Who wrote it—and when?
Authorship. Matthew is traditionally connected with the apostle Matthew, but the Gospel does not name its author. Most modern scholars think it was written after Mark, often around 80–90 CE, by an unknown Greek-speaking author or group. In this verse, an angel tells women that Jesus is no longer in the tomb because he has been raised.
Approximate writing date. Usually dated around 80–90 CE; broader estimates range from the 70s to the 90s.
Date of the events depicted. Matthew places the event on the morning after the Sabbath that followed Jesus's execution. Historians usually date the execution to about 29–34 CE, often to 30 or 33 CE.
The event and the writing did not happen at the same time. This page keeps those dates separate.
What Was Happening?
The story is set in Roman-ruled Judea during the governorship of Pontius Pilate, usually dated about 26–36/37 CE. Jesus's execution is commonly placed during Passover in Jerusalem, but historians cannot establish the exact date with confidence.
Passover brought many people to Jerusalem while the Temple was still standing. The festival included worship, sacrifice, religious hopes, and political concern. Roman authorities had reason to watch large gatherings and possible unrest.
Matthew's story reflects Jewish ideas from the Second Temple period about the Sabbath, burial, tombs, resurrection, and the fulfillment of Scripture. Jewish groups disagreed about resurrection. Matthew presents Jesus's resurrection as connected with Jesus's own predictions and Israel's Scriptures.
The general setting is historically recognizable. However, surviving contemporary Roman or Jewish records do not independently confirm Matthew's reports of the earthquake, angel, guards, empty tomb, or resurrection.
Read the Evidence
Original Koine Greek
οὐκ ἔστιν ὧδε, ἠγέρθη γὰρ καθὼς εἶπεν· δεῦτε ἴδετε τὸν τόπον ὅπου ἔκειτο.
ouk estin hōde, ēgerthē gar kathōs eipen; deute idete ton topon hopou ekeito.
Key words in plain English
How the Text Reached Us
Text difference worth noting
The main difference is between “where he lay” and “where the Lord lay.” Important early witnesses, including Vaticanus and Sinaiticus, support the shorter wording. It appears in SBLGNT and NA28. Many later manuscripts and the Textus Receptus support the longer wording used by the KJV. The difference is minor: the longer wording gives Jesus the title “Lord,” but it does not change the main announcement that he was raised. Other nearby differences concern story details and do not remove the resurrection announcement.
The Story Around the Verse
Matthew 28:6 follows Jesus's burial in Matthew 27:57–61 and the placing of guards at the tomb in 27:62–66. After the Sabbath, the women come to the tomb and are told that Jesus is no longer there. They are then told to announce that Jesus has been raised and will meet the disciples in Galilee. Jesus later meets the women. Matthew ends with Jesus appearing to the disciples and giving the Great Commission. Most scholars think Matthew used Mark but expanded the story with an earthquake, guards, an angel, a report about bribery, and appearances to the women. Matthew's account therefore contains inherited material along with its own theological and apologetic development.
What the Evidence Shows—and What It Does Not
These findings separate the evidence itself from its significance, limits, and areas of scholarly disagreement.
The main wording is well established, but the KJV has a later expansion
Finding. The critical Greek text reads, “He is not here, for he has been raised ... come, see the place where he lay.” The KJV reads “where the Lord lay,” based on the longer wording ἔκειτο ὁ κύριος.
Why it matters. The exact KJV wording is not preferred by major critical editions. The longer reading calls Jesus “Lord,” but it does not remove the central claim that he was raised.
Limits. Textual criticism compares manuscripts, translations, and common scribal patterns. It cannot recover the original manuscript with absolute certainty. The longer reading is ancient and appears widely in later witnesses.
Scholarly view. SBLGNT and NA28 prefer the shorter reading. Scholars who follow Byzantine, Majority, or Textus Receptus traditions retain “the Lord.”
Evidence sources: Codex Sinaiticus - See The Manuscript | Matthew |
The earliest surviving direct witnesses are fourth-century manuscripts
Finding. Codex Vaticanus and Codex Sinaiticus are fourth-century Greek codices, or bound manuscript books. Both contain Matthew 28:6 and support the shorter wording without “the Lord.”
Why it matters. These manuscripts show that the verse existed in a substantially familiar form by the fourth century. They also give early support to the shorter reading.
Limits. They are copies made centuries after the reported event and after Matthew was probably written. They show how the text was transmitted, not whether the resurrection happened.
Scholarly view. Scholars broadly agree that these codices are important and date them to the fourth century. They differ over how much weight each witness should have in particular textual decisions.
Evidence sources: Codex Sinaiticus - See The Manuscript | Matthew |
Matthew follows Mark's shape but gives the resurrection story its own form
Finding. Most scholars think Matthew used Mark. Matthew keeps material from Mark's account but adds an earthquake, an angel who moves the stone, guards, a bribery story, and appearances to women.
Why it matters. Matthew should not automatically be treated as a fully independent witness equal to Mark. At the same time, Matthew changes and develops inherited material for its own theological and pastoral purposes.
Limits. Source criticism tries to reconstruct literary relationships. It cannot by itself decide whether an underlying event happened or whether Matthew also used other independent traditions.
Scholarly view. Most scholars accept Markan priority—the view that Mark was written first—and Matthew's use of Mark. Minority views give Matthew more independence or propose different relationships among the Synoptic Gospels.
Evidence sources: The Gospel of Matthew → Death and Resurrection – Study Guide - Yale Bible Study
The guard story shows a controversy and is strongly disputed
Finding. Matthew alone reports guards, a bribe, and the claim that the disciples stole the body. The story directly answers an explanation based on theft.
Why it matters. The account shows that Matthew's story addresses an alternative explanation for a missing body. It cannot be treated as independently confirmed by the other canonical Gospels.
Limits. A story's apologetic purpose does not prove that the controversy really happened. Its absence from the other Gospels also does not prove that Matthew invented it.
Scholarly view. Many scholars view the guard story as Matthew's apologetic addition. Others think it preserves an earlier controversy from before Matthew and may reflect an older tradition.
Evidence sources: The Gospel of Matthew → Death and Resurrection – Study Guide - Yale Bible Study · The Guard at the Tomb1 | New Testament Studies | Cambridge Core
Belief in the resurrection is earlier than Matthew, but the evidence does not settle the miracle
Finding. In 1 Corinthians 15:3–11, written around 56 CE, Paul reports a tradition he received: Christ died, was buried, was raised, and appeared to named people and groups. Many scholars think at least part of this tradition existed before Paul.
Why it matters. This evidence argues against the claim that belief in the resurrection first appeared late in the first or second century. It shows that resurrection preaching existed before Matthew was probably written.
Limits. Paul does not mention Matthew's guards, earthquake, women at the tomb, or the wording of Matthew 28:6. Early belief and reported experiences do not automatically prove a bodily miracle.
Scholarly view. Scholars broadly agree that Paul preserves an early resurrection tradition. They disagree about the formula's limits and date, what it means for the empty tomb, and what kind of appearances it describes.
Evidence sources: Reading the Bible → History and Literature – Study Guide - Yale Bible Study
The broad setting is secure, but supernatural details have no outside confirmation
Finding. The story takes place under Pontius Pilate in Roman Judea during Passover-season Jerusalem. Jesus's death is commonly dated to about 29–34 CE, although the exact date is uncertain.
Why it matters. Matthew places the story in a recognizable Roman-Judean setting rather than in an undefined mythical world.
Limits. No surviving contemporary Roman, Jewish, or archaeological source independently reports the earthquake, angel, guards, empty tomb, or resurrection. A reliable general setting does not confirm every event in the story.
Scholarly view. Scholars broadly agree about Pilate's office and the general date range. They strongly disagree about burial details, the empty tomb, and how resurrection belief should be explained.
Is there a case to examine?
This passage presents a central resurrection claim with substantial historical, textual, interpretive, and competing evidentiary questions suitable for a balanced courtroom examination.
PUT THIS PASSAGE ON TRIAL →