began
to use a long piece of wood, which was used for barring doors and was called
the patibulum (from patere, to be open)."
The patibulum weighed approximately 110 pounds and was strapped to the
victim's shoulders.
Crucifixion With Nails
Upon reaching the execution site, the condemned
person was nailed or bound by ropes to the cross. Many have questioned the
historical accuracy of the nailing of the hands and feet. The reason for this
skepticism is that there has been almost zero evidence of it in history.
Dr. J. W. Hewitt, in his Harvard Theological Review article entitled, "The Use of Nails
in the Crucifixion," said, "To sum up, there is astonishingly little
evidence that the feet of a crucified person were ever pierced by nails."
39/29-45 He went on to say that the victim's hands and feet were bound by ropes
to the cross.
For years Dr. Hewitt's statement was quoted as the
final word. The conclusion, therefore, was that the New Testament account of
Christ being nailed to the cross was false and misleading. Crucifixion by use
of nails was considered legendary. It was believed that nails would have ripped
the flesh and could not have supported a body on the cross.
A Dead Man Speaks
Then, a revolutionary archaeological discovery was
made in June 1968. Archeologist V. Tzaferis, under the direction of the Israeli
Department of Antiquities and Museums, discovered four cave-tombs at the site
of Gav'at ha-mivtar (Ras el-Masaref) just north of Jerusalem near Mt. Scopus.
In Ossuary 4 of Tomb I, inscribed with the name
Yohanan Ben Ha'galgal, were found the bones of an adult male and of a child. A
large 7-inch spike had been driven through the heel bone, and both legs had
been fractured. Haas reported: "Both the heel bones were found transfixed
by a large iron nail. The shins were found intentionally broken. Death caused
by crucifixion." 34/39
The bones in Ossuary 4 confirm another passage in
the New Testament:
The soldiers therefore came,
and broke the legs of the first man, and of the man who was crucified with Him;
but coming to Jesus, when they saw that He was already dead, they did not break
His legs (John 19:32,33).
Purpose for Breaking the Legs
To understand why the legs were broken, one must
study the means of execution. The soldiers would feel for the depression at the
front of the wrist, then drive the heavy wrought-iron spike through at that
point. Next, the legs were placed together and a large nail was driven through
them. The knees were left moderately flexed, and a seat (known as a sedecula) was attached to the cross for
the buttocks of the victim.
Dr. Truman Davis, the M.D. whom I quoted before,
describes what happens to the human body after a short time of exposure on the
cross:
As the arms fatigue, great waves of cramps sweep
over the muscles, knotting them in deep, relentless, throbbing pain. With these
cramps comes the inability to push Himself upward. Hanging by His arms, the
pectoral muscles are paralyzed and the intercostal muscles are unable to act.
Air can be drawn into the lungs, but cannot be exhaled. Jesus fights to raise
Himself in order to get even one short breath. Finally, carbon dioxide builds
up in the lungs and in the bloodstream and the cramps partially subside.
Spasmodically, He is able to push Himself upward to exhale and bring in the
life-giving oxygen.
After a while, orthostatic collapse through
insufficient blood circulating to the brain and heart would follow. The only
way the victim could avoid this was to push up by his feet so the blood could be
returned to some degree of circulation in the upper part of his body.
When the authorities wanted to hasten death or
terminate the torture, the victim's legs were broken below the knees with a
club. This prevented him from pushing himself upward to relieve the tension on
the pectoral or chest muscles. Either rapid suffocation or coronary
insufficiency followed. In the case of Christ, the legs of the two thieves
crucified with Him were broken, but Christ's were not because the executioners
observed He already was dead.
Spilling of Blood and Water
One of the executioners thrust a spear into Christ's side, and, as recorded in John 19:34, "Immediately there came out blood and water."
Davis relates that there was "an escape of watery fluid from the sac surrounding the heart. We, therefore, have rather conclusive post-mortem. Evidence that [Christ] died, not the usual crucifixion death by suffocation, but of heart failure due to shock and constriction of the heart by fluid in the pericardium." 181186
A Job Well Done
Pilate required certification of Christ's death before the body could be turned over to Joseph of Arimathea. 21/573 He consented to Christ's being removed from the cross only after four executioners had certified His death.
The efficiency of execution by crucifixion was quite well-known in the time of Christ. Dr. Paul L. Maier, professor of ancient history at Western Michigan University, writes,
True, there is a recorded instance of a victim
being taken down from a cross and surviving. The Jewish historian Josephus, who
had gone over to the Roman side in the rebellion of A.D. 66, discovered three
of his friends being crucified. He asked the Roman general Titus to reprieve
them, and they were immediately removed from their crosses.
Still, two of the three died anyway, even though
they apparently had been crucified only a short time. In Jesus' case, however,
there were the additional complications of scourging and exhaustion, to say
nothing of the great spear thrust that pierced His rib cage and probably
ruptured His pericardium. Romans were grimly efficient about crucifixions:
Victims did not escape with their lives.
SECURITY PRECAUTION #3-Solid Rock Tomb
The body of Christ was placed in a new tomb, hewn out
of a solid rock, in a private burial area. Jewish tombs usually had an entrance
4-112 to 5 feet high.
SECURITY PRECAUTION #4-Jewish Burial
The New Testament is very clear that the burial of
Christ followed the customs of the Jews.
In preparing a body for burial, the Jews would place
it on a stone table in the burial chamber. The body first would be washed with
warm water.
It was the custom, as verified in the New Testament,
to prepare the corpse (after cleansing) with various types of aromatic spices.
In the case of Christ's burial, 75 pounds of spices
were used. One might regard this as substantial, but it was no great amount for
a leader. For example, Gamaliel, grandson of the distinguished Jewish scholar
Hillel, also was a contemporary of Jesus. Saul of Tarsus studied under him.
When Gameliel died, 86 pounds of spices were used in his burial. Josephus, the
Jewish historian, records that when Herod died, it required 500 servants to
carry the spices for his body. 43 So the 75 pounds for Jesus was not at all
unusual.
After all the members of the body were straightened,
the corpse was clothed in grave vestments made out of white linen. There could
not be the slightest ornamentation or stain on the cloth. 5/261 The grave
linens were sewn together by women. No knots were permitted. For some this was
to indicate that the mind of the dead was "disentangled of the cares of
this life" 5/261-to others, it indicated the continuity of the soul
through eternity. No individual could be buried in fewer than three separate
garments.
At this point, the aromatic spices, composed of a fragrant wood pounded into a dust known as aloes, were mixed with a gummy substance known as myrrh. Starting at the feet, they would wrap to the armpits, put the arms down, then wrap to the neck. A separate piece was wrapped around the head. I would estimate an encasement weighing a total of between 92 and 95 pounds. John Chrysostom, in the fourth century A.D., commented that "the myrrh used was a drug which adheres so closely to the body that the graveclothes could not easily be removed."
SECURITY PRECAUTION #5-Very Large Stone
Matthew records in his writings that a large stone
was rolled against the front of the tomb (Matthew 27:60). Mark said the stone
was extremely large (Mark 16:1-4). In today's language, he would have said,
"Wow! Get a loada' that rock!"
Just how large was that "Wow, get a loada' that
rock" stone?
In the Mark 16:4 portion of the Bezae manuscripts in
the Cambridge Library in England, a parenthetical statement was found that
adds, "And when He was laid there, he (Joseph) put against the tomb a
stone which 20 men could not roll
away."
The significance of this statement is realized when
one considers the rules for transcribing manuscripts. It was the custom that if
a copier was emphasizing his own interpretation, he would write his thought in
the margin and not include it within the text. One might conclude, therefore,
that the insert in the text was copied from a text even closer to the time of
Christ, perhaps, a first-century manuscript. The phrase, then, could have been
recorded by an eyewitness who was impressed with the enormity of the stone,
which was rolled against Jesus' sepulcher.
One and a Half to Two Tons
After my lecture at Georgia Tech, two engineering professors
went on a tour of Israel with other Georgia Tech faculty members. They
remembered the comments I had made about the large size of the stone. So, being
engineers, they considered the type of stone used in the time of Christ and
calculated the size needed to roll against a 4-1/2 to 5-foot doorway.
Later, they wrote me a letter containing all the
technical terms, but they put their conclusions in simple language on the back
of it.
They said a stone of that size would have to have
had a minimum weight of 1-1/2 to 2 tons. No wonder Matthew and Mark said the
stone was extremely large.
One might ask, "If the stone were that big, how
did Joseph move it into position in the first place?" He simply gave it a
push and let gravity do the rest. It had been held in place with a wedge as it
sat in a groove or trench that sloped down to the front of the tomb. When the
wedge was removed, the heavy circular rock just rolled into position.
SECURITY PRECAUTION #6-Roman Security
Jewish officials panicked, because thousands were
turning to Christ. To avoid a political problem, it was to the advantage of
both the Romans and the Jews to make sure Jesus was put away for good.
So the chief priests and Pharisees gathered together
and said to Pilate, "Sir, we remember that when He was still alive that
deceiver said, 'After three days I am to rise again.' Therefore, give orders
for the grave to be made secure until the third day, lest the disciples come
and steal Him away and say to the people, 'He has risen from the dead,' and the
last deception will be worse than the first" (Matthew 27:63).
Pilate said to them, "You have a guard; go,
make it as secure as you know how." And so "they went and made the
grave secure, and along with the guard they set a seal on the stone"
(verse 65).
Some people would argue that Pilate said,
"Look, you have your Temple police. You take your Temple police, and go
make it secure."
The Temple Police
Now, if you want to say it's a Temple guard, you need to realize who made up that guard. It consisted of a group of 10 Levites who were placed on duty at different places at the Temple. The total number of men on duty was 270. This represented 27 units of 10 each. The military discipline of the Temple guard was quite good. In fact, at night, if the captain approached a guard member who was asleep, he was beaten and burned with his own clothes. A member of the guard also was forbidden to sit down or lean against something when he was on duty.
A Roman Guard
However, I am convinced it was the Roman guard that
was placed at the grave of Christ to secure it.
A. T. Robertson, noted Greek scholar, says this
phrase is in the present imperative and can refer only to a Roman guard, and
not the Temple police. According to him, Pilate literally said, "Have a
guard."
Robertson adds that the Latin form koustodia occurs as far back as the
Oxyrhynchus papyrus in reference to the Roman guard. The Jews knew Pilate
wanted to keep the peace, so they were sure he'd give them what they wanted.
What was the Roman guard?
A Roman "custodian" did a lot more than
care for a building. The word "custodian" represented the guard unit
of the Roman Legion. This unit was probably one of the greatest offensive and
defensive fighting machines ever conceived.
One helpful source for understanding the importance
of the Roman guard is Flavius Vegitius Renatus. His friends called him
Vegitius. A military historian, he lived several hundred years after the time
of Christ when the Roman army started to deteriorate in its discipline. He
wrote a manual to the Roman Emperor Valentinian to encourage him to instill the
methods of offensive and defensive warfare used by the Romans during the time
of Christ. Called The Military Institutes
of the Romans, it is a classic today.
Vegitius wanted to see the Roman armies restored to
the efficiency and might, which characterized them at the time of Christ. These
armies were great because they were highly disciplined. He wrote, "Victory
in war does not depend entirely upon numbers or mere courage; only skill and
discipline will insure it. We find that the Romans owed ... the conquest of the
world to no other cause than continual military training, exact observation of
discipline in their camps and unwearied cultivation of the other arts of
war."
There are two other excellent sources. At Indiana
University, Dr. George Currie did his doctoral dissertation on the Roman
custodian, and Dr. Smith edited a dictionary entitled, Dictionary of Greek and Roman Antiquities.
The Force of the Roman Guard
These and other sources point out that the Roman
guard was not a one-, two-, or three-man force. Supercilious pictures of the
tomb of Jesus Christ show one or two men standing around with wooden spears and
mini-skirts. That's really laughable.
A Roman guard unit was a 4- to 16-man security
force. Each man was trained to protect six feet of ground. The 16 men in a
square of 4 on each side were supposed to be able to protect 36 yards against
an entire battalion and hold it.
Normally what they did was this: 4 men were placed
immediately in front of what they were to protect. The other 12 were asleep in
a semi-circle in front of them with their heads pointing in. To steal what
these guards were protecting, thieves would first have to walk over those who
were asleep. Every four hours, another unit of 4 was awakened, and those who
had been awake went to sleep.
They would rotate this way around the clock.
Historian Dr. Paul Maier. writes, "Peter would
be guarded by four squads of four men each when imprisoned by Herod Agrippa
(Acts 12), so sixteen would be a minimum number expected outside a prison. Guards in ancient times always slept in shifts,
so it would have been virtually impossible for a raiding party to have stepped
over all their sleeping faces" without waking them.
High Priest Offers Bribe
Even Matthew records that it was a multi-man force
when he wrote that "some of the
guard came into the city and reported to the chief priests all that had
happened" (Matthew 28:11).
A critic at this point might say, "See, they
came to the high priest. It shows that they were the Temple guard." The
context is clear, however, that they came to the high priest because he had
influence with the Roman authority and because it was the only possible way to
save their necks. The high priest tried to bribe them (which would have been a
mockery if they had been Temple police). He gave them money and told them what
to tell the people. When the news reached Pilate, the high priest said he would
keep them from being killed. Normally, they would receive the death penalty,
because the story was to be that they had fallen asleep while guarding the
tomb.
It is significant that the governor had to be satisfied,
because I have not been able to find any account in history- secular, Jewish or
Christian -indicating that the Roman governor had anything at all to do with
the Temple police.
Even if the guard at the tomb had been made up of
Temple police, the security would have been no less thorough.
A Fighting Machine
T. G. Tucker, in his book, Life in the Roman World of Nero and St. Paul describes one of these
Roman guards:
Over his breast, and with flaps over the shoulders,
he will wear a corset of leather covered with hoop-like layers, or maybe
scales, of iron or bronze. On his head will be a plain pot-like helmet, or
skull-cap, of iron.
In his right hand he will carry the famous Roman
pike. This is a stout weapon, over 6 feet in length, consisting of a sharp iron
head fixed in a wooden shaft, and the soldier may either charge with it as a
bayonet, or he may hurl it like a javelin and then fight at close quarters with
his sword.
On the left arm is a shield, which may be of various
shapes. The shield is not only carried by means of a handle, but may be
supported by a belt over the right shoulder. In order to be out of the way of
the shield, the sword -a thrusting rather than a slashing weapon, approaching 3
feet in length- is hung at the right side by a belt passing over the left
shoulder .... On the left side, the soldier wears a dagger at his girdle.
Polybius, the Greek historian of the second century B.C., records