Updated:

Gospel Inconsistencies: Complementary Accounts of Jesus’s Resurrection Essay

Exclusively available on Available only on IvyPanda® Written by Human No AI

Introduction

When getting acquainted with biblical texts, one may find that the same event is described with certain inconsistencies. For example, the four accounts of the resurrection of Jesus Christ are referred to as the primary proof of contradictions in the Gospels. However, it is essential to examine whether these differences in detail are actual contradictions or merely appear to be so. The purpose of this essay is to list three examples of inconsistencies and explain why they complement and do not contradict each other.

Differences in the Accounts of the Visitors to the Tomb

To begin with, there is an inconsistency in the description of those people visiting the tomb. John records only the presence of Mary Magdalene, while other evangelists mention that she was not alone (Engelbrecht, 2014). Matthew talks about the other Mary accompanying her, and in Luke’s account, there are two women, including Joanna. Lastly, Mark does not write about Joanna but names Mary Magdalene, Mary, the mother of James, and Salome. Some people find a contradiction in these descriptions, but a simple explanation can prove that all four accounts merely complement each other (Engelbrecht, 2014).

Thus, in Matthew’s Gospel, the other Mary is Mary, the mother of James, whose presence is also stated by Luke and Mark. The latter two evangelists mention different persons, Joanna and Salome, meaning both came to the grave. Therefore, this is not a contradiction, and to understand the whole group of people visiting the tomb, all four accounts should be read.

Variations in the Reported Time of the Visit

Another apparent inconsistency is the exact time when the grave was visited. Engelbrecht (2014) indicates that Mark and John contradict each other, as the former refers to the morning or afternoon because it was light when the women came, but John states that it was still dark. Similar to the previous example, these accounts should be considered complementary to each other.

Engelbrecht (2014) believes that Mark describes when Mary Magdalene started her trip to the grave. Simultaneously, John is most likely to refer to her arrival, so he writes that the sun had already risen. These accounts enable readers to understand how long the walk lasted, when it began, and what time of day it concluded.

Discrepancies in the Description of the Angels at the Tomb

Eventually, there is another example of theologists’ and people’s misunderstanding of some scenes’ details in the four Gospels. Similar to the first seeming contradiction explained in this paper, in the following scene, the evangelists differ in their consideration of more or less essential facts (Engelbrecht, 2014). In the accounts of Matthew and Mark, one angel is mentioned to speak to the women, while the other two evangelists refer to two angels delivering the news.

However, Matthew and Mark do not indicate that only one angel arrived at the tomb; instead, they say that only one was speaking, which does not exclude the possibility of other angels being there. Therefore, the evangelists’ different preferences in describing the event explain all these seeming inconsistencies. Taken together, they provide a complete picture of Jesus’s resurrection, while each evangelist complements the accounts of the others.

Conclusion

To conclude, the provided examples contain certain inconsistencies and differences. Additionally, certain scenes in the description of Jesus’ resurrection raise doubts about the truthfulness of some Gospels. However, the four accounts should be considered as the four pieces of a single picture, and taken together, they provide a better understanding of the event in question.

Reference

Engelbrecht, E. (Ed.). (2014). The resurrection of Jesus. In the Lutheran Bible Companion (Vol. 2, pp. 169-173). Concordia Publishing House.

Cite This paper
You're welcome to use this sample in your assignment. Be sure to cite it correctly

Reference

IvyPanda. (2026, February 21). Gospel Inconsistencies: Complementary Accounts of Jesus's Resurrection. https://ivypanda.com/essays/gospel-inconsistencies-complementary-accounts-of-jesuss-resurrection/

Work Cited

"Gospel Inconsistencies: Complementary Accounts of Jesus's Resurrection." IvyPanda, 21 Feb. 2026, ivypanda.com/essays/gospel-inconsistencies-complementary-accounts-of-jesuss-resurrection/.

References

IvyPanda. (2026) 'Gospel Inconsistencies: Complementary Accounts of Jesus's Resurrection'. 21 February.

References

IvyPanda. 2026. "Gospel Inconsistencies: Complementary Accounts of Jesus's Resurrection." February 21, 2026. https://ivypanda.com/essays/gospel-inconsistencies-complementary-accounts-of-jesuss-resurrection/.

1. IvyPanda. "Gospel Inconsistencies: Complementary Accounts of Jesus's Resurrection." February 21, 2026. https://ivypanda.com/essays/gospel-inconsistencies-complementary-accounts-of-jesuss-resurrection/.


Bibliography


IvyPanda. "Gospel Inconsistencies: Complementary Accounts of Jesus's Resurrection." February 21, 2026. https://ivypanda.com/essays/gospel-inconsistencies-complementary-accounts-of-jesuss-resurrection/.

If, for any reason, you believe that this content should not be published on our website, you can request its removal.
Updated:
This academic paper example has been carefully picked, checked, and refined by our editorial team.
No AI was involved: only qualified experts contributed.
You are free to use it for the following purposes:
  • To find inspiration for your paper and overcome writer’s block
  • As a source of information (ensure proper referencing)
  • As a template for your assignment
1 / 1