Q (Author's Reconstruction):
Mary and Mary Magdalene go to the tomb of Jesus early on sunday. However, when they got there, they were suprised to find that the tomb had been rolled away. The tomb was found to be empty, and they were informed by a messenger that God had raised Jesus from the dead.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
When the Sabbath was over, Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James, and Salome brought spices, so that they might go and anoint him (Mark 16.1).
Matthew agrees with Mark that it was after the Sabbath and that both Marys were involved. He does not mention James and Salome either way (28.1). Matthew includes a massive earthquake, the descending of an angel, and the stone being rolled away (28.2). Luke agrees, but incorporates the account of the spices (24.1).
-------------------------------------------------------------------
And very early on the first day of the week, when the sun had risen, they went to the tomb (Mark 16.2).
Matthew agrees with Mark. So does Luke.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
They had been saying to one another, "Who will roll away the stone for us from the entrance to the tomb?" (Mark 16.3).
Matthew does not include this, but does not preclude it. Same could be said about Luke.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
When they looked up, they saw that the stone, which was very large, had already been rolled back (Mark 16.4).
Matthew gives us the account of the angel to explain this (28.2). Luke agrees with Mark and does not include Matthew's story about the earthquake (again, not necessarily in variance).
--------------------------------------------------------------------
As they entered the tomb, they saw a young man, dressed in a white robe, sitting on the right side; and they were alarmed (Mark 16.5).
Matthew interprets the young man in white as being an angel in white (28.3). In Matthew, "they were alarmed" seems to refer to the guards (28.3). Luke disagrees with both of them, in Luke's account, there are two men, both of which suddenly appear as angels (24.4).
--------------------------------------------------------------------
But he said to them, "Do not be alarmed; you are looking for Jesus of Nazareth, who was crucified. He has been raised, he is not here. Look, there is the place they laid him. But go, tell his disciples and Peter that he is going ahead of you to Galilee; there you will see him, just as he told you." (Mark 16.6-7).
Matthew, in less detail, agrees that Jesus has been raised and invites them to go in and see the tomb (28.6). Mark 16.7 and Matthew 28.7 are almost complete parallels; Matthew did not see the need to altar Mark. Although more lengthy, Luke agrees with both that they were told of Jesus' resurrection. Luke's account here (except for the variance of two men versus one) can be seen as harmonizable.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
So they went out and fled from the tomb, for terror and amazement had seized them; and they said nothing to anyone, for they were afraid (Mark 16.8).
Luke seems to disagree. In his account, they run out and tell the 11 disciples. Furthermore, Luke attributes this to the fact that they remembered Jesus' own words, lest we try to say that Matthew's account of Jesus appearing to them changed their minds (24.7-9).
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Mark 16.9-20, whether "true" or not, was not part of the original. Though the original most likely did not end with v.8, the original ending is long gone. V.9-20 may or may not accurately reflect Mark's intended ending.
In Matthew's account (28.9-10) Jesus appears to the women and they touch his feet (Matthew interprets the resurrection as being physical). Also, Jesus agrees with the angel that they should go to Galilee where he would appear.
Luke's continuation is much more lengthy. He includes the story of Peter going to them tomb, which is not necessarily at variance with the other accounts (24.12). Furthermore, the road to Emmaus seems to be the main place of Jesus' appearings, not Galilee (24.13-onward). ***NOTE: The majority of resurrection appearances are found in Luke's account, the latest of all of the synoptics.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Mark's account seems to be simply historical. Matthew seems to give theological significance to the man in the white womb by saying that it was angel. Other than this, Matthew agrees wholeheartedly with Mark (and even the one point of variance is subject to opinion). Luke agrees with the basic structure of Mark and Matthew, but adds a lot (most noteably the road to Emmaus). The main variances, however, are in the question of whether or not it was one or two men/angels in the tomb as well as whether or not it was just women who went to the tomb (M and L).
In conclusion, there is overall agreement that God raised Jesus from the dead--there is not agreement on the details and/or the appearances. John's gospel was not included in this analysis because his not historical.
All Scripture quotations, taken from the New Revised Standard Version, NRSV.
Mary and Mary Magdalene go to the tomb of Jesus early on sunday. However, when they got there, they were suprised to find that the tomb had been rolled away. The tomb was found to be empty, and they were informed by a messenger that God had raised Jesus from the dead.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
When the Sabbath was over, Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James, and Salome brought spices, so that they might go and anoint him (Mark 16.1).
Matthew agrees with Mark that it was after the Sabbath and that both Marys were involved. He does not mention James and Salome either way (28.1). Matthew includes a massive earthquake, the descending of an angel, and the stone being rolled away (28.2). Luke agrees, but incorporates the account of the spices (24.1).
-------------------------------------------------------------------
And very early on the first day of the week, when the sun had risen, they went to the tomb (Mark 16.2).
Matthew agrees with Mark. So does Luke.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
They had been saying to one another, "Who will roll away the stone for us from the entrance to the tomb?" (Mark 16.3).
Matthew does not include this, but does not preclude it. Same could be said about Luke.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
When they looked up, they saw that the stone, which was very large, had already been rolled back (Mark 16.4).
Matthew gives us the account of the angel to explain this (28.2). Luke agrees with Mark and does not include Matthew's story about the earthquake (again, not necessarily in variance).
--------------------------------------------------------------------
As they entered the tomb, they saw a young man, dressed in a white robe, sitting on the right side; and they were alarmed (Mark 16.5).
Matthew interprets the young man in white as being an angel in white (28.3). In Matthew, "they were alarmed" seems to refer to the guards (28.3). Luke disagrees with both of them, in Luke's account, there are two men, both of which suddenly appear as angels (24.4).
--------------------------------------------------------------------
But he said to them, "Do not be alarmed; you are looking for Jesus of Nazareth, who was crucified. He has been raised, he is not here. Look, there is the place they laid him. But go, tell his disciples and Peter that he is going ahead of you to Galilee; there you will see him, just as he told you." (Mark 16.6-7).
Matthew, in less detail, agrees that Jesus has been raised and invites them to go in and see the tomb (28.6). Mark 16.7 and Matthew 28.7 are almost complete parallels; Matthew did not see the need to altar Mark. Although more lengthy, Luke agrees with both that they were told of Jesus' resurrection. Luke's account here (except for the variance of two men versus one) can be seen as harmonizable.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
So they went out and fled from the tomb, for terror and amazement had seized them; and they said nothing to anyone, for they were afraid (Mark 16.8).
Luke seems to disagree. In his account, they run out and tell the 11 disciples. Furthermore, Luke attributes this to the fact that they remembered Jesus' own words, lest we try to say that Matthew's account of Jesus appearing to them changed their minds (24.7-9).
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Mark 16.9-20, whether "true" or not, was not part of the original. Though the original most likely did not end with v.8, the original ending is long gone. V.9-20 may or may not accurately reflect Mark's intended ending.
In Matthew's account (28.9-10) Jesus appears to the women and they touch his feet (Matthew interprets the resurrection as being physical). Also, Jesus agrees with the angel that they should go to Galilee where he would appear.
Luke's continuation is much more lengthy. He includes the story of Peter going to them tomb, which is not necessarily at variance with the other accounts (24.12). Furthermore, the road to Emmaus seems to be the main place of Jesus' appearings, not Galilee (24.13-onward). ***NOTE: The majority of resurrection appearances are found in Luke's account, the latest of all of the synoptics.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Mark's account seems to be simply historical. Matthew seems to give theological significance to the man in the white womb by saying that it was angel. Other than this, Matthew agrees wholeheartedly with Mark (and even the one point of variance is subject to opinion). Luke agrees with the basic structure of Mark and Matthew, but adds a lot (most noteably the road to Emmaus). The main variances, however, are in the question of whether or not it was one or two men/angels in the tomb as well as whether or not it was just women who went to the tomb (M and L).
In conclusion, there is overall agreement that God raised Jesus from the dead--there is not agreement on the details and/or the appearances. John's gospel was not included in this analysis because his not historical.
All Scripture quotations, taken from the New Revised Standard Version, NRSV.
