Monday, October 10, 2011

Do the resurrection accounts of the Gospels contradict one another?

INTRODUCTION
            In “Jesus, Interrupted,” Bart Ehrman makes the claim, “Nowhere are the differences among the Gospels more clear than in the accounts of Jesus’ resurrection.”[1] The implication, of course, is that the differences among the Gospel narratives demonstrate them to be an unreliable source of history and, thereby, sheds doubt on the Christian claim that Jesus of Nazareth rose from the dead. There are five chapters in the canonical Gospels, which recount the events that occurred following the burial of Jesus. The disciple of Jesus, Matthew, reports the events in the twenty verses that make up Matthew chapter 28. Mark, who was a close associate of the Apostle Peter, gives an account of the resurrection in eight verses of Mark chapter 16.[2] Luke, who was a close associate of the Apostle Paul, gives his account in fifty-three verses of Luke 24. Finally, the close disciple of Jesus, John, records the events following the burial of Jesus in fifty-six verses of John chapters 20-21. Overall, there are 137 verses recorded in the four canonical Gospels, which narrate the central event of Christianity that Jesus of Nazareth rose from the dead on the Sunday morning following His crucifixion and burial. After discussing the alleged discrepancies of the resurrection narratives in the four accounts forwarded by Bart Ehrman, I will attempt to give plausible explanations for these differences, followed by a proposed harmony of the events as they are recorded in the final chapters of the Gospels.

THE PROPOSED PROBLEM
            Bart Ehrman states, “All four Gospels agree that on the third day after Jesus’ crucifixion and burial, Mary Magdalene went to the tomb and found it empty. But on virtually every detail they disagree.”[3] Ehrman goes on to state:
“Who actually went to the tomb? Was it Mary alone (John 20:1)? Mary and another Mary (Matthew 28:1)? Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James, and Salome (Mark 16:1)? Or women who had accompanied Jesus from Galilee to Jerusalem—possibly Mary Magdalene, Joanna, Mary the mother of James, and ‘other women’ (Luke 24:1; see 23:55)? Had the stone already been rolled away from the tomb (as in Mark 16:4) or was it rolled away by an angel while the women were there (Matthew 28:2)? Whom or what did they see there? An angel (Matthew 28:5)? A young man (Mark 16:5)? Two men (Luke 24:4)? Or nothing and no one (John)? And what were they told? To tell the disciples to ‘go to Galilee,’ where Jesus will meet them (Mark 16:7)? Or to remember what Jesus had told them ‘while he was in Galilee,’ that he had to die and rise again (Luke 24:7)? Then, do the women tell the disciples what they saw and heard (Matthew 28:8), or do they not tell anyone (Mark 16:8)? If they tell someone, who do they tell? The eleven disciples (Matthew 28:8)? The eleven disciples and other people (Luke 24:8)? Simon Peter and another unnamed disciple (John 20:2)? What do the disciples do in response? Do they have no response because Jesus himself immediately appears to them (Matthew 28:9)? Do they not believe the women because it seems to be ‘an idle tale’ (Luke 24:11)? Or do they go to the tomb to see for themselves (John 20:3)?”
One point in particular seems to be irreconcilable. In Mark’s account the women are instructed to tell the disciples to go meet Jesus in Galilee, but out of fear they don’t say a word to anyone about it. In Matthew’s version the disciples are told to go to Galilee to meet Jesus, and they immediately do so. He appears to them there and gives them their final instruction. But in Luke the disciples are not told to go to Galilee. They are told that Jesus had foretold his resurrection while he was in Galilee (during his public ministry). And they never leave Jerusalem—in the southern part of Israel, a different region from Galilee, in the north. On the day of the resurrection Jesus appears to two disciples on the ‘road to Emmaus” (24:13-35); later that day these disciples tell the other what they have seen, and Jesus appears to all of them (24:36-49); and then Jesus takes them to Bethany on the outskirts of Jerusalem and gives them their instructions and ascends to heaven. In Luke’s next volume, Acts, we’re told that the disciples are in fact explicitly told by Jesus after his resurrection not to leave Jerusalem (Acts 1:4), but to stay there until they receive the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost, fifty days after Passover. After giving his instructions, Jesus then ascends to heaven. The disciples do stay in Jerusalem until the Holy Spirit comes (Acts 2). And so the discrepancy: If Matthew is right, that the disciples immediately go to Galilee and see Jesus ascend from there, how can Luke be right that the disciples stay in Jerusalem the whole time, see Jesus ascend from there, and stay on until the day of Pentecost?”[4]

I have shared this long passage from Ehrman, because it exhaustively displays the alleged problem of discrepancies among the resurrection narratives of the four Gospel accounts. In my next section, I will attempt to offer some plausible solutions to the differences Bart Ehrman describes.

SOME PROPROSED SOLUTIONS
            The first problem Ehrman mentions is the issue of who visited the tomb on the morning of the resurrection. Matthew’s account states that Mary Magdalene and the other Mary visited the grave (28:1).  Mark records Mary Magdalene visiting the tomb, along with “Mary the mother of James and Salome” (16:1). Luke mentions both Mary’s and adds Joanna and “the other women with them” (24:10). Finally, John’s Gospel documents only Mary Magdalene as visiting the tomb. Bart Ehrman rightly recognizes these accounts as varying in the details, but none of these accounts display a contradiction regarding who visited the tomb. In fact, Ehrman is being irresponsible (at best) or dishonest (at worst) to even ask the question in the form, “Who actually went to the tomb? Was it Mary alone (John 20:1)?[5] John does not state that Mary visited the tomb “alone” – he merely only mentions her in the tomb visit! The fact that each Gospel writer did not feel the need to document the complete list of women who visited the tomb on Sunday morning should not cast aspersions on their credibility as honest historians. This is not even recognized as necessary according to our modern standards of documenting events.
To illustrate, I have compared three news articles recounting the events of the attack on Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941. USA Today mentions the attack by the Japanese, from the first-hand perspectives of Russell Meyne and Jim Morgan. Meyne recounts a plane crashing into a building, which killed four people, and he also describes witnessing battleships tipping over and dumping oil on the water. The Fort Worth Star Telegram article only agrees with USA Today on the major details: The date of the attack, the perpetrators of the attack, and the location of the event. The article does not mention Meyne or Morgan or a plane crashing into a building killing four people. It does mention separate details, however, such as the sinking of the USS Arizona and the USS Oklahoma. Interestingly, an msnbc.com article only mentions the sinking of the USS Arizona, but does not state that the USS Oklahoma sank, nor does it mention any of the details offered by the USA Today article. In fact, the msnbc article has different details, including the perspective of one Navy veteran named Louis Conter. It would be quite easy to get a dozen more articles from different newspapers, all of which would recount the most important details of December 7, 1941 in uniformity, but (without question) would differ in the details. Differences among the accounts are not a difficulty for the historical record – only contradictions would be problematic.
When this proper reasoning is applied to the question of who visited the tomb, it can very easily be explained. Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James and Salome, Joanna, and other women visited the tomb on the morning of the first day of the week. Luke, who prefers to provide more details, mentions all of these women (although not all of them by name), Matthew and Luke both decide to only mention the two Mary’s, and John prefers to only mention Mary Magdalene, although he does not state that Mary “alone” visited the tomb. John’s reasoning is probably because he is going to recount the appearance of Jesus to her beginning in verse 11, and he is the only Gospel writer to do so in detail. It should be noted that, even though John only mentions Mary Magdalene, he does record her stating in 20:2, “They have taken the Lord out of the tomb and we do not know where they have laid Him” (NASB, italics mine).[6] So even John is implicitly conveying that it was not only Mary Magdalene who had visited the tomb. It is not difficult to conclude that there are no contradictions in any of these accounts, but merely differences among the details. As human beings, we share stories all of the time in this way, often recounting various details of an event based on whom we are speaking to, the length of time in which we wish to spend sharing a story, or even based simply on the kind of mood we are in. This is easily accomplished without stating an actual contradiction or abusing the truth.
Ehrman goes on to question, “Had the stone already been rolled away from the tomb (as in Mark 16:4) or was it rolled away by an angel while the women were there (Matthew 28:2)?”[7] This is another inaccurate representation of the accounts. Matthew states in 28:2,4-5, “And behold a severe earthquake had occurred, for an angel of the Lord descended from heaven and came and rolled away the stone and sat upon it…The guards shook for fear of him and became like dead men. The angel said to the women…” (italics mine). Is Matthew conveying that the women walked up to the tomb, saw the stone and the guards, and then the earth shook, the stone rolled away, and an angel descended from heaven? The account could be read in that way, but I think a more accurate interpretation (based on the clue given in verse 2) is that these events had occurred by the time the women arrived. This is also consistent with Mark’s account.
The next difference mentioned by Ehrman regards whom or what did the women see there? Matthew records an angel spoke to the women (28:5), Mark records that it was a young man in a white robe (16:5), Luke states that it was two men (24:4), and John does not mention an angel or men being at the tomb. As in the case of the number of women of visiting the tomb, we are once again not dealing with a contradiction regarding the number of angels but merely the differing details conveyed by the Gospel writers. After all, Matthew does not record that “only one” angel spoke to the women. Matthew and Mark might have only mentioned one angel because only one of them spoke to the women in their account. Furthermore, Mark’s account does not state that a young man “who was not an angel” spoke to the women. The “young men” in Luke’s account are clearly angels, so it should not be problematic that Mark and Luke would call them “young men” since that was how they appeared to the women. It is highly doubtful that Mark and Luke were trying to convey that two human men, wearing dazzling white robes (according to their descriptions), showed up at the tomb with a special knowledge of Jesus’ location.
What were the women told by these messengers? Matthew records the angel saying, “Do not be afraid; for I know that you are looking for Jesus who has been crucified. He is not here, for He has risen, just as He said. Come, see the place where He was lying. Go quickly and tell His disciples that He has risen from the dead; and behold, He is going ahead of you into Galilee, there you will see Him; behold I have told you” (28:5-7). In Mark’s account, we find the women being told, “Do not be amazed; you are looking for Jesus the Nazarene, who has been crucified. He has risen; He is not here; behold, here is the place where they laid Him. But go, tell His disciples and Peter, ‘He is going ahead of you to Galilee; there you will see Him, just as He told you.’” (16:6-7). Finally, in Luke’s account, the women are told, “Why do you seek the living One among the dead? He is not here, but He has risen. Remember how He spoke to you while He was still in Galilee, saying that the Son of Man must be delivered into the hands of sinful men, and be crucified, and the third day rise again” (24:5-7). Matthew and Mark both appear to record the same message, and the angel in Luke is likely giving an additional message by the same angel or an additional message by the second angel. Regarding the issues of the number of angels, their exact location at the site, and the messages they conveyed to the women, R.A. Torrey states, “The very simple solution of it all is that there was an angel outside the tomb when the women approached, and they saw another one sitting inside. The one outside entered and the one sitting arose and, standing by the women, together, or after one another, they uttered the words recorded in Matthew, Mark, and Luke.”[8]
A more difficult question is what did the women do next? Ehrman asks, “Do the women tell the disciples what they saw and heard (Matthew 28:8), or do they not tell anyone (Mark 16:8)? If they tell someone, who do they tell? The eleven disciples (Matthew 28:8)? The eleven disciples and other people (Luke 24:8)? Simon Peter and another unnamed disciple (John 20:2)?”[9] Truthfully, Matthew’s Gospel does not record that the women told the disciples what they saw and heard, as Ehrman conveys, but it only states their intention to do so. Matthew states, “And they left the tomb quickly with fear and great joy and ran to report it to His disciples” (28:8). Mark’s Gospel concludes, “They went out and fled from the tomb, for trembling and astonishment had gripped them; and they said nothing to anyone, for they were afraid” (16:8). It should be noted that Mark’s description that the women were “trembling and astonished” accurately coincides with Matthew’s portrait of their “fear and great joy.” Norman Geisler points out, “Since Mark reveals that they did not speak because ‘they were afraid,’ it may be that at first they held their peace (as Mark indicated), and then later spoke up (as Matthew may imply). It is also possible that the women left the tomb in two groups at slightly different times, Mark referring to one and Matthew to the other.”[10] Regarding who the women tell, once again, there is no contradiction between the Gospel accounts: The women told Simon Peter and another unnamed disciple, as reported by John (20:2), the women told the eleven disciples as reported by Matthew 28:8 (at the very least, Matthew implies this fact), and the women told the eleven disciples and others as recorded in Luke 24:9. Once again, Luke gives the most details. These are all very plausible explanations and place the burden of proof on Ehrman or any critic who would want to label very reconcilable accounts as incongruent.
What do the disciples do in response after hearing that the tomb was found empty? Ehrman questions, “Do they have no response because Jesus himself immediately appears to them (Matthew 28:9)? Do they not believe the women because it seems to be ‘an idle tale’ (Luke 24:11)? Or do they go to the tomb to see for themselves (John 20:3)?”[11] Matthew’s account (as well as Mark’s) should be left out of this discussion, because clearly the Gospel writers chose not to relate the response of Jesus’ disciples. As stated in the introduction, it should be remembered that Matthew’s account of the resurrection is only twenty verses in length and Mark’s account is a mere eight verses. This contrasts greatly with Luke’s more detailed fifty-three verses and John’s fifty-six. Ehrman is right to point out that John’s Gospel records that the disciples visit the tomb to see for themselves (20:3), but he fails to mention that Luke’s Gospel also records this fact immediately after mentioning that they did not believe the women. Luke’s Gospel states that after hearing the testimony of the women, “these words appeared to them as nonsense, and they would not believe him” (24:11). Apparently, Ehrman forgets to mention the very next verse, which states, “But Peter got up and ran to the tomb…” (vs. 12). This is one of the many reasons why I find Bart Ehrman to be disingenuous in some of his criticisms. I have no doubt that he is aware of at least some of the holes in his thinking. Regarding Ehrman’s criticisms stated in the second paragraph of his extended quote (pages 3-4), I will respond in my next section.

A HARMONIZED ACCOUNT
            To create a harmonized account of the resurrection narratives, I will begin by recounting the testimonies of the Gospel writers separately, as well as Luke’s further information in the opening chapter of the book of Acts:
àMatthew: On the first day of the week, Mary Magdalene and another Mary visit Jesus’ tomb; women encounter angel who invites them into the tomb; angel announces Jesus’ resurrection and tells the women to give message to the disciples; women leave tomb and encounter Jesus on their way; Jesus informs the women to take word of His resurrection to the disciples and also instruction for the disciples to go to Galilee; some interaction occurs between the tomb guards and the chief priests; an unspecified time later the eleven disciples proceed to Galilee to a mountain where they encountered Jesus; Jesus commissions them; (Note: Matthew’s gospel does not record Jesus’ ascension).
àMark: On the first day of the week, Mary Magdalene and another Mary visit Jesus’ tomb; women find the stone rolled away; they enter tomb and find a young man (presumably an angel) who announces Jesus’ resurrection and instructs the women to share this news with the disciples; women leave tomb trembling and astonished and do not say anything to anyone, because they were afraid. (Note: Mark’s gospel does not record Jesus’ ascension).
àLuke: On the first day of the week, women visit the tomb; the women enter the tomb and find the body of Jesus missing; angel announces Jesus’ resurrection; women leave and report the news of Jesus’ resurrection to the disciples; disciples do not believe women; Peter runs to the tomb and finds it empty; Peter goes home marveling at what he found; on the same day, two disciples are confronted by Jesus on the road to Emmaus; the disciples (not knowing it was Jesus) recount the events of the women finding the tomb empty and “some” of the disciples confirming this fact; Jesus teaches these disciples, eats with them that evening and reveals Himself to them; Jesus vanishes from their sight; these disciples returned to the Jerusalem, met the other disciples, and recounted their experience with the risen Jesus; Jesus appears to all of them and eats with them; Jesus commissions the disciples and instructs them to stay in Jerusalem; an unspecified time later Jesus leads the disciples out as far as Bethany where He ascends into heaven; the disciples return to Jerusalem with great joy.
àJohn: On the first day of the week, Mary Magdalene visit Jesus’ tomb; Mary finds the tomb empty and runs to tell Peter and another disciple (likely John) that Jesus’ body has been moved; Peter and the other disciple go to the tomb and find Jesus missing; Both disciples leave and go home; Mary stood outside the tomb weeping and two angels appear to her (although she does not notice that they are angels); Jesus then appears to Mary; Mary then goes and announces to the disciples that she has seen Jesus alive; Jesus appears to the disciples when they are all together; eight days later, Jesus appears to the disciples again; an unspecified time later, Jesus appears to His disciples at the Sea of Tiberias; (Note: John’s gospel does not record Jesus’ ascension).
àActs: Luke mentions that Jesus appears to the disciples over a period of forty days; Jesus instructs the disciples not to leave Jerusalem; Jesus commissions the disciples and ascends to heaven; two men (presumably angels) appear to the disciples and announce that Jesus will return; the disciples return to Jerusalem from the mount called Olivet.
Creating a harmony of the resurrection narratives is not a completely “clean” or easy job, but the mere fact that there can be a plausible harmony of the accounts suggests that harsh criticisms and claims of irreconcilable differences among the four Gospels is unfounded. I propose the following harmony:
àA proposed harmony of the resurrection narratives: On the first morning of the week, Mary Magdalene and other women visit the tomb, and find it empty. Disheartened because she believes Jesus’ body has been moved, Mary Magdalene separates from the rest of the women and quickly runs to inform the disciples that Jesus’ body has been moved. After Mary Magdalene leaves, the remaining women encounter two angels who announce that Jesus had risen from the dead. The angels also instruct the women to tell the disciples to meet Jesus in Galilee. The women leave the tomb terrified, intending not to tell anything to anyone (at least, at first this was their intention). After leaving the tomb, Jesus appears to these women and, once again, instructs them to inform His disciples to meet Him in Galilee. These women then head to the disciples. Either before or after the women’s encounter with Jesus (but after the women had left the tomb), Peter and the other disciple (likely John) run and confirm that the tomb is empty. The disciples then return home. Mary Magdalene returns to the tomb after the disciples and stays behind even after the disciples leave. She begins to weep and then looks inside the tomb, where she sees the two angels, but she does not notice they are angels because she probably does not look directly at them (because she is weeping), and then Jesus appears to her and He makes Himself known to her. (Once again, this appearance could have occurred before or after Jesus’ appearance to the other women.) After Jesus appears to Mary Magdalene and the other women, all of the women return to the disciples and inform them that they had seen the risen Jesus. The disciples do not believe the women. [After stating the disciples’ disbelief, Luke then mentions, “Peter got up and ran to the tomb…” Chronologically, I do believe this event to have happened prior to this point (as recorded in detail in John’s Gospel), but that Luke places it here for the purpose of wanting to simply share this fact.]  After the women inform the disciples of what they saw, Jesus appears that afternoon to two of the disciples on the road to Emmaus, but the two disciples do not recognize Him. Jesus teaches them and then eats with them once they reach the village. While eating, Jesus makes Himself known to the two disciples. After Jesus leaves their sight, the two disciples return to Jerusalem at once and share with the remaining disciples (and the others there) about their encounter with the risen Jesus. While sharing, Jesus appears to all of them that evening, and even eats among them. So on the first day after Jesus had resurrected, He appeared to Mary Magdalene, the other women, and all of the disciples. During the next forty days, Jesus would appear to the disciples at least two more times (including in Galilee). According to Paul in 1 Corinthians 15, Jesus would also appear to more than five hundred at one time and to James, the brother of Jesus. Jesus commissions His disciples in several instances, instructs them to stay in Jerusalem for a time, and then He ascends to heaven from Bethany, which is on the eastern slope of the Mt. of Olives, which is just east of Jerusalem. After Jesus ascends and disappears among the clouds, two angels appear to the disciples and inform them that Jesus will return in the same way He departed. Afterward, the disciples return to Jerusalem until Pentecost a week and a half later, when they receive the Holy Spirit.

CONCLUSION
            As stated, creating a proposed harmony of the resurrection narratives is not a “neat” job, but the plausible explanations for these divergent details places the burden of proof on those who would discount the historical testimonies of these four Gospel authors. Newspaper articles and history books will often agree in the major details and diverge in the minor ones. The reason for this fact is often due to the enormous amount of details that one could include. This is exactly what we find among the four Gospels. The simple fact is that the events of that day and the forty days that follow are compressed into as few as eight verses (under 190 words), in Mark’s case, to as high as a mere fifty-six verses in John’s account. This fact alone is a reasonable explanation for the differences among the details! Even so, as I have illustrated in every example given by Bart Ehrman, these differences do not equate to contradictions. The very reasonable and numerous potential ways to harmonize the resurrection narratives only serves to strengthen the historical claim that Jesus of Nazareth was crucified, buried, and rose from the dead.

BIBLIOGRAPHY
Ehrman, Bart D. Jesus, Interrupted. New York: HarperCollins, 2009.

Geisler, Normal L. and Thomas Howe. The Big Book of Bible Difficulties. Grand Rapids:
BakerBooks, 1992.

New American Standard Bible. Anaheim: Foundation Publications, 1995.

Torrey, R.A. Difficulties in the Bible. Springdale: Whitaker House, 1996.


[1]Bart D. Ehrman, Jesus, Interrupted (New York: HarperCollins, 2009), 47.

[2]Although there are twenty verses in Mark 16 recorded in the Bible, the last twelve verses (9-20) are widely
regarded by scholars to be an addition in later manuscripts. Due to this, I will only be interacting with Mark 16:1-8.
[3]Ehrman, 48.
[4]Ehrman, 48-49.

[5]Ibid., 48, italics mine.
[6]All Bible verses recorded independent of another source will be from the Updated New American
Standard Bible (NASB).

[7]Ehrman, 48.
[8]R.A. Torrey, Difficulties in the Bible (Springdale: Whitaker House, 1996), 127.

[9]Ehrman, 48-49.
[10]Norman L. Geisler and Thomas Howe, The Big Book of Bible Difficulties (Grand Rapids: BakerBooks, 1992), 377.

[11]Ehrman, 49.

No comments:

Post a Comment