Do the Resurrection Accounts Contradict?

Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John all give different accounts of Easter Sunday. It is beneficial to have multiple testimonies to an important event, but what if those testimonies contradict each other?

The Importance of the Question

The entire Christian faith hinges upon the truth of the resurrection of Jesus Christ. As the Apostle Paul has said, “if Christ has not been raised, then our preaching is in vain and your faith is in vain” (1 Corinthians 15:14). If Jesus is still in the grave, then it was all a lie. Jesus is not who he said he was, he has not paid for our sins, and we have no hope of resurrection ourselves. 

Although some like to think that faith and facts are of different realms, Christianity is a faith founded upon historical facts. If the Bible cannot be trusted in matters of history, then it cannot be trusted in matters of spiritual truth. Jesus cannot simply be a good moral teacher. He claimed to be the Son of God who came to die for the sins of his people and rise from the grave on the third day (Mark 9:31). In the famous words of CS Lewis, Jesus is either liar, lunatic, or Lord. 

The accounts of Jesus’ resurrection are critical historical evidence. Each of them claims to present eyewitness testimony. Some variation in the accounts supports their authenticity. However, if they contradict each other, this obviously undermines their integrity. 

So the question is: do they contradict? 

The Alleged Contradictions

There are 5 primary alleged contradictions in the resurrection accounts: 

1. The number of angels at the tomb

2. The number of women present at the tomb

3. The time of day the women went to the tomb

4. Whether or not the tomb was already open when the women arrived

5. The order of appearances of the resurrected Jesus

The 4 accounts of the resurrection can be found in these chapters of Scripture:

1. Matthew 28

2. Mark 16

3. Luke 24

4. John 20-21

Let’s consider each of these alleged contradictions and evaluate whether they represent real contradictions. 

1) The number of angels at the tomb

Matthew and Mark both describe only one angel, while Luke and John describe two angels.

Which is it?

While Matthew and Mark only describe one angel, they do not say there was only one. It is important to remember that the goal of the gospel authors was not to give an exhaustive description of every event and detail. The goal of the authors was to tell the story of Jesus. Although Matthew and Mark leave out the detail about a second angel, this does not undermine the integrity of their accounts. 

2) The number of women present at the tomb

Matthew says “Mary Magdalene and the other Mary went to see the tomb.” 

Mark says “Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James, and Salome.”

Luke says “Mary Magdalene and Joanna and Mary the mother of James and the other women with them.” 

John says “Mary Magdalene came to the tomb.” 

Which women were present at the tomb?

Once again, none of the authors say that only the women they mention were there. For example, even John who only mentions one woman at the tomb, later records Mary as saying “They have taken away the Lord out of the tomb, and we do not know where they have laid Him” (John 20:2, italics added). Clearly John was aware that Mary was not the only one at the tomb. For whatever reason, each gospel author focuses on one or a few of the women present. From the various accounts, we can see that a number of women were present greater than three. This variation in recording does not undermine the integrity of the accounts. 

3) The time of day the women went to the tomb

Matthew says “toward the dawn of the first day of the week.” 

Mark says “very early on the first day of the week, when the sun had risen.” 

Luke says “on the first day of the week, at early dawn.” 

John says “on the first day of the week Mary Magdalene came to the tomb early, while it was still dark.” 

So was it before dawn, at dawn, or after dawn?

First, this is a very small variation. Each author says it was right around dawn. Second, the variation could be accounted for by the difference in what part of the trip the author was describing. If the women traveled to the tomb from Bethany, the walk would be about 2 miles. This length of journey may have begun in the dark and concluded after sunrise. This variation in recording does not undermine the integrity of the accounts.

4) Whether or not the tomb was already open when the women arrived

Mark, Luke, and John say that the stone had already been rolled away when the women arrived. 

Matthew’s account appears to tell a different story. 

Which is it?

The difference here is only in appearance. The confusion is created because of Matthew’s placement of the words of verse 2. He does not actually say that the women saw the earthquake and the angel moving the stone. He simply records that it happened. In reading the narrative, because Matthew begins to describe the women’s journey and then includes this detail, it feels like he is implying the women saw the stone roll away, but he does not actually say this. Matthew’s added detail does not undermine the integrity of the account. 

5) The order of appearances of the resurrected Jesus

This is the most complex issue of the alleged contradictions. We can only imagine the chaos created by the discovery of the empty tomb. There would have been much running to and fro to tell the story and try to process what was happening among Jesus’ followers. The first couple appearances of Jesus is where the main challenge lies. 

Matthew seems to say that after discovering the empty tomb and speaking with the angels, the group of women encounter Jesus on their way to tell the disciples. 

Mark simply says that Mary Magdalene was the first to see him. 

Luke’s first recorded appearance is on the road to Emmaus. 

John says that Mary ran to get Peter and John, the three of them ran back to the tomb, and then Mary encounters Jesus alone after Peter and John have again left the tomb. 

Which is it?

Several different theories have been proposed to harmonize the stories. 

A fairly simple and compelling theory is as follows (credit for this theory to Tim Chaffey, author of In Defense of Easter: Answering Critical Challenges to the Resurrection of Jesus):

After the group of women discover the empty tomb, Mary splits from the group and runs into the city to tell Peter and John while the rest of the women begin the trip back to Bethany to find the rest of the disciples. Mary, Peter, and John run back to the tomb. Peter and John leave astonished. Mary is now left alone at the tomb and encounters Jesus (first appearance). After this, the rest of the women encounter Jesus on their own walk back to Bethany (second appearance). 

Have you ever received shocking news and then frantically tried to spread the word to friends and family… without a cell phone? Once again, we can only imagine the chaos created by the discovery of the empty tomb. It is quite reasonable that different groups of Jesus’ followers would have been running around and these different appearances would have all happened on Easter Sunday. The integrity of the accounts is not undermined. 

Conclusion

While at first glance it may appear that the four accounts of the resurrection contradict each other, upon closer inspection they do not. Real genuine eyewitness accounts shouldn’t perfectly overlap, but they also can’t contradict. The four gospels continue to bear the marks of faithful historical witness. 

The good news of the gospel is that Jesus Christ, the Son of God, came to live the perfect life of righteousness that we could not live, die the death for sin that we deserved to die, and he conquered the grave so that we too can have new life by putting our faith in him.