Matthew 28

The Story of Frank Morrison (a.k.a. Albert Henry Ross)

Frank Morrison was a journalist and lawyer in the early 1900s. He was not a Christian—and actually set out to disprove Christianity. His plan was to write a book explaining how the resurrection of Jesus never really happened.

Matthew 28 was one of the key chapters he studied. He focused on:

The empty tomb

The Roman guards

The claim that the disciples stole the body

The reaction of the religious leaders

As Morrison examined the historical details—especially the guard story in Matthew 28:11–15—something unexpected happened. He realized that the explanations meant to deny the resurrection actually made less sense than the resurrection itself.

Roman guards didn’t fall asleep on duty. Grave robbery would’ve been a capital offense. Terrified disciples don’t suddenly become bold witnesses willing to die for a lie.

Matthew 28 forced him to face a question he couldn’t escape: If Jesus didn’t rise from the dead, why does every alternative explanation collapse?

By the time Morrison finished his research, he reached a conclusion he never intended. The resurrection wasn’t a myth—it was the most reasonable explanation of the evidence. That realization led him to accept Christ as Lord.

Instead of writing a book against Christianity, he published one in defense of it: Who Moved the Stone? (1930)

The opening chapter is famously titled “The Book That Refused to Be Written.” Matthew 28 didn’t just challenge his ideas—it changed his life.

Why this connects so well to Matthew 28:

The guards’ lie (vv. 11–15) becomes evidence

The empty tomb demands an explanation

The resurrection leads directly to faith and mission

Now show the quick video:

1. How Jews counted days (this is the key 🔑)

In Jewish thinking, any part of a day counts as a whole day. So:

Part of Friday = Day 1

Saturday = Day 2

Part of Sunday = Day 3

They didn’t count in 24-hour blocks the way we do today.

2. Walk through the timeline

Friday afternoon: Jesus dies and is placed in the tomb before sunset (Matt 27:57–60) → Day 1

Saturday (Sabbath): Jesus remains in the tomb all day → Day 2

Early Sunday morning: Jesus rises (Matt 28:1–6) → Day 3

So even though it’s not three full 24-hour days, it is three days by Jewish reckoning.

3. Scripture backs this up

Jesus said:

“On the third day He will be raised” (Matt 16:21)

“After three days” and “on the third day” are used interchangeably in the Gospels

That only works if you’re using Jewish inclusive counting—which everyone at the time did.

4. What about “three days and three nights”?

In Matthew 12:40, Jesus says:

“three days and three nights”

In Hebrew idiom, this phrase means a period that spans parts of three days, not necessarily 72 hours. Example:

Esther 4:16 → “fast three days, night and day”

Esther 5:1 → “on the third day” Esther goes in to the king

Same language. Same counting method.

Bottom line

Jesus wasn’t wrong, the Bible isn’t contradicting itself, and the resurrection timeline fits perfectly within Jewish culture and language.

The Message of Matthew Is It Possible?

Dead people don’t rise. If we are asked to believe in the resurrection of Jesus, this must be something quite unparalleled. There is nothing comparable in Judaism. There is nothing comparable in the Graeco-Roman world. Mythological stories of the raising of Adonis or Isis and Osiris are totally beside the point. They were just stories. Nobody believed they had happened. They concerned mythical figures of long ago who had never even existed. But the resurrection stories of Jesus concern a man whom they all knew. He was executed in a very public manner. He was seen to be alive and well, but in a strangely other mode of existence, three days later and for the next six weeks before being finally parted from his infant church. That is unparalleled in the history of the world.

There is no parallel, but it might still be possible if God exists at all—if his Son came into the world he made, and lived the perfect life that the Gospel attests; if he faced and conquered sin, the most basic of all the foes of the human spirit, the foe that gives death its power over us. If that is the case, then why should it be deemed impossible that God should raise him from the dead? Of course, we have seen no others rise from their tombs, but we know only broken, sinful, human nature.

The Message of Matthew Is It Possible?

We have no idea of what might happen if a person never deviated from the perfect will of God throughout his whole life and took personal responsibility for the evil in the lives of all the world. Who can say that under such circumstances resurrection might not be possible? Jesus was different from anyone else: in who he was, in the perfection of his life, and in his victory over sin and Satan at every point. The resurrection is God’s vindication of such a life. There is nothing impossible about it. It is no more impossible than for God to create us in the first place.

It is possible, but the question remains: is it true? ‘Yes,’ says Matthew. ‘No,’ says the Synagogue. We must examine the two sides in the debate in turn.

Jesus Has Risen

Matthew 28:

1  After the Sabbath, at dawn on the first day of the week, Mary Magdalene and the other Mary went to look at the tomb.

2 There was a violent earthquake, for an angel of the Lord came down from heaven and, going to the tomb, rolled back the stone and sat on it. 3 His appearance was like lightning, and his clothes were white as snow. 

4 The guards were so afraid of him that they shook and became like dead men.

5 The angel said to the women, “Do not be afraid, for I know that you are looking for Jesus, who was crucified. 

6 He is not here; he has risen, just as he said. Come and see the place where he lay.

 7 Then go quickly and tell his disciples: ‘He has risen from the dead and is going ahead of you into Galilee. There you will see him.’ Now I have told you.”

8 So the women hurried away from the tomb, afraid yet filled with joy, and ran to tell his disciples. 

The Message of Matthew Is It True?

All of this is brought to us through female witnesses! That is simply astounding. As we have already seen, women counted for little in both Jewish and Graeco-Roman circles in those days. They were nobodies: they were goods and chattels; they could in some circumstances be offered for sale; they could not bear witness in a court of law. And God perpetrates the supreme irony of having two women as the first witnesses of his Son’s resurrection!

Jesus had been born in an obscure province that nobody had heard of; his genealogy contains various disreputable females who might be considered liabilities in any family; he worked as a jobbing builder where nobody would have dreamed of looking for him; he went to a cross, the place associated with God’s curse, not his approval; and now the last and greatest surprise is that God allows the first witnesses of his resurrection to be women! If anyone was going to fabricate the story of the resurrection, would they have made the witnesses women? Of course not. Only God could have dreamed up so remarkable a thing. But this is the supreme irony, the supreme humour, the supreme surprise value of almighty God, that when he does his greatest act since the creation of the world, in raising his Son from the dead, he attests it through the lips of those who were so widely discounted. Magnificent!

9 Suddenly Jesus met them. “Greetings,” he said. They came to him, clasped his feet and worshiped him.

 10 Then Jesus said to them, “Do not be afraid. Go and tell my brothers to go to Galilee; there they will see me.”

The Guards’ Report

11 While the women were on their way, some of the guards went into the city and reported to the chief priests everything that had happened.

 12 When the chief priests had met with the elders and devised a plan, they gave the soldiers a large sum of money, 

13 telling them, “You are to say, ‘His disciples came during the night and stole him away while we were asleep.’

 14 If this report gets to the governor, we will satisfy him and keep you out of trouble.” 15 So the soldiers took the money and did as they were instructed. And this story has been widely circulated among the Jews to this very day.

1. The authorities admit the tomb is empty

In Matthew 28:11–15, the Jewish leaders don’t say:

“The body is still there”

or “The women went to the wrong tomb”

Instead, they say:

“Tell people, ‘His disciples came during the night and stole Him away while we were asleep.’”

Habermas points out: you only invent a body-theft story if the body is missing. If Jesus were still in the tomb, Christianity would have died in a weekend.

2. The disciples-stole-the-body explanation collapses

Habermas highlights how unrealistic this explanation is:

Roman guards could be executed for sleeping on duty

If they were asleep… how did they know who stole the body?

Frightened disciples don’t suddenly overpower trained guards

The same disciples later willingly suffer and die for their claim—people don’t die for what they know is a lie

So the official explanation actually creates more problems than it solves.

3. The polemic proves early opposition

Habermas stresses that Matthew 28 preserves an early Jewish counter-explanation. That matters historically.

Why?

It shows the resurrection claim wasn’t legendary or late

It shows opponents couldn’t deny the empty tomb

The debate starts immediately, not generations later

Habermas often says:

“The earliest explanation for the empty tomb was not denial—it was theft.”

That’s huge.

4. Enemy testimony is powerful evidence

Habermas leans on a key historical principle: enemy attestation.

The guards’ story comes from people trying to stop Christianity, not promote it. When enemies admit facts (like an empty tomb), historians take that seriously.

So Matthew 28:11–15 functions as unintended confirmation.

5. Habermas’ conclusion

Habermas doesn’t say Matthew 28 proves the resurrection by itself. But he argues it strongly supports these minimal facts:

Jesus died by crucifixion

The tomb was found empty

The disciples sincerely believed Jesus rose

Alternative explanations fail

And when all that is taken together, the resurrection is the best explanation.

One-sentence summary you can use

“Gary Habermas argues that Matthew 28 doesn’t weaken the resurrection—it strengthens it, because the first explanation given admits the tomb was empty and then offers a story that doesn’t hold up.”

Where William Lane Craig sharpens the argument

Craig’s emphasis: Logic, law, and history

Craig goes after the theft theory more aggressively and methodically:

1. The disciples had no motive

They gained no money, power, or comfort

Instead, they gained persecution, imprisonment, and death

Craig often asks:

“Why would they invent a resurrection that brought them nothing but suffering?”

2. The disciples lacked the means

Roman guards were trained and armed

The tomb was sealed

Moving the stone quietly at night is unrealistic

Craig points out: this isn’t a petty theft—it’s a military security breach.

3. The guard story self-destructs

Craig highlights the internal contradiction:

If the guards were asleep, they couldn’t know who took the body

Admitting sleep is admitting a capital offense

So the explanation fails even on its own terms.

4. Early proclamation in Jerusalem

Craig emphasizes location:

The resurrection was preached in the very city where Jesus was buried

Producing a body would have instantly ended Christianity

That didn’t happen.

The combined knockout argument

When you combine Habermas and Craig, you get this:

Historically: The tomb was empty (enemy admission)

Psychologically: The disciples truly believed Jesus rose (Habermas)

Logically: The theft theory is incoherent (Craig)

Practically: The movement couldn’t survive if the body existed

Craig often concludes:

“The disciples-stole-the-body hypothesis is historically implausible, psychologically absurd, and logically inconsistent.”

Simple way to explain this to a skeptic or student

You can say:

“If the disciples stole the body, they knew the resurrection was fake. But they were beaten, imprisoned, and killed for it. People may die for a lie—but not for one they personally invented.”

1. N.T. Wright (Anglican, historian)

Wright argues that no first-century Jew would invent a resurrection story like this.

Key points:

Resurrection meant bodily resurrection at the end of time, not one person rising in the middle of history

The disciples didn’t have a category for this

Something forced them to rethink everything

Wright says the theft theory fails because:

“You do not explain a revolution in worldview by inventing a lie that brings persecution.”

For Wright, the empty tomb + transformed disciples demands a real event.

2. E.P. Sanders (skeptical scholar, not evangelical)

Sanders is important because he’s not trying to defend Christianity.

He admits:

Jesus was crucified

The disciples genuinely believed He rose

Their belief needs explanation

Sanders rejects the theft theory because:

It doesn’t explain why the disciples believed

It doesn’t explain the early proclamation

Even skeptical scholars agree: theft doesn’t account for the data.

3. James D.G. Dunn (critical scholar)

Dunn argues the resurrection faith arose very early, not decades later.

Why this matters:

Legends take time

A stolen-body story would’ve collapsed immediately

Dunn emphasizes:

The belief in resurrection wasn’t a slow myth—it exploded instantly.

That timing makes conspiracy theories implausible.

4. Jacob Kremer (German critical scholar)

Kremer explicitly affirms the empty tomb:

“By far most exegetes hold firmly to the reliability of the biblical statements about the empty tomb.”

This includes scholars who do not accept the resurrection—yet still reject the theft theory.

5. Michael Brown (Jewish-Christian scholar)

Brown focuses directly on Matthew 28:11–15 and Jewish polemic.

He notes:

The Jewish explanation assumes an empty tomb

This polemic appears very early

It was never replaced by a better explanation

Brown argues:

If the theft story were true, it would have ended the Christian movement—yet it failed.

6. Gerd Lüdemann (atheist scholar)

Lüdemann rejects the resurrection—but still admits:

The disciples truly believed Jesus rose

Their belief was sincere

He does not accept the theft theory because:

It doesn’t explain the disciples’ conviction

It doesn’t explain their willingness to suffer

Even critics of Christianity admit: the disciples were not frauds.

Big takeaway

Across the spectrum—evangelical, critical, skeptical, even atheist—scholars broadly agree on this:

The tomb was empty (Matthew 28 assumes it)

The disciples genuinely believed Jesus rose

The “stolen body” explanation is historically weak

The real debate among scholars isn’t:

“Did the disciples steal the body?”

It’s:

“What best explains the empty tomb and transformed disciples?”

And that’s why Matthew 28:11–15, meant to stop Christianity, ended up strengthening the resurrection case.

The Great Commission

16 Then the eleven disciples went to Galilee, to the mountain where Jesus had told them to go. 

17 When they saw him, they worshiped him; but some doubted. 

18 Then Jesus came to them and said, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. 

19 Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 

20 and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age.”

The Great Commission

Verse 16 — The Meeting

“The eleven disciples went to Galilee, to the mountain where Jesus had told them to go.”

Only eleven remain—this is a reminder of failure and grace (Judas is gone).

Galilee matters: it’s where Jesus first called them and where the mission now restarts.

Obedience comes first—they go where Jesus told them.

Key idea: God uses imperfect people who obey.

Verse 17 — Worship and Doubt

“When they saw Him, they worshiped Him; but some doubted.”

Worship is the natural response to the risen Jesus.

“Doubted” doesn’t mean unbelief—it means hesitation or awe.

Even in the presence of the resurrected Christ, faith and uncertainty coexist.

Key idea: Jesus doesn’t wait for perfect faith to give His mission.

Verse 18 — Authority

“All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to Me.”

This is the foundation of the Commission.

Jesus isn’t just resurrected—He’s enthroned.

Echoes Daniel 7:13–14 (the Son of Man given dominion).

Key idea: We go because Jesus reigns.

Verse 19 — The Mission

“Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.”

The main command is “make disciples”, not just “go.”

“All nations” = no ethnic, cultural, or geographic limits.

Baptism shows public identification with the Triune God.

One “name,” three persons—early Trinitarian theology.

Key idea: Christianity is about forming followers, not collecting converts.

Verse 20 — The Method and the Promise

“Teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age.”

Discipleship includes obedience, not just knowledge.

Jesus’ presence is ongoing—not symbolic.

The mission lasts until history’s end.

Key idea: We never carry out the mission alone.

Big Picture Summary

Authority — Jesus reigns

Mission — Make disciples everywhere

Method — Baptize and teach obedience

Power — Jesus’ presence with us always

Or in one sentence:

The risen Jesus, with all authority, sends imperfect worshipers to make disciples of all nations—promising His constant presence.

1. N.T. Wright

Wright says this passage is about Jesus being installed as King, not just giving instructions.

“All authority in heaven and on earth” echoes Daniel 7

This is a royal commissioning scene

The mission flows out of Jesus’ kingship, not human enthusiasm

Wright’s big point:

The Great Commission isn’t optional church work—it’s what happens when the true King takes the throne.

2. R.T. France (Matthew scholar)

France emphasizes that:

The command is not “go”, but “make disciples”

Baptizing and teaching are how disciples are made

This is the climax of Matthew’s Gospel

France notes:

Matthew begins with “God with us” (1:23) and ends with “I am with you always” (28:20)

So the Gospel is framed by Jesus’ presence.

3. Craig Blomberg

Blomberg highlights that:

The disciples still doubted (v.17), yet Jesus commissions them anyway

This shows grace, not hesitation on Jesus’ part

He says:

The mission depends on Jesus’ authority and presence, not the disciples’ confidence.

That’s huge pastorally.

4. William Lane Craig

Craig focuses on authority and truth:

Jesus’ resurrection validates His authority claim

Because He rose, His command carries divine weight

Craig argues:

If Jesus truly rose from the dead, then the Great Commission is rational, not blind faith.

The resurrection makes obedience reasonable.

5. Michael Green

Green emphasizes the global scope:

“All nations” breaks Jewish boundary lines

Christianity is missionary by nature

Green famously said:

The early church didn’t have a missions program—it was a mission.

Matthew 28 explains why.

6. Ulrich Luz (critical scholar)

Even as a more critical scholar, Luz agrees:

This passage reflects early, authoritative teaching

The Trinitarian baptism formula shows early high Christology

He doesn’t dismiss it as legend—he sees it as foundational.

Where scholars overwhelmingly agree

Across evangelical, critical, and historical camps:

Jesus is portrayed as having universal authority

The mission is intentional and global

Discipleship involves obedience, not just belief

Jesus’ ongoing presence is essential to the mission

The debates aren’t about whether this passage matters—but about how the church lives it out.

SHows the Keys to the church and pic