Saturday, July 17, 2021

Douglas S. Huffman on the Number of Angels Present at the Tomb

In another example of a Protestant apologist and defender of inerrancy of the autographs of the Bible sounding like an LDS apologist addressing the differences in the accounts of the First Vision, we read the following on the number of angels at the tomb and the New Testament gospels:  

The Empty Tomb Is Open and Angels Are Present

 

While only Matthew reports how the tomb was opened (Matt 28:2-4, an angel rolled the stone away), the other Gospels all comment that the stone was found removed from the door of Jesus’ tomb (Mark 16:4; Luke 24:2; John 20:1). Clearly silence on how the tomb was opened is not mean to be a denial of it being opened (Selection Is Not Denial)! Furthermore, all four Gospels report angelic appearances on the morning of the resurrection but their reporting of slightly different activities cannot be taken as denials of each other’s reports (Matt 28:2-7; Mark 16:4-7; Luke 24:2-8; cf. John 20:12-13) (Different Is Not Discrepant, Selection Is Not Denial). Luke reports two angels present, but neither Matthew nor Mark reports “one-and-only-one” angel; their focus on the speaking angel and their silence about a second figure need not be construed as denial (Selection Is Not Denial, Unacknowledged Attention) (“Where, out of two or more, only one is spokesman, he is necessarily remembered. The other or others may easily be ignored or forgotten. It is an exaggeration to call such differences absolute discrepancies” [Alfred Plummer, The Gospel According to Luke, 5th ed. (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1922), 1957]. ON this Wenham colorfuly remarks, “It should be said once and for all that the mention by one evangelist of two angels and by another of one does not constitute a contradiction or discrepancy. If there were two, there was one. When learned critics make heavy weather about the accuracy of such accounts, they lack common sense” [Wenham, Easter Enigma, 87]). John confirms the presence of two angels at the tomb, although John reports only their appearance to Mary after she returns to the tomb with Peter and the beloved disciple (Different Is Not Discrepant). Even the slightly differing Synoptic paraphrases of the angelic pronouncement to the women are unproblematic (Paraphrase is Not Quotation). “There is nothing in any of the three messages which is contradictory to anything in either of the others, the matter is complementary. All that is recorded could have been uttered without hurry in a couple of minutes” (Wenham, Easter Enigma, 85). In all this, there is no necessary contradiction between accounts here (Indeed, even the noted New Testament scholar-skeptic Ehrman demonstrates that the accounts of angelic appearances in the resurrection narratives need not be considered contradictory at all. Ehrman is clear that he does not like such truly workable solutions: none of the Gospels is as complete as he would have them and they don’t all use the same simple vocabulary he wishes of them. Nevertheless, he has to admit that there are no contradictions in the accounts of the angel appearances. See Ehrman, Jesus Interrupted, 8). (Douglas S. Huffman, “Are There Contradictions in the Bible?” in Steven B; Cowan and Terry L. Wilder, eds., In Defense of the Bible: A Comprehensive Apologetic for the Authority of Scripture [Nashville: B&H Academic, 2013], 267-93, here, pp. 285-86)

 

Further Reading


Who spoke to the women at the tomb?