This page will endeavour to list and answer all objections relevant to the actual challenge (i.e. telling what happened at Jesus' resurrection, omitting no Biblical detail).
NOTE: Due to the overlap of material, I should really merge this page with Answers to specific alleged contradictions.
Last revised on 24-Mar-2008.
Claim that I've invented parallel accounts (Objector on alt.atheism, 12-Mar-2001)
It's a very reasonable-sounding account when read in its entirety -- each step is accompanied by an explanation, and the explanations, when taken individually, make sense. But once we look at the harmonization as a whole . . . . . . we immediately realize what a silly endeavour it really is. Your strategy throughout is the "how-it-could-have-been" scenario. You seem to believe that as long as you can suggest an interpretation that removes a contradiction from a problem passage, you can preserve the inerrancy claim. For example, you claim that Mary Magdalene left her house before sunrise, then met up with the other women and they set out as a group after sunrise.
You even have two of the women go to the tomb twice, just so you can squeeze all the necessary details in. But this tactic is simply desperation hermeneutics. ... your assertion that two of the women went back to the tomb is an ad hoc argument with nothing in the Bible to support it.
Response: I don't see the problem, because I have used what's in the texts. For instance: John is the only writer to have a woman leave before sunrise, but he is also the only writer to only mention Mary Magdalene. It is also not unusual to leave one's residence before sunrise and meet up with other people after sunrise (I've done it myself on a number of occasions). So if John is taking the specific perspective of Mary Magdalene, the fact that he alone says "before sunrise" fits neatly.
The objector is also wrong when he says "your assertion that two of the women went back to the tomb is an ad hoc argument with nothing in the Bible to support it.". In fact John chapter 20 has Mary visiting the tomb twice: she goes first in verse 1; returns to tell the disciples in verse 2, then goes back to the tomb again and sees Jesus (veses 11-17).
When were the spices bought? (Sean, aus.religion.christian, 27-Apr-2003)
Objection: Were the spices, for the Sunday morning anointing, purchased before the Sabbath (Luke 23:56) or after the Sabbath (Mark 16:1)?
Response: They prepared some before the Sabbath, i.e. on Friday afternoon, as mentioned in Luke 23:56. Then after the Sabbath, i.e. on Saturday evening, they bought some more (as mentioned in Mark 16:1).
When did Mary Magdalene leave her house? ("Libertarius" on alt.religion.christian.biblestudy, alt.bible, 30-Nov-2001)
Objection: Mary Magadelene was with the others buying spices on Saturday night (Mark 16:1), and yet John 20:1 says she joined them on Sunday morning. Isn't this a contradiction?
Response: No. Mary Magdelane did not "sleep over", but she met up with the other women twice. Once on Saturday night, to buy and prepare the spices. And once on Sunday morning, to visit the tomb.
Did Mary Magdalene go alone? (Brian970 on talk.atheism, 27-Jan-2002)
Objection: John states quite clearly that Mary Magdalene was alone. Throughout is account he refers to her, and her alone, there is no question of this.
Response: But John does not say "alone".
Look up a news report on a politician's trip. It will say something like "George Bush travelled to London and...". This does not mean GWB travelled alone, even though others are never mentioned.
More to the point, in John 20:2 Mary says "we", indicating other people were present with her.
Did the women see the stone move? (Brian970 on talk.atheism, 27-Jan-2002)
Objection: Matthew says the women were present during the earthquake, and the Angel talked to them. There was no mention of an earthquake by anyone else, biblical of otherwise. You sate that the Angel went inside before the women arrived, but Matthew clearly states that it addressed them outside the tomb, sitting on the stone.
Response: I beg to disagree. I suggest that Matthew's language allows a gap between v.2-4 (angel moves stone) and v.5 (angel addresses women).
John says it was dark when the women reached the tomb, (yet Mark says it was after sunrise). (email from Dan Barker, 20-Mar-2002)
Objection: John writes that Mary "came to" or "came unto" the sepulchre "when it was yet dark." The Greek "eis" is usually rendered "into," so we might more correctly translate it as "came INTO" the sepulchre while it was still dark.
(While Mark 16:2 says "just after sunrise, they were on their way to the tomb).
Response: "erchetai eis" need not mean "came into". In at least two other places in John it cannot mean that: John 11:38, where Jesus came to ("erchetai eis") the tomb of Lazarus while there was till a stone across the entrance; and John 20:4 where John came to the tomb ("Elthen ... eis"), yet 20:5 says he did not enter.
So since the journey took a bit of time, it is possible that John's "while it was still dark" can refer to the fact that it was dark for part of the journey.
Who saw the stone move? ("Libertarius" on alt.religion.christian.biblestudy, alt.bible, 30-Nov-2001)
Objection: [W]ho saw the "angel" sitting on the rock if he moved by the time the women got there?
Response: The guards.
"Luke mentions men, not angels" ("Libertarius" on alt.religion.christian.biblestudy, alt.bible, 30-Nov-2001)
Objection: ===>"Mark" says there was just ONE a young man sitting at the right, wearing a white robe. Even "Luke" says there WERE MEN, not "looked like men"! The author/redactor of "Matthew" revised the story to make it more mysterious... ===>It is clear that they are described as MEN, not "angels". Your efforts at harmonizing involves changing the texts!
Response: No it is not clear that they were men. Luke also describes men in shining white with a message from God in Acts 1:10-11. They are clearly meant to be understood to be angels. Even more decisively, Luke refers to them as angels in Luke 24:23!
Does Mark mention the resurrection? ("Libertarius" on alt.religion.christian.biblestudy, alt.bible, 30-Nov-2001)
Objection: ===>The only evidence is that the "Mark" Gospel ends by saying the women ran away!
Response: Mark gives far more evidence than that! He mentions Jesus' resurrection at least 6 times (Mark 8:31, 9:9-10, 9:31, 10:34, 14:28, 16:6 ), including the women being told that it had happened in Mark 16:6. So, even though Mark's gospel ends suddenly at verse 8, it is ridiculous to say that Mark had no knowledge of Jesus' resurrection.
Did the women report a missing body or a risen Jesus? (Sean, aus.religion.christian, 27-Apr-2003)
Objection: After discovering the empty tomb, did Mary Magdalene report back with grave news that Jesus' body had been taken (John 20:2) or did she and others report the joyous news that Jesus had risen (Mat 28:8)?
Response: Both. They passed on the angels' message (that Jesus was risen), but they were "afraid" (Matthew 28:8) and "trembling and bewildered" (Mark 16:8). So they passed on the report, but they really weren't sure what had happened. This wasn't helped by the disciples' unbelief (Luke 24:11).
How could Mary Magdalene report the resurrection but later on be crying? (Sean, aus.religion.christian, 27-Apr-2003)
Objection: For instance, at #6 (in either version) he has the women going back and reporting to the apostles the joyous news that Jesus had risen. Among the women who went back and told the apostles was Mary Magdalene. However, when you go to #9 in the proposed solution, Mary is back at the tomb crying because persons unknown have taken away Jesus' body!
Response: I think this is already addressed in my note to point 9:
Why Mary's lack of understanding despite the angel's previous message (Mt 28:5-7 Mk 16:6-7 Lk 24:5b-8)? Because the women were bewildered and confused (according to Mark they were too afraid to tell anyone (Mk 16:8) (at least at first) despite clear instructions to do so (Mk 16:7)); and Luke reports that their words "seemed like nonsense". And probably this confusion had been compounded by the disciples' unbelieving response (Lk 24:11).
The wording of Matthew does not allow a gap between Matthew 28:8 and 28:9 (Michael, private email, 20-Mar-2006)
Objection: However, verse 9 in the Matthew account clearly states that Jesus met them "as they went to tell his disciples".
Response: So while it in the King James Version, it is not in modern translations. That is because phrase "as they went to tell his disciples" is not in the best manuscripts, so was not part of what Matthew originally wrote.
I agree that, even without that phrase, the most natural reading of Matthew is that there is no gap between verses 8 and 9. But a gap is not impossible.
You've added a second trip to the tomb by Mary Magdalene (Objector on alt.atheism, 12-Mar-2001); (similarly by Brian970 on talk.atheism, 27-Jan-2002)
Objection: You even have two of the women go to the tomb twice, just so you can squeeze all the necessary details in. But this tactic is simply desperation hermeneutics. ... your assertion that two of the women went back to the tomb is an ad hoc argument with nothing in the Bible to support it.
Response: No there is evidence: John chapter 20 has Mary visiting the tomb twice: she goes first in verse 1; returns to tell the disciples in verse 2, and then is back at the tomb in 20:11. Although John doesn't actually say so, surely the implication is that Mary followed Peter and John back to the tomb.
Were the disciples told to go to Galilee, or to stay in Jerusalem? (Sean, aus.religion.christian, 27-Apr-2003)
Objection: Did they follow the instruction in Matthew (Mark 16:7, Matthew 28:7) and go to Galilee or did they stay in Jerusalem (Luke 24:9-50 and Acts) as instructed in Luke (24:49)?
Response: The instruction to stay in Jerusalem (Luke 24:49, Acts 1:4) was immediately before Jesus' ascension, and so was after they had been to Galilee and back during the 40 days after the resurrection.
Did the disciples have to be in two places at once? (Sean, aus.religion.christian, 27-Apr-2003)
Objection: Another thing it doesn't even try to harmonize (in either version) is how the entourage could seemingly be in two different geographical locations at one time. For instance, Matthew has the apostles proceed to Galilee after the resurrection while Luke and Acts have them remaining in Jerusalem till Jesus had his Ascension, and that's only the start of that problem area.
Response: Matthew does not say that they went immediately to Galilee. The disciples saw Jesus in Jerusalem a week after the resurrection (John 20:26-29), and were in Jerusalem again 40 days after the resurrection (Acts 1:3). There is plenty of time in between to fit the Galilee appearances mentioned in John 21:1-24 and Matthew 28:16-20.