Why does the resurrection story in Mark contradict Luke?

Question

You can look these up if you want
1. Mark 16:5 states that " 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 16:8 " 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.
Then In Mark 16:9 it indicates that they only told them after Jesus appeared to mary first.

2. Luke 24:4 While they were perplexed about this,suddenly 2 men in dazzling clothes stood beside them.
Luke 24:8-9 " Then they remembered his words and returning from the tomb, they told all this to the eleven and to all the rest.

How come both the stories don't match? I know that they are slight differences but when it comes to the resurrection story. The difference between 1 person in the tomb and 2 can be huge!

Answer 1

As salaamu 'alaikym , my friend.

The Gospels were written between 70 to 150 years after the life of the Prophet Essa (peace be upon him).
They are not eye witness accounts. In fact, they are at best second or third hand accounts based upon similar source material.

The question should be why were more than one account written?
If the Gospel stories are true, a single accounting should have been enough. However, many "Gospels" were written and they contradict one another, some contain details that others don't, etc., as well as many "Gospels" having been excluded from the conanical or accepted "Gospels" when the Roman Catholic Chruch, at the Council of Nicence (approximately 356 C.E.)codified the same.
How many "Gospels" or "truths" are there, why are some acceptable and others not to the Christian community, why is there disagreement between the various "Gospels", etc., etc., etc.?
Sadly, this goes to show that Christainity, as it was begun by the writer Paul, is at best a cafeteria style religion where the adherents pick and choose what they want (some of this, some of that, two of those and none of the ones you don't like, etc.). The Gospels themselves have been corrupted by evil men who sought power and control over others and, to a great extent, the original message fo the Prophet Essa (peace be uopn him ) that may have once been contained there in has been lost.

For a better understadning of the truth regarding the Prophet Essa (peace be upon him) called "Jesus" ( a Greek name for a Jewish prophet) by the Christians, please read the Holy Qur'an.

Ma'a salaam.

Answer 2

It's just a matter of personal choice as to what you are going to edit out and what you are going to keep. Remember, the ministry of Jesus lasted 3 1/2 years. He was teaching and healing people and doing other unbelievable things everyday. There simply is no way you could put everything He ever did into any book. The Apostle John said(in John21:25) that " Jesus did many other things as well. If every one of them were written down, I suppose that even the whole world would not have room for the books that would be written".
The gospel writers had to pick and choose what they wrote down because of limited space. In that particular incident, there was 2 angels. One was doing all the talking and the other one was just there. Mark chose to use his space telling his readers what the one angel said. Luke decides to mention that there was another angel there. There is no contradiction. Luke says there were 2 angels there. Mark mentions one. Had Mark said there was "ONLY" one, then you would have a contradiction.
Anyone who has ever been an investigative reporter or a Private detective knows that for any kind of news story or crime, the witnesses are always going to differ a little bit. That's because they see it from a different perspective. That's why every newspaper has a re-write editor. His job is to collect all the eye-witness reports and harmonize them because they are all going to be a little different. If the witnesses reports are all exactly the same, the re-write editor starts to think COLLUSION. In other words, maybe this thing never happened. Maybe a bunch of people just got together and made this story up and made sure there were no differences in their stories. The witnesses always differ. That doesn't mean it didn't happen. It just means they say it from a different perspective. Incidently, a good book you might want to consider is a book called 'The resurrection report'. It's by a guy named William Proctor. William Proctor was an editor for the Chicago Sun Times for many years but he started his career as an investigative reporter. He takes the Gospels and writes a book as if he is a reporter covering the story. It's kind of a harmony of the gospels type of book. The interesting thing is that he explains why he has no problem with the so-called differences in the gospels. He just says that that's what you would expect from any story.
Let me give you an example of see an event from a different perspective. This is a true story. It actually happened. There were 4 friends who were raised in Illinios. They all grew up and one moved to California but they kept in touch by text messaging and other means. Later on when they were in their 40's, one of the friends in Illinios is suddenly killed. The other two friends in Illinios text message the friend in California to tell him. One says he was hit by a car while walking across the street. The other says he died in a car accident when another car ran a red light, smashed the car on the passenger side by the back door where he was sitting. Obvious contradiction, right? Actually, they were both true. This is what actually happened. He was walking across the street and a car hit him. Because there was no hospital near and he needed care
immediately and the people driving the car were in the medical field, they decided to put him in the back seat of the car and drive him to the hospital themselves. They went about a mile with him in the back seat and as they were going through a green light, someone ran the red light at 50 MPH and hit their car right on the back door where his head was and he was killed instantly. So it wasn't a contradiction. Both stories were true. It was just a matter of perspective.

Answer 3

History tells us Mark is transcribed from Peter's teaching. Luke's prologue (Luke 1:1-4) describes his effort as a "research project" based on a variety of eyewitness interviews and the writings of earlier evangelists. In a small area, the tombs of that era that have been excavated are generally small enough that 2 adults pretty well filled the available workspace, it is quite possible that:

1. Not all of the women actually SAW the angels and knew their number.
-or-
2. Peter didn't hang around to hear the extended description of the women's findings.

Reasonably, that was a VERY CONFUSING MORNING. That there are minor variations in the telling of details does not diminish the stories of the evangelists, rather, it confirms for us that we have 4 people who were somewhat independent in producing their Gospel messages, rather than 4 varying copies of the same source.

Throughout the Gospel which bears his name Luke provides us with extensive detail, like "... A man whose RIGHT HAND was weak and twisted was there." in Luke 6:6. This level of detail indicates that he interviewed his sources extensively rather than taking simple statements and piecing the story together. The effect of this is to produce a more vivid "mental picture" in his readers.

With our modern habit of taking the Gospels and shuffling them together like a deck of playing cards, we often miss the individual details unique to each writer. Mark's statement speaks of one angel at a particular location talking. It DOES NOT SAY that the one described was the only one present.

Our BEST manuscripts of Mark END at VERSE 8, so WE HAVE NO IDEA WHAT THE ORIGINAL DOCUMENT MIGHT HAVE INCLUDED that could have better explained this question. Based on the manuscript evidence we have now, the probability that Mark 16:9-20 is original to Mark is virtually zero. The original ending seems to have been lost very early in history. The existence of the "shorter ending of Mark" which a few manuscripts contain testifies in support of the "lost ending" hypothesis as do those 4th century manuscripts that end so abruptly at what we call Mark 16:8.

Answer 4

Well the bible is certainly not the verbatim word of God. It is the gospel of mark, not of God. - and so on. Maybe if they would have had a gospel of Mary Magdaline, it would have been more accurate. How is it possible for someone else to be crucified in jesus' place? I think someone would have noticed that. Crucifiction was a very common death. There is nothing amazing about the way Jesus died. Now, if you read Revelations, that is the amazing part. That is what Jesus intercepted while experiencing His death. (Yes, I believe it took place on the cross) Of course the bible is contradictory. The apostles all referred to themselves as 'His favorite'. The apostles are the ones who started churches that mixed old Jewish law and traditions with the love and sacrafice of Jesus. Big mistake. One eliminated the other. They do not mix. Really, they didn't get it. Paul got it. And paul and the apostles did not agree on teachings. (Acts/Galations) Whether Jesus actually died, or actually rose - the message is still the same. The result is still the same. There is no law, no sin, no hell. The world of that ended at the cross and a new one began. Of equal love, grace, peace. Really, it sounds like the apostles were mostly unbelievers.

Answer 5

The Scriptures have been thoroughly studied for centuries. What you have studied has been part of it. There is no new revelation.

The young man mentioned in Mark 16:5 is evidently the angel who rolled away the stone. The angel of the Lord is first mentioned in Mat. 28:2.

The verses of Mark 16:9-20 may not be part of Mark's genuine text. These verses may have been lost, given the abrupt ending of verse 8. Given the uncertain genuineness of these verses, it would be unwise to base your arguments on them.

The two men in Luke 24:4 were angels (v. 23). The fact that only one angel was mentioned in Mark that spoke to the women does not mean there was not another. Likewise, the fact that Luke does not mention that either one of the angels appeared as a young man does not mean that he wasn't as described in Mark. Mark did NOT say there was one angel AND ONLY ONE ANGEL.
It is good to study the Scriptures. Be careful no to fall in the "mutually exclusive" trap, where just because one accounting of an event seems to report an incident slightly different from another, you conclude the Bible has an error. It's not true. Both accountings are true, told by two independent people. I challenge you to ask two people independently what they saw on TV, and you'll likely get two slightly different stories, despite the fact they saw the same show in the same room at the same time. Both are correct.

Answer 6

Mark is believed to be writing from Peter's testimony and Luke from his own. The number of angels present is really irrelevant in contrast to the huge story of the Resurrection and an angelic announcement and a historical event.
This doesn't debunk anything and I don't think you can throw it all away over a number.

May your lights be green and your lines be short.

Answer 7

It"s like you and a friend go see a movie.
Both of you might tell something different about the movie, but both of you saw the same movie.

One thing all the Gospels agree on is that there was a
Resurrection.
I believe that's whats important.

Amen?

Answer 8

Well most biblical scholars will tell you that the last 12 verses of mark are not even supposed to be in the gospel. You would think the writers of the gospels being inspired by god wouldn't have conflicting stories....Considering God is guiding the pen.

Answer 9

ok Mark 16 verse 8 to 20 is not part of the old translation of the bible.

let me prove it to you, in verse 18.

They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover.

Mark 16:18
King James Version

Jim Jones believe this verse. and drink cyanide and 909 died 276 were children including him.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_jones

Answer 10

I would not say that it is contradictory one simply adds more detail and compliments the other. For instance in Mark it only mentions the two women but in Luke there is ADDITIONAL information namely there were more women present.