Luke 24:2 – Was Jesus’ Tomb Open or Closed?

Problem: According to Mark, Luke, and John, by the time Mary Magdalene and the other women reached the sepulcher of Jesus on the first day of the week after Christ’s crucifixion, the great stone covering the entrance to His tomb already had rolled away (16:4; 24:2; 20:1). Matthew, on the other hand, mentions the rolling away of the stone after writing that the women “came to see the tomb.” In fact, at first glance it seems that Matthew 28:1-6 indicates several significant things took place in the presence of the women.
Continue reading →

Posted by petra1000 in Bible Difficulty, Bible Study, Bible Teaching

Luke 24:1-2 – Was the stone moved away before Mary arrived at Jesus’ tomb or not?

Problem: Was the stone moved away before Mary arrived at Jesus’ tomb or not? Some critics of Christianity assert that there is a contradiction between the gospels of the New Testament regarding the chronology of the arrival of the women at Jesus’ tomb and when the stone was rolled away.  Was the stone moved before or after the women arrived at the tomb? Let’s take a look at the four gospels that record this event:  Matthew 28:1–2; Mark 16:1–4; Luke 24:1–2; John 20:1
Continue reading →

Posted by petra1000 in Apologetics, Bible Proof, Bible Study

Luke 24:1 – Was the Sun Up, Down, or In Between?

Problem: Attempting to cite contradictions between the resurrection accounts of the four Gospels consistently has been an endeavor long on effort and Scripture-twisting but short on evidence and valid reasoning. For example, some Bible critics demand that the time of day at which the women visited the empty tomb of Jesus is different when the Gospel of John is compared with the other three accounts. Please read for yourself the four different accounts that follow (emphasis has been added to underscore the time of day under discussion).
Continue reading →

Posted by petra1000 in Bible Difficulty, Bible Study, Bible Teaching

Luke 23:54-24:10 – How Many Women, Men, and Angels Were at the Tomb of Jesus?

Problem: In his debate with Michael Horner on “Did Jesus Really Rise From the Dead?” atheist Dan Barker asked:

Who were the women who came to the tomb? Matthew said it was Mary Magdalen and the other Mary. Mark said it was Mary Magdalen, Mary the mother of James, and Salome. Luke said it was Mary Magdalen, Joanna, Mary the mother of James, and other women. John said Mary Magdalen….

Who was at the tomb when they arrived? Mark said there was one “young man.”… Luke said there was [sic] two men. Matthew said there was one angel, and John, the last writer, said, there’s two angels. See what’s happening here? See how the myth is growing and getting more exaggerated?1

Solution: Indeed, two of the most frequently cited reasons for questioning (and perhaps rejecting, as in the case of Barker) the four resurrection accounts have to do with the identity and number of women who went to the empty tomb of Jesus, as well as who (and how many) they actually found there.

The Women

Many fail to recognize in their critique of the Bible that additional information is not necessarily contradictory information. Was it essential for the apostle John to mention every woman who came to the tomb of Jesus on the morning of His resurrection, or was he at liberty to mention as few as he wanted (John 20:1)? If Mary Magdalene was at the tomb on that Sunday morning, and John recorded that she was there, without ever denying the presence of others (some of whom were mentioned by Matthew, Mark, and Luke), could his record of the events be truthful? Of course. Differences exist among the Gospel writers’ accounts, but no one has proven that they are discrepant. Just as a person might say, “I went to the ball game with Bill, Bob, and Bubba,” he might also truthfully say, “I went to the game with Bill and Betty.” These statements are not necessarily contradictory. One can easily (and honestly) supplement the other. A person may only mention Bill and Betty in one setting when talking to one group (e.g., at worship where the church knows the married couple), while at another setting when talking to a different group (e.g., at the office where only the men are known), he may truthfully just mention the men. We must keep in mind that Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John wrote at different times, to different people, for different reasons.

Consider the scenario where four different newspaper reporters are covering the 2021 NBA finals (between the Phoenix Suns and the Milwaukee Bucks). All four writers are from different cities, including Phoenix, Milwaukee, Charleston, South Carolina, and Athens, Greece. Here are the four different headlines from the Bucks’ third win in the series:

  • From Phoenix: “Timely Team Effort Lifts Bucks Over Suns”
  • From Milwaukee: “Jrue Holiday’s Big Night on Offense and Defense Leads to W”
  • From Charleston: “Hometown Hero Kris Middleton Shoots Lights Out in Win”
  • From Athens: “Greece’s Giannis Leads the Way for Another Bucks Win”

All four reporters focused on different people in their headlines (and stories) for different reasons for their different audiences. Yet, all four reports were truthful. No reasonable person would accuse the writers of contradicting one another. Similarly, no rational, fair-minded individual should assume the Bible writers were errant in their accounts of the events on the morning of Jesus’ resurrection.

Furthermore, if the Bible writers always told every detail of every account the same way (mentioning the same people, places, things, and events exactly alike), the criticism would then be, “They all copied each other’s accounts. They conspired with one another!” When an experienced detective interviews various suspects regarding a crime, and all four suspects have the exact same alibi (down to the smallest details), the detective will be highly suspicious of such “perfect” repetitiveness—wondering if collusion has taken place to cover up a crime.

One of the many marvels of the Gospel accounts is how similar they are so as not to be contradictory, yet how different they are so as not to be guilty of collusion. This perfect balance of various truthful differences is what should be expected by independent truth-tellers, especially those who were inspired by God.

The Number and Nature of Those Already at the Tomb

The Gospel writers also differ in their accounts of who was at the tomb of Jesus when the women arrived. Regarding the number of individuals present, if there were “two” (as Luke and John specify), then there was at least one (on whom Matthew and Mark focus). Matthew and Mark do not say “there was only one,” but they do mention one individual. As with the number of women who came to the tomb, the number of individuals who were already at the tomb is not contradictory but supplementary. If I tell someone, “I have an old car with a lot of miles on it,” and I tell someone else, “I own two old cars you should check out,” I have not contradicted myself. Both statements are factual. Simply because I did not mention both cars in the first conversation is not a denial of owning more than one older car. It’s quite telling how easily skeptics can understand the legitimacy of supplementation not being equivalent to a contradiction in their own everyday-life scenarios, yet not give the Bible writers the same fair treatment.

Still, what about the nature of the individuals at the tomb of Jesus? Were they men or angels? The answer is simply, “They were both.” Lest someone scoff at such an answer, pause for a moment to consider how versatile certain things are (as well as the description of those items). In one setting, a person may refer to his handheld device as a “phone,” and in another setting, his “flashlight.” He may take out this device at a meeting to check his “calendar,” while later on that night he uses it as an “alarm clock.” (Imagine telling someone in 1950 that his “phone” would one day also be his flashlight, calendar, alarm clock, camera, directory, etc. He would have thought you had gone mad. Yet, to those in the 21st century, it all makes perfect sense.) Many things are not either/or; they are both/and.

Similar to how Jesus was both God and man (John 1:15,14; Philippians 2:5-11), the individuals at the tomb of Jesus on the day of His resurrection were both angels and men. Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John were all correct in their accounts. The angels were in human form. Mark and Luke referred to their humanity (in their appearance), while Matthew and John referred to their angelic nature. Consistent with what Scripture teaches elsewhere (e.g., Genesis 18:1-33; 19:1,5,15), in the past, both God and angels have come to Earth in the form of human beings.

The four Gospel accounts independently testify that various women arrived at the tomb of Jesus on the morning of His resurrection and were greeted by angels who were in the form of men. Such differently worded statements are without contradiction. In truth, they stand as perfectly harmonious accounts with different, supplemental material from four different independent writers.

Posted by petra1000 in Bible Difficulty, Bible Study, Bible Teaching

Luke 23:53 – Extra, Extra, Read all about it

Problem: One of the most commonly neglected rules of interpretation that Bible critics overlook when attacking Scripture is that extra information is not necessarily contradictory information. When one Bible writer offers more details than another on a particular subject, it is inappropriate to assume that one of the writers is mistaken. When a journalist in the 21st century writes about a man on the side of the road who has just escaped death following a particular catastrophe, while another journalist writes how this same man and his wife (standing next to him) are suffering survivors of the devastating disaster, it does not mean that the first journalist was dishonest in his representation of truth. Similarly, countless times throughout Scripture, and especially within the gospel accounts, extra information is given that critics cannot justifiably prove to be contradictory.
Continue reading →

Posted by petra1000 in Bible Difficulty, Bible Study, Bible Teaching

Luke 23:46 – Two “Contradictions” Solved By Remembering Two Simple Rules

Problem: On a regular basis, atheists, agnostics, skeptics, and Bible critics write our offices at Apologetics Press. Some of the feedback we receive is simply to inform us how naïve Christians are for believing in God, Jesus, and the Bible, or how ignorant creationists are for disbelieving in macro-evolution. We also receive numerous questions from these non-believers. (Unfortunately, due to the volume of inquiries we receive, we are unable to answer all of them.) Recently, one Bible critic sent the following note:
Continue reading →

Posted by petra1000 in Bible Difficulty, Bible Study, Bible Teaching

Luke 23:47 – Is the remark of the centurion about Jesus accurately recorded?

Problem: Matthew records the centurion saying, “Truly this was the Son of God,” while Mark says substantially the same thing, adding only the word “man,” rendering it, “Truly this Man was the Son of God.” Luke records the words of the centurion as follows: “Certainly this was a righteous Man!” What did he really say?

Continue reading →

Posted by petra1000 in Bible Difficulty, Bible Study, Bible Teaching

Luke 23:44-46 – When Did the Temple Veil Tear?

Problem: A few years ago, a journal dedicated to revealing (alleged) Bible errors petitioned its readers to submit their “best” biblical questions and arguments that “they have found through actual experience to be exceptionally effective vis-à-vis biblicists…and they will probably be published for all to see and use” (McKinsey, 1988a, p. 6). The first response printed in this journal (two months later) was from a man who listed among his top five “Bible contradictions” a question of whether or not the veil of the Temple was torn in two “before” (Luke 23:44-46) or “after” (Matthew 27:50-51) Jesus died on the cross? The skeptic stated that this question was one of his favorites to ask because it elicits “such ludicrous rebuttals from Christian apologists” (McKinsey, 1988b, p. 6).
Continue reading →

Posted by petra1000 in Bible Difficulty, Bible Study, Bible Teaching

Luke 23:34-43 – Did Both Thieves Revile Christ?

Problem: Very likely, the most well-known, nameless person in the Bible is “the thief on the cross.” The Lord demonstrated His mercy one last time before His crucifixion by pardoning the thief who begged Jesus, saying, “Lord, remember me when You come into Your kingdom” (Luke 23:42). Having the “power on Earth to forgive sins” (Matthew 9:6), and an overflowing amount of compassion, Jesus told him: “Assuredly, I say to you, today you will be with Me in Paradise” (Luke 23:43).

Solution: After rehearsing the story of “the thief on the cross” countless times from Luke’s gospel account (a story that, sadly, has been misused by many to justify that a person today can be saved without being baptized “for the remission of sins”—Acts 2:38; cf. 22:16), some Bible students are puzzled when they eventually compare the “beloved physician’s” account with what Matthew and Mark recorded. Whereas Luke wrote: “Then one of the criminals who were hanged blasphemed Him, saying, ‘If You are the Christ, save Yourself and us’ ” (23:39), Matthew and Mark stated the following:

“Even the robbers who were crucified with Him reviled Him” (Matthew 27:44)

“Even those who were crucified with Him reviled Him” (Mark 15:32)

The obvious question is, why did Matthew and Mark indicate the “thieves” (plural) reviled Jesus, while Luke mentioned only one who insulted Him?

First, it is quite possible that, initially, both thieves reviled Christ, but then one of them repented. After hearing Jesus’ words on the cross, and seeing His forgiving attitude, the one thief may have been driven to acknowledge that Jesus was indeed the Messiah. How many times have we made a statement about someone or something, but then retracted the statement only a short while later after receiving more information?

A second possible explanation for the minor differences in gospel accounts regarding the two thieves who were crucified next to Jesus involves the understanding of a figure of speech known as synecdoche. Merriam-Webster defines this term as “a figure of speech by which a part is put for the whole (as fifty sail for fifty ships), the whole for a part (as society for high society)…or the name of the material for the thing made (as boards for stage)” (italics. in orig.). Just as Bible writers frequently used figures of speech such as simile, metaphor, sarcasm, and metonymy, they also used synecdoche. As seen above (in the definition of synecdoche), this figure of speech can be used in a variety of ways (see also Dungan, 1888, pp. 300-309):

  • A whole can put for the part.
  • A part may be put for the whole.
  • Time might be put for part of a time.
  • The singular can be put for the plural.
  • And the plural can be put for the singular.

It is feasible that Matthew and Mark were using the plural in place of the singular in their accounts of the thieves reviling Christ on the cross. Lest you think that such might be an isolated case, notice two other places in Scripture where the same form of synecdoche is used.

Genesis 8:4 indicates that Noah’s ark rested “on the mountains of Ararat.” Question: Did the ark rest on one of the mountains of Ararat, or did it rest on all of them at the same time? Although the ark was a huge vessel, it obviously did not rest on the many mountains of Ararat; rather, it rested on one.

In Genesis 21:7 Sarah asked, “Who would have said to Abraham that Sarah would nurse children? For I have borne him a son in his old age.” Anyone who knows much about the Bible will remember that Sarah had but one child. In certain contexts, however, one might use a synecdoche and speak of one child (as did Sarah) by using the word children.

We must keep in mind that the biblical apologist does not have to pin down the exact solution to an alleged contradiction; he need show only one or more possibilities of harmonization in order to negate the force of the charge that a Bible contradiction really exists. The skeptic cannot deny that both of the above options are plausible explanations to the question of why Matthew and Mark wrote of “thieves” reviling Christ, instead of “thief.”

Posted by petra1000 in Bible Difficulty, Bible Study, Bible Teaching

Luke 23:38 – What Was the Inscription on the Cross?

Problem: Controversy has surrounded the death of Christ on the cross for almost two millennia. In the days of the apostle Paul, it served as a “stumbling block” to the Jews, and was “foolishness” to the Greeks (1 Corinthians 1:23). Throughout the past 2,000 years, men and women of all ethnicities have rejected the story of the crucified, resurrected Savior named Jesus for many objectionable reasons. Sadly, for some today, even the physical cross itself has become a stumbling block. Because of an alleged contradiction surrounding the actual words written on the cross of Christ, some have suggested that the message of the cross once preached by John, Paul, Peter, Philip, and others simply cannot be trusted. According to skeptics, the gospel writers disagree regarding what the title read that appeared on the cross above Jesus’ head.

  • Matthew: “This is Jesus the King of the Jews” (27:37).
  • Mark: “The King of the Jews” (15:26).
  • Luke: “This is the King of the Jews” (23: 38).
  • John: “Jesus of Nazareth the King of the Jews” (19:19).

Continue reading →

Posted by petra1000 in Bible Difficulty, Bible Study, Bible Teaching