Tag: Resurrection Contradictions

The Resurrection Accounts Don’t Agree—And That’s a Problem

📅 Today is Day 5 of The 20-Day Easter Special

Each day leading up to Easter, we’re critically examining a core resurrection claim—one at a time—through the lens of reason, evidence, and The God Question’s Core Philosophy.

🧠 Today’s Big Question

If the resurrection really happened as the defining moment of Christianity, why do the four Gospel accounts contradict each other at nearly every major detail?

Wouldn’t something this miraculous—something this pivotal—warrant a consistent, unified report?

📜 A Quick Glance at the Conflicting Accounts

Let’s break down just a few of the major discrepancies in the Gospel resurrection stories (found in Matthew 28, Mark 16, Luke 24, and John 20–21):

ElementMatthewMarkLukeJohn
Who went to the tomb?Mary Magdalene & “the other Mary”Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James, & SalomeA group of women, unnamed at firstMary Magdalene (alone), then others
Was the stone already rolled away?YesYesYesYes
Who was at the tomb?One angelOne young manTwo men in dazzling clothesTwo angels inside tomb
Where were the angels/men?Sitting on the stoneSitting insideStanding insideSitting inside
What was said to the women?“He has risen… go tell…”Similar messageSimilar messageAngels say little; Jesus speaks
Did the women tell the disciples?YesNo—they said nothing (original ending)YesYes
Who saw Jesus first?Women (Mary Magdalene, etc.)Not shown in earliest versionTwo disciples on the road to EmmausMary Magdalene alone
Where did Jesus appear?GalileeGalilee (as predicted)JerusalemJerusalem

And these are just a few of the inconsistencies. When you compare the full narratives, it becomes clear: these are not four people describing the same event. These are four theological retellings—written decades apart—for different audiences, with different agendas.

🔍 Applying The God Question’s Core Philosophy

Let’s examine the resurrection accounts using our critical thinking lens:

1. Do the accounts rely on evidence or belief?

All the Gospels rely on hearsay and secondhand testimony. There is no contemporary, verifiable documentation of these events—just writings decades later by authors who were promoting a specific theological message.

2. Are alternative explanations addressed?

No. The Gospel writers do not account for inconsistencies or attempt to harmonize the contradictions. Apologists today often try—but the results require cherry-picking, assumptions, and speculation.

3. Is there independent corroboration?

None. All four Gospels are religious texts written within the same faith community. No non-Christian source from the 1st century documents a resurrection, empty tomb, or angelic appearances.

4. Are the claims falsifiable?

No. These are miracle claims presented as divine truth. Any contradiction is explained away as a “matter of perspective” or “complementary” rather than being taken seriously as a credibility issue.

5. Do the contradictions raise more questions?

Absolutely. If the resurrection were a historical event, why do the supposed eyewitnesses disagree so wildly on who saw what, when, and where? If God wanted us to believe it, wouldn’t he have made sure the story was consistent?

💭 Conclusion

For a faith that hinges entirely on the resurrection, these Gospel contradictions should give any honest seeker pause.

We’re not talking about minor differences in wording—we’re talking about clashing stories that disagree on the key details. And when sacred stories look more like legend development than eyewitness reports, we have every reason to question their truth.

The God Question isn’t afraid to ask the hard questions. Because if we’re going to stake our beliefs—and our lives—on something, it should be grounded in truth, not tradition.

📺 For Further Exploration

YouTube Video:
🎥 Are the Gospels Historically Reliable? The Problem of Contradictions


A breakdown of how and why the resurrection accounts differ—and why that matters.

📌 Daily Reminder

Today is Day 5 of our 20-Day Easter Special.
We’ll return to our regular Tuesday, Friday, and Sunday posting schedule after Easter—on April 21st.

Empty Tomb or Evolving Story? Tracing the Resurrection Narrative

📅 Today is Day 2 of The 20-Day Easter Special
Each day leading up to Easter, we’re critically examining a core resurrection claim—one at a time—through the lens of reason, evidence, and The God Question’s Core Philosophy.

The resurrection is the centerpiece of Christianity. But is the story we know today the same story told by the earliest Christians? Or has it evolved—shaped over time by theology, tradition, and conflicting agendas?

Today, we explore the development of the resurrection narrative across the four Gospels and early Christian writings, asking a crucial question: 👉 Did the story of the empty tomb and resurrection appearances grow more elaborate over time?

📖 The Evolving Gospel Accounts

Let’s trace how the resurrection is described in the four Gospels—believed to be written decades apart:

✅ Mark (earliest Gospel, c. 70 CE)

  • No appearances of Jesus post-resurrection in earliest manuscripts (Mark 16:1–8).
  • Women discover the empty tomb and flee in fear, telling no one.
  • The resurrection is implied, not witnessed.

✅ Matthew (c. 80–85 CE)

  • Adds a dramatic earthquake, an angel who rolls away the stone, and guards at the tomb.
  • Jesus appears to the women and later to the disciples in Galilee.
  • A visible, physical Jesus now enters the scene.

✅ Luke (c. 85–90 CE)

  • Two men in dazzling clothes appear at the tomb.
  • Jesus appears to two disciples on the road to Emmaus and later eats with others.
  • Emphasizes the physicality of Jesus’ body—he eats fish.

✅ John (last, c. 90–100 CE)

  • Adds Mary Magdalene’s encounter with the risen Jesus.
  • Includes doubting Thomas, and Jesus allows him to touch his wounds.
  • The narrative becomes highly detailed, emotional, and theological.

🧠 What This Suggests

Over time, the story:

  • Grows more dramatic (from silent fear to emotional reunions).
  • Becomes more physical (from a missing body to eating meals and being touched).
  • Shifts geographically (appearances in Galilee vs. Jerusalem).
  • Introduces new characters and dialogue not found in earlier accounts.

This kind of story evolution is exactly what we see in legend development—not in consistent eyewitness testimony.

🔍 Applying The God Question’s Core Philosophy

Let’s test the resurrection narrative’s development:

1. Does the claim rely on evidence or belief?

The later Gospels build belief using emotionally powerful scenes. But earlier sources (like Paul and Mark) offer no detailed appearances. What grows is narrative embellishment, not historical proof.

2. Are alternative explanations considered?

No. The tradition assumes these conflicting accounts can be harmonized. But contradictions are real—who found the tomb? When did they visit? Who did they see? What did Jesus say?

3. Is there independent corroboration?

There’s no record of the empty tomb or appearances outside Christian sources. No Roman or Jewish historian mentions them. Even Paul, writing earlier than the Gospels, never mentions the empty tomb.

4. Is the claim falsifiable?

No. Any critique is dismissed as “lack of faith.” This places the resurrection beyond question—where belief, not evidence, decides what’s true.

5. Does the explanation raise more questions than it answers?

Yes. Why would God allow four contradictory stories if this was the most important event in history? Why do the accounts become more miraculous over time?

🧭 Final Thought

If the Gospels agreed perfectly, apologists would say “see, they corroborate!” But because they conflict, the response is, “see, that proves they’re authentic!” This heads-I-win, tails-you-lose reasoning is not intellectually honest.

The resurrection story didn’t arrive fully formed. It evolved—growing more miraculous as belief in Jesus grew. That’s not the path of history. That’s the pattern of myth.

📺 For Further Exploration

“The Crucifixion and Resurrection of Jesus Iceberg Explained” – Genetically Modified Skeptic A clear, concise breakdown of Gospel contradictions surrounding the resurrection. 🔗

📅 Note: After we wrap up our 20-Day Easter Special on April 20, we’ll return to our regular schedule of posting three times a week:

  • Tuesdays & Fridays – our structured explorations through all 11 blog categories
  • Sundays – our Sunday Special Feature, where we critically respond to real-world religious claims in real time

We hope you’ll stay with us as we continue asking bold questions and applying reason to faith.