JCM: Jesus' Empty Tomb and the Angels

Sunday, March 27, 2016

Jesus' Empty Tomb and the Angels

Every celebration of Easter Season is concoction of a fortunate and unfortunate event because while the Catholic Church are joyful of the Resurrection, there’s constantly a need to educate the non-Catholics’ skepticism about memorializing of the Resurrection (whose permanent question about it is “How many times does your Christ resurrects?”) that Jesus’ resurrection is the final testimony that the Lord indeed is triumphant in His mission to save humanity, that He undeniably rose from the grave after death and ascends into Heaven.

While the Catholics are fortunate and in utter bliss in praising and worshipping for this gift, it’s unfortunate that along with non-Catholics, atheists bitterly yell that there’s no such thing as Resurrection, despite the relentless awareness raised in all platforms (pulpit, TV, radio, social media, broadsheet, books, literatures, word of mouth etc.) which is treated by them as a mere fabrication, a drama by the Church, and nothing but a Liturgical hallucination.

Are there contradictions in the Gospel accounts for them to be unbelievers of the Resurrection? Let’s find out, for the benefit of the doubt?

Matthew 28:1-10

After the sabbath, as the first day of the week was dawning, Mary Magdalene and the other Mary came to see the tomb. And behold, there was a great earthquake; for an angel of the Lord descended from heaven, approached, rolled back the stone, and sat upon it. His appearance was like lightning and his clothing was white as snow. The guards were shaken with fear of him and became like dead men. Then the angel said to the women in reply, "Do not be afraid! I know that you are seeking Jesus the crucified. He is not here, for he has been raised just as he said. Come and see the place where he lay. Then go quickly and tell his disciples, 'He has been raised from the dead, and he is going before you to Galilee; there you will see him.' Behold, I have told you." Then they went away quickly from the tomb, fearful yet overjoyed, and ran to announce this to his disciples. And behold, Jesus met them on their way and greeted them. They approached, embraced his feet, and did him homage. Then Jesus said to them, "Do not be afraid. Go tell my brothers to go to Galilee, and there they will see me."

Mark 16:1-11

When the sabbath was over, Mary Magdalene, Mary, the mother of James, and Salome bought spices so that they might go and anoint him. Very early when the sun had risen, on the first day of the week, they came to the tomb. They were saying to one another, "Who will roll back the stone for us from the entrance to the tomb?" When they looked up, they saw that the stone had been rolled back; it was very large. On entering the tomb they saw a young man sitting on the right side, clothed in a white robe, and they were utterly amazed. He said to them, "Do not be amazed! You seek Jesus of Nazareth, the crucified. He has been raised; he is not here. Behold the place where they laid him. But go and tell his disciples and Peter, 'He is going before you to Galilee; there you will see him, as he told you.'" Then they went out and fled from the tomb, seized with trembling and bewilderment. They said nothing to anyone, for they were afraid. When he had risen, early on the first day of the week, he appeared first to Mary Magdalene, out of whom he had driven seven demons. She went and told his companions who were mourning and weeping. When they heard that he was alive and had been seen by her, they did not believe.

Luke 24:1-12

But at daybreak on the first day of the week they took the spices they had prepared and went to the tomb. They found the stone rolled away from the tomb; but when they entered, they did not find the body of the Lord Jesus. While they were puzzling over this, behold, two men in dazzling garments appeared to them. They were terrified and bowed their faces to the ground. They said to them, "Why do you seek the living one among the dead? He is not here, but he has been raised. 2 Remember what he said to you while he was still in Galilee, that the Son of Man must be handed over to sinners and be crucified, and rise on the third day." And they remembered his words. Then they returned from the tomb and announced all these things to the eleven and to all the others. The women were Mary Magdalene, Joanna, and Mary the mother of James; the others who accompanied them also told this to the apostles, but their story seemed like nonsense and they did not believe them. But Peter got up and ran to the tomb, bent down, and saw the burial cloths alone; then he went home amazed at what had happened.

Mark 16:1-11

None of these accounts seem to line up with each other. In two accounts there’s one angel mentioned, and in two accounts two angels. In Matthew the angel sits on the rock while in Mark he is in the tomb. In Luke the two angels are simply standing before the women. In Matthew, it says plainly that the women grasped Jesus' feet and worshiped Him. In John, Jesus ordered Mary not to touch Him. In Matthew, the stone is miraculously rolled away by an angel, accompanied by an earthquake. In all of the other Gospels, the stone is presented as already having been rolled away when the women arrived. Many claim that these are true contradictions.

Let’s find out if their claims are true. First, there’s a need to understand a particular Scriptural principle through Principle of Non-Exclusion. This means that when the Scriptures mention a particular event as occurring, other possible events not mentioned in the text are not thereby eliminated, unless they are directly contradictory to what is written. For example, the Gospel of John appears like Mary Magdalene went to the tomb alone: "Now on the first day of the week, Mary Magdalene came to the tomb early, while it was still dark." Nothing is stated of anybody else. Nevertheless, the fact that only Mary is indicated does not discard the possibility that others were with her, and it’s known from the other Gospels that she was in fact not alone: Luke mentions "Joanna and Mary the mother of James and the other women" as being there, as well (Luke 24:10). So, the fact that Mary alone is pointed out by John does not conflict with the account of Luke for one simple reason: though Mary alone is hinted at by John, John nowhere affirms that Mary ONLY was at the tomb. This is the flip-side of the Principle of Non-Exclusion: while nothing is discarded that does not disagree with the narrative, anything that would oppose it must be discarded.

Let’s apply this to the Resurrection accounts, by looking not at what the accounts don't say but what they do say, then, fill in the gaps.

To begin with, let's establish the issue of the stone.

Matthew says that the stone was rolled away miraculously by an earthquake and an accompanying angel. Therefore, since the Scriptures specifically assert an earthquake, one must take into account that the movement of the stone was caused by an earthquake. When the accounts are checked, none of the other three Gospels indicate how the stone was moved, they only say that the women found it and turned away when they got there. Thus, this leaves conclusion, to make the obvious connection that the stone was rolled away by the earthquake stated in Matthew. Asserting otherwise would be to accuse Sacred Scripture of being untrustworthy.

The time the stone was rolled away is also in question. Matthew’s narration looks as if the stone was rolled away before the eyes of the women: On the first day of the week, Mary Magdalene and the other Mary went to see the tomb. And behold, there was a great earthquake; for an angel of the Lord descended from heaven and came and rolled back the stone and sat upon it (Matthew 28:1-2).

Nevertheless, by examining the text closely, it could be established that it does not imply that these two events (the women coming to the tomb and the earthquake) were simultaneous. There’s only an assumption that it is so because of the order in which Scripture relates these events, but sentence order does not necessarily imply anything chronologically. Let’s try to peep in at a similar passage taken from the chapter earlier from the death of Jesus:

And Jesus cried again with a loud voice and yielded up His spirit. And behold, the curtain of the temple was torn in two, from top to bottom; and the earth shook, and the rocks were split; the tombs also were opened, and many bodies of the saints who had fallen asleep were raised, and coming out of the tombs after His resurrection they went into the holy city and appeared to many. And the centurion and those who were with him, keeping watch over Jesus, saw the earthquake and what took place, they were filled with awe and said, "Truly, this was the Son of God!" (Matthew 27:51-54)

Once scrutinized, the sentence order of this section seems to insinuate that all of these events cropped up right after Jesus' death, especially since Matthew uses the word 'Behold' to draw the audience’s attention. But if one looks at the section about the tombs of the saints opening, the Gospel says that they came out of their tombs “after His resurrection,” that is, three days later at least. But Matthew places this event in the same section as the centurion's act of faith and the splitting of the temple curtain, both of which occurred at the time Jesus breathe His last.

Applying this to the stone, it could be viewed that it is not necessary to maintain that the stone was rolled away by an earthquake in the presence of the women. Mark, Luke and John uniformly say that they found the stone rolled away when they arrived there. Perhaps, Matthew should be interpreted as saying that while the women were setting out, or while they were on the way there, the earthquake took place, leaving the stone rolled away for them to find. Utilizing man’s principle, it could be seen that Mark, Luke and John consistently and specifically cite that the stone was moved when the women got there, and so this should be taken into consideration. Matthew is unclear with respect to the time, and so the gap in Matthew can be interpreted referring the information as provided by the other three Gospels.

Further, aside from the stone, the angels are also in question. Matthew has one, Mark one, Luke two, while John reports nothing about it. Matthew accounts that the angel sits upon the rolled back stone, Mark tells the angel sits in the tomb, and Luke recounts there are two angels who both of them simply "appear" before the women and stand there. If Luke mentions two, then there must have been two. The fact that Matthew or Mark cites one angel does not rule out the likelihood of a second one not mentioned by them, as John's exclusion of any angel's does not imply they were not there, only that he prefers to exclude them.

If Luke's statement that there were two angels is taken, then the fact that the angel in Matthew sits on the stone while Mark's angel is in the tomb should not create confusion, as it is simply agreeing with Luke that there were two angels, each in a different location. Concerning Luke statement saying that the angels "stood" by them, while Matthew and Mark both have their angels sit, it is interesting to consider that the word "stood" is a pretty all-encompassing verb. For example, if one says that he together with his friends were "standing" around outside the apartment, it could mean that two of the were standing, one was sitting on the front steps, one was reclining on the grass, and one was leaning up against a tree. Still, the phrase "standing around" would be suitable for this situation. Therefore, the fact that Luke uses the word "stood" needs no compelling force to accept that the angels were literally standing up. Or, if they were, it does not compel to believe they stood the whole time. The angel in Mark's Gospel, who was sitting in the tomb, could have gotten up and stood upon seeing the women approaching. No accounted several postures of the angels can be obtained from the Gospels. However, it is a common sense that whether it is sitting, reclining or squatting posture at that instance, every posture is entitled to change eventually because of from time to time body movements.

Mary's encounter with Jesus is also raised as issue here. Matthew records it, as does John, but the order and the events surrounding the episode are different. Matthew tells that the women are specifically said to have clung to Jesus' feet, while John accounts that Jesus tells Mary, "Do not hold Me, for I have not yet ascended to the Father" (John 20:17).

The question that crops up is that how come that in Matthew’s Mary holds Him while it’s opposite in John. Matthew directly says that they did hold Jesus, so one must take this into account that He was touched by the women. It should be noted that although Matthew told that they hold, John’s account may be interpreted in a sense that Mary attempted to touch Him but Jesus pulled away from her before she was able to, and lastly if viewed it any angles the text does not actually say whether Jesus was touched or not. However, Jesus' words seem to imply that Mary did indeed touch Him. Nonetheless, it’s interesting to note that the Lord did not say, "Do not touch Me," but, "Do not hold Me." The use of the verb "hold" seems to imply that she had in fact been holding the Lord before He gave her the command, “Touch Me Not”. Hence, Matthew and John are reconcilable. Matthew accounted that Jesus' feet were clasped while John wrote down that Jesus told them to let go of Him.

Matthew's Gospel narrates that Mary Magdalene and the women run to Jesus after leaving the tomb and the encounter with the angel (verse 28:10). There He repeats the message of the angel and tells them to go tell the disciples about His resurrection.

John stages a more difficult chronology (20:11-18): Mary goes to the tomb and sees it empty (no angels are mentioned), runs back to tell the disciples and Peter, and John in haste go to the tomb to probe. Mary encounters Jesus, does not know who He is, recognizes Him, and is commanded to go back and tell the disciples of His resurrection.

Peter and John's rush to the tomb is not an issue as this is mentioned in Luke as well. The issue is Mary's meeting with Jesus. Matthew as the only other Gospel to mention this meeting tells that she meets Jesus after leaving the tomb the first time. There He commands her to go tell the disciples of the Resurrection. On the other hand, John's Gospel narrates that she apparently accompanies Peter and John back to the tomb to show them and has her encounter with Christ after they leave, which would make this her second time seeing the Risen Lord. He gives her the same command to tell the disciples about Jesus’ Resurrection, and she again does so. From these points, two possibilities can be made:

1) Mary goes to the tomb two times (once with the women, once with Peter and John), sees the Risen Lord two times, receives the same instructions two times and carries them out twice.

2) Mary sees Jesus only once: the meeting of Jesus and Mary in Matthew is the same meeting as portrayed in John.

Number two can be much more probable. Looking at John's Gospel, although Mary's encounter with Jesus is mentioned after Peter and John’s appearance to the tomb, it does not specifically say that this is the instance when it happened. It could have occurred on her first visits and was mentioned in this place only because John desired to give emphasis to Peter's visit to the tomb instead of Mary's visit from Jesus. This emerges later on, as a reference to the episode with Peter and John.

Hypothesizing two appearances to Mary is to be soldered into an attempt to explain Jesus’ awkward position commanding Mary to go tell the disciples of the Lord’s resurrection, Mary doing so and bringing the two back to the tomb, and then being again commissioned by Jesus to do the same thing she had already done, and her going to tell the disciples again that Jesus rose even though they had already been there in the tomb and seen it. It seems straightforward to simply say that John's narrative of Mary's visit with Jesus is not chronological while Matthew's is sequential.

Putting them all together, what really happened on Easter morning is that

Mary Magdalene, Joanna, the other Mary and some other unnamed women arose early to go to the tomb. While they were on their way (but before they arrived), there was an earthquake and the stone was rolled away by an angel. The guards were stricken and fainted. The women possibly heard the earthquake or felt it from afar. Arriving in the area, they found the guards passed out and the stone rolled away. Then out of curiosity, they went inside the tomb to examine and found the body was not there anymore. At this juncturee, two angels appeared, one on the stone, another in the tomb who told these women that Jesus was not dead, but had risen, and that they should go and tell the disciples. The women fled in fear.

While approaching, they ran to Jesus and did not recognize Him (Mary thought He was the gardener). When Jesus uttered Mary's name, they recognized Him and clasped His feet in worship. Nevertheless, He commanded them to stop holding Him, but charged them to go, as the angel had instructed, to tell the disciples the good news about the Resurrection.

The women returned, and Mary told the disciples. Most of them disbelieved, but Peter and John hurried to the tomb. John arrived there first, but he waited for Peter. They went into the tomb, saw the linen cloths, and left bowled over.

There it is, about the Resurrection. This account is coherent with all of the Gospels. Anyone who says that the Gospel accounts contradict each other is the one who wants the Gospels to contradict each other and who has no time on discerning this, or if not, skeptics may have the chance to read the Scriptures but felt self-sufficient by his/her private word-for-word interpretation out of pride that he/she is intellectual than the other not knowing that there are things that she/he knows which others don’t know and there are things that others know which she/he does not , or if not, a number of them prefers not to entertain anymore what the Church authorities say about it because of personal interest or pursuits of the few to gain advantage for whatever sort than universal benefit, or if not, others have been completely blinded by indoctrination which conditions their minds, heart and conscience to hate Resurrection celebration – everything that human feeds to her/mind whether good or bad is adapted by these faculties forever except in the presence of readiness to accept and embrace logical truth.

Whatever the reason may be for non-acceptance of celebrating the Resurrection just like how they give a negative response on celebrating Christmas and the Seven Sacraments, may the good Lord who emptied the tomb which gives a sign that He emptied everybody’s sin bringing each one in His eyes a new life without any marks from the violence of sin, like a blank tomb without any traces of blots from the cruelty of man’s transgressions; may also empty everybody’s pride, self-sufficiency and wrong motives to replace it with humility and hunger for truth, especially those who utterly renounce Jesus, the skeptics, those who are inside the faith but have no time in engagement, and the converts who after conversion repudiates the Resurrection that the Church celebrates in honor of Jesus’ summit of saving the humanity, providing an inkling that indeed Jesus death does not end up in the grave but rather He rises from the dead, and that everybody who lives in Him, with Him and for Him, bon in words and in deeds will also rise with Him at the time of death, Amen!