I cannot believe how deep the brainwashing goes when it comes to watching the defenders try to defend the obvious inconsistencies and at least one major contradiction of the four gospel accounts of the discovery of the empty tomb.
This is the most monumental claim that Christianity brings – that Jesus rose from the dead! I mean, there were no witnesses to that apparent event at all. All they have is the discovery of the empty tomb. Yet the story of this discovery is riddled with blatantly conflicting accounts of who discovered it, what they saw and what they did afterward.
They cannot even get the part about who was first on scene witnessing the empty tomb. They don’t even get the number of people correct. Was it one woman, two women or three women?
Matthew says that Mary Magdeline and “the other Mary” discovered the empty tomb.
Mark says that it was Mary Magdeline, “the other Mary” and Salome.
Luke gives the credit to Mary Magdeline, “the other Mary, and Joanna.
John says Mary Magdeline was alone.
Besides this, what they saw when they got there and what they did immediately after the discovery are also vastly different.
One obvious contradiction is that the book of Matthew which says that when the two women got there, the stone was still there and they witnessed the stone being rolled away. The other accounts all say that when whomever arrived, the stone was already rolled away. This is what any reasonably-minded person sees as a contradiction.
If you’re not aware of the conflicts, I’ve delved in deep here, complete with direct links to an online bible, so you can check it out for yourself.
How Defenders Spin The Fact That Inconsistencies and Contradictions Not Only Exist, But That They Are Also Good!
In brief, they say the blatant inconsistences and contradiction is a good thing! Wait! What? How?
They compare it to witnesses in a car accident. They blindly and thoughtlessly repeat what they have heard and they truly seem to think it’s a great analogy!
In a modern car accident, you will not get full truth from the witnesses. You will get inconsistencies. After all, these are only human and prone to see things from a limited perspective. This is true.
Here is why there are obvious issues to this line of thinking.
First off, none of these writers were eye witnesses. Matthew, Mark, Luke and John did not wake up early to follow Mary Magdeline and whomever she was with to see what she, or they, would do that day. If that was the case, the writers would at least be able to see if there was woman, two women or three women. They would, at least, get that basic fact correct.
The argument for inconsistencies and the contradiction being human error does not work because they also try to tell us that everything in the bible is perfect, contains, no errors and was divinely inspired by the holy spirit.
Is It Divinely Inspired Or Is It Human Written And Subject To Errors And Inconsistencies?
They want to have it both ways here. They fully realize that the accounts are conflicting. So they reconcile it with the idea that this makes the story more believable, because it contains human error!
This is where the mental gymnastics kicks in, heavily.
If all of these words in the bible are divinely inspired by the holy spirit, was it the holy spirit telling them to write things down incorrectly? Why would the holy spirit give four different men, four very different versions of what happened, to the point where there is an obvious contradiction.
It doesn’t work. Stop trying to make it so.
Free Your Mind 
Leave a comment