Matthew 28 versus John 20.

[rstrats]

　
Matthew 28:1-10 says that when Mary Magdalene went to the tomb that she was told by an angel that the Messiah had risen and would be seen in Galilee. Matthew then says that she ran "with great joy" to tell the disciples and while on the way that she met the Messiah (this occurred before she got to the disciples).

However, John 20:1 and 2 say that when she came to the tomb and didn’t find the Messiah there, that she ran to the disciples and told them that He had been taken away and that she didn’t know where He was. In Matthew she knew where He was (or at least had been) and where He would be, but in John she didn’t.

How can this be reconciled?

 

[Secundulus]

　
Matthew 28:1-10 says that when Mary Magdalene went to the tomb that she was told by an angel that the Messiah had risen and would be seen in Galilee. Matthew then says that she ran "with great joy" to tell the disciples and while on the way that she met the Messiah (this occurred before she got to the disciples).

However, John 20:1 and 2 say that when she came to the tomb and didn’t find the Messiah there, that she ran to the disciples and told them that He had been taken away and that she didn’t know where He was. In Matthew she knew where He was (or at least had been) and where He would be, but in John she didn’t.

How can this be reconciled?

Mt 28 an John 20 tell the same story. See John 20:11-18. Mt. simply condenses the story and doesn't talk about the first trip to the tomb.

As evidence, Mt says they went at dawn. John says they first went when it was still dark and then again a short while later (dawn).

 

[RibI]

Matthew 28 versus John 20.

There is no "versus" in the Bible. We may understand or misunderstand, but there are no real contradictions in God's word. "For scripture can not be broken."
The Bible is not written in chronological order, it is like a puzzle we must put together.
So here is the harmonized account of what happen. With this we can begin to put it together.

Mk. 16:3 And they said among themselves, “Who will roll away the stone from the door of the tomb for us?” 4 But when they looked up, they saw that the stone had been rolled away—Mat. 28:2 For behold, there had been a great earthquake; for an angel of the Lord had descended from heaven, and came and rolled back the stone from the door, and sat on it. 3 His countenance was like lightning, and his clothing as white as snow. 4 And the guards shook for fear of him, and became like dead men.
Mk. 16:5 And entering the tomb, they saw a young man clothed in a long white robe sitting on the right side; and they were alarmed.
Mat. 28:5 But the angel answered and said to the women, “Do not be afraid, for I know that you seek Jesus who was crucified. 6 He is not here; for He is risen, as He said. come, see the place where the Lord lay.
Lk. 24:6b Remember how He spoke to you when He was still in Galilee, 7 saying, ‘The Son of Man must be delivered into the hands of sinful men, and be crucified, and the third day rise again.’” 8 And they remembered His words.
Mat. 28:7 “Now go quickly and tell His disciples that He is risen from the dead, and indeed He is going before you into Galilee; there you will see Him. Behold, I have told you.” 8 So they went out quickly from the tomb with fear and great joy, and ran to bring His disciples word.
Lk. 24:10 It was Mary Magdalene, Joanna, Mary the mother of James, and the other women with them, who told these things to the apostles. 11 And their words seemed to them like idle tales, and they did not believe them.
Jo. 20:3 Peter therefore went out, and the other disciple, and were going to the tomb. 4 So they both ran together, and the other disciple outran Peter and came to the tomb first. 5 And he, stooping down and looking in, saw the linen cloths lying there; yet he did not go in. 6 Then Simon Peter came, following him, and went into the tomb; and he saw the linen cloths lying there, 7 and the handkerchief that had been around His head, not lying with the linen cloths, but folded together in a place by itself. 8 Then the other disciple, who came to the tomb first, went in also; and he saw and believed. 9 For as yet they did not know the Scripture, that He must rise again from the dead. 10 Then the disciples went away again to their own homes.
11 But Mary stood outside by the tomb weeping, and as she wept she stooped down and looked into the tomb. 12 And she saw two angels in white sitting, one at the head and the other at the feet, where the body of Jesus had lain. 13 Then they said to her, “Woman, why are you weeping?”
She said to them, “Because they have taken away my Lord, and I do not know where they have laid Him.”
14 Now when she had said this, she turned around and saw Jesus standing there, and did not know that it was Jesus. 15 Jesus said to her, “Woman, why are you weeping? Whom are you seeking?”
She, supposing Him to be the gardener, said to Him, “Sir, if You have carried Him away, tell me where You have laid Him, and I will take Him away.”
16 Jesus said to her, “Mary!” She turned and said to Him, “Rabboni!” (which is to say, Teacher).
17 Jesus said to her, “Do not cling to Me, for I have not yet ascended to My Father; but go to My brethren and say to them, ‘I am ascending to My Father and your Father, and to My God and your God.’”
18 Mary Magdalene came and told the disciples that she had seen the Lord, and that He had spoken these things to her.

 

[revanneosl]

The version of the story in Matthew and the version of the story in John were written by authors who were members of communities with very different traditions about what happened on that day. The differing traditions were encoded into different written accounts of the first resurrection appearance.

Also, Matthew's account was written about 70 AD, while John's was written about 100 AD.

Imagine, if you will, a big fancy wedding that happened about 70 years ago. 1939 or thereabouts. Now imagine collecting all of the family stories about it: the ones that were passed down orally, the diaries people wrote, their letters to distant relatives that couldn't attend. Take all of that information and put it together and write the story of that wedding.

Now imagine another person doing exactly the same thing, but on the other side of the family, and about 30 years later. Different family oral tradition, different diaries, different letters. Then they take all of their stories and put them together and write the story of that wedding.

How closely do you imagine the two written accounts will be to one another?

And here's the really great part: no amount of discrepancy or disagreement between the two written accounts will have any effect whatsoever upon the legitimacy of the marriage that took place. The stories may disagree in every single respect - but the couple were still married, lived together in joy and affection for the rest of their lives, and raised a whole passle of children.

In the same way, it matters not one whit that the four gospels contain four different and irreconcilable accounts of the life, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. The Bible is a wonderful book - but it's historical accuracy is not what saves us. The gracious love of God is what saves us, and no amount of disagreement between first-century biographers can interfere with that.

 

[catzrfluffy]

The Resurrection of Jesus - A Harmony of the Resurrection Accounts
Greenleaf's Harmony of the Resurrection Accounts

 

[Standing Up]

　
Matthew 28:1-10 says that when Mary Magdalene went to the tomb that she was told by an angel that the Messiah had risen and would be seen in Galilee. Matthew then says that she ran "with great joy" to tell the disciples and while on the way that she met the Messiah (this occurred before she got to the disciples).

However, John 20:1 and 2 say that when she came to the tomb and didn’t find the Messiah there, that she ran to the disciples and told them that He had been taken away and that she didn’t know where He was. In Matthew she knew where He was (or at least had been) and where He would be, but in John she didn’t.

How can this be reconciled?

She visited twice; once after Sabbath sunset and once Sunday morning.

 

[rstrats]

Standing Up,
　
re: "She visited twice; once after Sabbath sunset and once Sunday morning."


How about Luke 24:1? Was that referring to Mary M's first visit or to a subsequent one?

 

[Radagast]

Also, Matthew's account was written about 70 AD, while John's was written about 100 AD.

John's gospel was almost certainly written much earlier than that, given that we have a fragmentary manuscript from Egypt dated to the early 2nd century.

 

[Standing Up]

Standing Up,
　
re: "She visited twice; once after Sabbath sunset and once Sunday morning."


How about Luke 24:1? Was that referring to Mary M's first visit or to a subsequent one?

Second. Remember, they don't believe Mary M (or other Mary from Mt. 28:1).

 

[ViaCrucis]

I don't know that the accounts need to be reconciled.

Some people seem to think inconsistencies in the accounts such as this is a detriment. I don't think so.

On the contrary, if we suppose that the Gospels were deliberate fabrications we might expect them to match details far more closely, and none would have the first witnesses of the resurrected Jesus be women.

Instead the Gospels as they are are far more organic, and look far more like natural accounts of what the early Christians believed and were saying about Jesus. Questions like did Jesus preach His famous Sermon on the Mount (Matthew's Gospel) or on the Plain (Luke's Gospel) become somewhat superfluous. The point instead is very clearly that Jesus preached this Sermon.

Likewise, the exact details of the women and which women exactly, and what they exactly saw at the empty tomb--if we obsess on them too much--kind of misses the point of what's going on: Jesus' tomb is empty because Jesus stopped being dead, He is risen!.

If having a single harmonious account of the Jesus Story were really that important, we would suppose that the ancient and historic Church would have only chosen one gospel text, or else gone with a harmony text like Tatian's Diatessaron. But the Church didn't go with one text or with a harmonization text--it went with four. Four distinct texts with distinct details, that don't always agree with one another on every jot and tittle.

Clearly the Holy Spirit didn't seem it necessary to give us a completely harmonized account of all the details and minutia. Rather He has provided us with four distinct gospel texts with unique foci, flavors, perspectives; a four-fold prism through which we as the whole Church might look upon the Gospel Story and hear the Good News proclaimed to us--Christ is risen from the dead, Alleluia! He is risen indeed!

-CryptoLutheran

 

[Standing Up]

The first witnesses were the guards. Only "some" went to their boss (Mt. 28:11). 'Course we don't know what happened to those who were awe struck. AWOL?

The gospel accounts don't contradict, if we simply read them without Tradition glasses.

There was never just one view of the account, but always a planned for four. And it wouldn't be up to Tatian or the recent Pope Benedict to reconcile them.

Remember, the issue is God-with-us. How best to present that to a doubting world?

 

[BobRyan]

　
Matthew 28:1-10 says that when Mary Magdalene went to the tomb that she was told by an angel that the Messiah had risen and would be seen in Galilee. Matthew then says that she ran "with great joy" to tell the disciples and while on the way that she met the Messiah (this occurred before she got to the disciples).

However, John 20:1 and 2 say that when she came to the tomb and didn’t find the Messiah there, that she ran to the disciples and told them that He had been taken away and that she didn’t know where He was. In Matthew she knew where He was (or at least had been) and where He would be, but in John she didn’t.

How can this be reconciled?

Best Explanation - from eye witness --

The Desire of the Ages "The Lord is Risen" chapter describes the resurrection details.

The Desire of the Ages "Why Weepest Thou" correlating all the events.

The women had not all come to the tomb from the same direction. Mary Magdalene was the first to reach the place; and upon seeing that the stone was removed, she hurried away to tell the disciples. Meanwhile the other women came up. A light was shining about the tomb, but the body of Jesus was not there. As they lingered about the place, suddenly they saw that they were not alone. A young man clothed in shining garments was sitting by the tomb. It was the angel who had rolled away the stone. He had taken the guise of humanity that he
Page 789

might not alarm these friends of Jesus. Yet about him the light of the heavenly glory was still shining, and the women were afraid. They turned to flee, but the angel's words stayed their steps. "Fear not ye," he said; "for I know that ye seek Jesus, which was crucified. He is not here: for He is risen, as He said. Come, see the place where the Lord lay. And go quickly, and tell His disciples that He is risen from the dead." Again they look into the tomb, and again they hear the wonderful news. Another angel in human form is there, and he says, "Why seek ye the living among the dead? He is not here, but is risen: remember how He spake unto you when He was yet in Galilee, saying, The Son of man must be delivered into the hands of sinful men, and be crucified, and the third day rise again."

He is risen, He is risen! The women repeat the words again and again. No need now for the anointing spices. The Saviour is living, and not dead. They remember now that when speaking of His death He said that He would rise again. What a day is this to the world! Quickly the women departed from the sepulcher "with fear and great joy; and did run to bring His disciples word."


Mary had not heard the good news. She went to Peter and John with the sorrowful message, "They have taken away the Lord out of the sepulcher, and we know not where they have laid Him." The disciples hurried to the tomb, and found it as Mary had said. They saw the shroud and the napkin, but they did not find their Lord. Yet even here was testimony that He had risen. The graveclothes were not thrown heedlessly aside, but carefully folded, each in a place by itself. John "saw, and believed." He did not yet understand the scripture that Christ must rise from the dead; but he now remembered the Saviour's words foretelling His resurrection.


It was Christ Himself who had placed those graveclothes with such care. When the mighty angel came down to the tomb, he was joined by another, who with his company had been keeping guard over the Lord's body. As the angel from heaven rolled away the stone, the other entered the tomb, and unbound the wrappings from the body of Jesus. But it was the Saviour's hand that folded each, and laid it in its place. In His sight who guides alike the star and the atom, there is nothing unimportant. Order and perfection are seen in all His work.



Mary had followed John and Peter to the tomb; when they returned to Jerusalem, she remained. As she looked into the empty tomb, grief filled her heart. Looking in, she saw the two angels, one at the head and

in Christ,

Bob

 

[Restoresmysoul]

I don't see a contradiction. But i just noticed this scripture and remembered this thread. Who is Cephas?

1 Co 15:3 For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received, that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, 4 and that He was buried, and that He was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, 5 and that He appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve. 6 After that He appeared to more than five hundred brethren at one time, most of whom remain until now, but some have fallen asleep; 7 then He appeared to [c]James, then to all the apostles; 8 and last of all, as [d]to one untimely born, He appeared to me also. 9 For I am the least of the apostles, [e]and not fit to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God.

 

[ViaCrucis]

I don't see a contradiction. But i just noticed this scripture and remembered this thread. Who is Cephas?

1 Co 15:3 For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received, that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, 4 and that He was buried, and that He was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, 5 and that He appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve. 6 After that He appeared to more than five hundred brethren at one time, most of whom remain until now, but some have fallen asleep; 7 then He appeared to [c]James, then to all the apostles; 8 and last of all, as [d]to one untimely born, He appeared to me also. 9 For I am the least of the apostles, [e]and not fit to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God.

Cephas is the Hellenized form of the Aramaic Kepha, it means "rock". His name is usually translated into Greek, as Petros: Peter. The name Jesus gave Simon bar Jonah. Paul doesn't bother translating. So Cephas is Peter.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[Restoresmysoul]

Cephas is the Hellenized form of the Aramaic Kepha, it means "rock". His name is usually translated into Greek, as Petros: Peter. The name Jesus gave Simon bar Jonah. Paul doesn't bother translating. So Cephas is Peter.

-CryptoLutheran

Thank you.

 

[Standing Up]

I don't see a contradiction. But i just noticed this scripture and remembered this thread. Who is Cephas?

1 Co 15:3 For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received, that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, 4 and that He was buried, and that He was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, 5 and that He appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve. 6 After that He appeared to more than five hundred brethren at one time, most of whom remain until now, but some have fallen asleep; 7 then He appeared to [c]James, then to all the apostles; 8 and last of all, as [d]to one untimely born, He appeared to me also. 9 For I am the least of the apostles, [e]and not fit to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God.

The usual answer is Cephas is Peter. Others answer, however, that Cephas was someone different.

The other question then bears about when would that appearance have taken place to someone named Cephas? Some answer scripture doesn't say. Others view it as taking place with the two on the road to Emmaus.

You may google these things if you're interested.

 

[Restoresmysoul]

The usual answer is Cephas is Peter. Others answer, however, that Cephas was someone different.

The other question then bears about when would that appearance have taken place to someone named Cephas? Some answer scripture doesn't say. Others view it as taking place with the two on the road to Emmaus.

You may google these things if you're interested.

Thanks. Maybe i will google that sometime, it does seem interesting.

 

[ViaCrucis]

The usual answer is Cephas is Peter. Others answer, however, that Cephas was someone different.

The other question then bears about when would that appearance have taken place to someone named Cephas? Some answer scripture doesn't say. Others view it as taking place with the two on the road to Emmaus.

You may google these things if you're interested.

I've never heard anyone ever suggest that Cephas and Peter were entirely different people.

Kepha and Petros both mean "Rock", which is the name Jesus gave to Simon bar Jonah. One is Aramaic, and is thus likely what Jesus, in His own voice, called Simon. "Petros" being a translation into Greek.

It would make sense to me that given St. Paul is our earlier Christian writer, that he preserves the Aramaic form of the name Jesus gave Simon as Cephas. Whereas by the time of the Gospels the Greek translation of "Petros" had started to become the norm.

In Syriac (Aramaic) translations of the Bible, going back to antiquity, the name Jesus gives Simon bar John in Matthew 16 is, indeed, Kepha.

ܐܴܦ݂ ܐܷܢܳܐ ܐܴܡܰܪ ܐ̱ܢܳܐ ܠܴܟ݂ ܂ ܕܱ݁ܐܢ̄ܬ݁ ܗ̄ܽܘ ܟܻ݁ܐܦ݂ܳܐ ܂ ܘܥܰܠ ܗܳܕ݂ܶܐ ܟܻ݁ܐܦ݂ܳܐ ܐܷܒ݂ܢܶܝܗ ܠܥܺܕ̱݁ܬ݁ܝ܂ ܘܬ݂ܱܪ̈ܥܶܐ ܕܱ݁ܫܝܽܘܠ ܠܴܐ ܢܶܚܣܢܽܘܢܳܗ܂

“Again I say to you that you are the Rock (Kepha), and upon this Rock (Kepha) I will build my Church, and the gates of Sheol will not subdue it.”

The bold words are "Kepha", Hellenized as Kephas (then into English as Cephas), or translated into Greek as Petros (and rendered into English as Peter).

-CryptoLutheran

 

[Standing Up]

I've never heard anyone ever suggest that Cephas and Peter were entirely different people.

Kepha and Petros both mean "Rock", which is the name Jesus gave to Simon bar Jonah. One is Aramaic, and is thus likely what Jesus, in His own voice, called Simon. "Petros" being a translation into Greek.

It would make sense to me that given St. Paul is our earlier Christian writer, that he preserves the Aramaic form of the name Jesus gave Simon as Cephas. Whereas by the time of the Gospels the Greek translation of "Petros" had started to become the norm.

In Syriac (Aramaic) translations of the Bible, going back to antiquity, the name Jesus gives Simon bar John in Matthew 16 is, indeed, Kepha.

ܐܴܦ݂ ܐܷܢܳܐ ܐܴܡܰܪ ܐ̱ܢܳܐ ܠܴܟ݂ ܂ ܕܱ݁ܐܢ̄ܬ݁ ܗ̄ܽܘ ܟܻ݁ܐܦ݂ܳܐ ܂ ܘܥܰܠ ܗܳܕ݂ܶܐ ܟܻ݁ܐܦ݂ܳܐ ܐܷܒ݂ܢܶܝܗ ܠܥܺܕ̱݁ܬ݁ܝ܂ ܘܬ݂ܱܪ̈ܥܶܐ ܕܱ݁ܫܝܽܘܠ ܠܴܐ ܢܶܚܣܢܽܘܢܳܗ܂

“Again I say to you that you are the Rock (Kepha), and upon this Rock (Kepha) I will build my Church, and the gates of Sheol will not subdue it.”

The bold words are "Kepha", Hellenized as Kephas (then into English as Cephas), or translated into Greek as Petros (and rendered into English as Peter).

-CryptoLutheran

You're probably right, though there are some who think otherwise.

Paul uses "Cephas" throughout 1 Cor to refer to Peter.

I was mainly recalling the vague connection of Cephas to Cleopas and the idea that Jesus appeared first to Peter, but where is it in scripture? Perhaps an old oral tradition passed down to Paul.