That particular event doesn't have to be true for the claim to be literal. The point of the resurrection in terms of Messianic lore is that Messiah was supposed to control the keys ot life and death. In the last day he would raise all of fallen Israel from the dead. So Jesus is called (Paul) "first fruit form the dead." It's like saying "to prove he is Messiah he'll raise himself." then this (probable) embellishment is added becuase it just seems right, Messiah is going to raise all of Israel he raises himself first so he also raises others with him. That's most likely the way the redactor saw it.
Having said all of that the event can be real and the fact we don't have a record of it is in no way evidence that it can't be real.
There are all kinds of happens throughout time that are not recorded in history.
*they had no press, no school of journalism, no philosophies of how to report things, no sense that reporting mattered.
*no in search of, no Ripple's believe it or not. no nothing.
*they didn't even have news papers.
*no evening news at 11.
*It doesn't indicate it was more than a handful of people. So like 10 people raise up and come out of graves, stare in wonderment at each other then wonder home in different directions.
who is going to report it and to whom do they report?
