Why this story matters

(Commentary on Mark 16, Luke 24, Matthew 28, and John 20)

(Page 2 of 5)

Two different approaches to 'harmonizing' Mary's role

According to the three synoptic gospels (Mathew, Mark, and Luke), the sequence of events happens basically like this:

1. Mary Magdalene, accompanied by some other women, goes to the tomb early in the morning.

2. Mary Magdalene and the other women discover that the tomb is empty and are met by angels.

3. The angels explain that Jesus has risen from the dead, and they tell the women to give the good news to the disciples.

4. Mary Magdalene and the other women leave

However, in John’s gospel, the sequence of events is quite different. In John’s version, Mary goes to the tomb, seemingly alone, and discovers it empty. In great distress, she immediately runs to tell the disciples that Jesus' body has been stolen. Peter and John, run back with Mary, and witness the empty tomb. It's only after Peter and John leave that Mary looks inside and finally meets the angels. Then they proceed to have a conversation similar to the one that Matthew, Mark, and Luke describe happening at the initial discovery of the tomb.

So we have two different and divergent accounts. How do apologists reconcile this difference? Well there are two main approaches:

1. The first approach is to say that Mary had two encounters with the angels. After the first encounter, while on the way to tell the disciples, the stress of it all became too much and she became confused and essentially forgot all that the angels had told her and forgot her meeting with Jesus. Here’s an example of this from legendary apologist Gleason Archer, from the book, The Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties:

“She apparently had not yet taken in the full import of what the angel meant when he told her that the Lord had risen again and that He was alive. In her confusion and amazement, all she could think of was that the body was not there; and she did not know what had become of it. Where could that body now be? It was for this reason that she wanted Peter and John to go back there and see what they could find out. (Zondervan, 1982, pp. 348-349)

This is the harmonization attempt that has been illustrated.

2. The other approach, is to say that Mary got there first, saw the tomb was empty and immediately ran off to tell Peter that the body had been stolen. The angels didn't appear to Mary the first time. They only appeared to the other women who arrived after Mary ran off. Here’s an example of this apologetic approach:

"After Mary left, her other companions arrived at the tomb. The angels appeared to them, delivered their message, whereupon they left and ran to tell the disciples. So Mary was the first person to reach the tomb." (An Examination of the Alleged Contradictions in the Resurrection Narratives - Part 4, by Dr John Ankerberg, Dr. John Weldon, ankerberg.com)

Both approaches are clever and creative but, unfortunately for the faithful, neither works. Let’s look at each one more closely to see why.

© IllustratedBibleStories.ca