Home > Apologetics, Atheism, Biblical Accuracy > The Empty Tomb Conundrum… C’mon!

The Empty Tomb Conundrum… C’mon!


The source I’ve derived my list of biblical contradictions is from the Secular Web. This is a community that is aggressively atheistic. Most of the readers are already de-converted and not looking for compelling evidence to change their minds, but rather a pat on the back for non-belief. I say this only because it allows really awful “intellectualism”. The last post Jesus’ Ancestry is a good example of bad scholarship. This post, about the empty tomb is just as awful, and a clear neglect for common sense. Source says this:

Who was at the Empty Tomb? Is it:

MAT 28:1 In the end of the sabbath, as it began to dawn toward the first day
of the week, came Mary Magdalene and the other Mary to see the sepulchre.

MAR 16:1 And when the sabbath was past, Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James, and Salome, had bought sweet spices, that they might come and anoint him.
JOH 20:1 The first day of the week cometh Mary Magdalene early, when it was yet dark, unto the sepulchre, and seeth the stone taken away from the sepulchre.

I wonder why he didn’t throw in Luke’s version that merely says “the women”. It’s just as uncompelling. Clearly the gospels don’t say exactly the same thing on this issue, but they don’t contradict each other either. There is no reason,from reading John’s gospel, that anyone would believe that Mary the mother of James, and Salome were not at the tomb. Let me make this clear with an example. If I said the Bronco II featured below is blue, I am correct. If I said the Bronco II featured below is white I am also correct. If I were feeling crazy and said the Bronco II featured below is Blue and White, then I am still correct! So what then is the empty tomb conundrum?

Advertisements
  1. August 16, 2011 at 3:27 PM

    You write The source I’ve derived my list of biblical contradictions is from the Secular Web. This is a community that is aggressively atheistic. Most of the readers are already de-converted and not looking for compelling evidence to change their minds, but rather a pat on the back for non-belief”

    Note the language selected in bold. (Secular web? As in, the web is designed for promoting secularism? Good grief.)

    Now read the header to the site:

    “Not everyone will agree that all of the listed “contradictions” are, in fact, contradictions. It is therefore up to the reader to use his own intelligence and decide for himself what s/he can and will accept as a contradiction. In any case, lists such as this can be useful in serving as a springboard for further study.”

    I think you’ve mixed up who is being aggressive here.

    • August 17, 2011 at 10:44 PM

      You’re correct, Tildeb. The problem I have with the listed contradictions is that many of them aren’t even close to contradictions- they explain themselves within the reading. Jim writes that not everyone will agree, but it’s not a matter of opinion. Many of them don’t even hint at contradiction if they’re read within the context. “this can be useful in serving as a springboard for further study” that statement implies that the list was studied. It’s doubtful that Meritt actually studied very far into too many of these, or he knowingly fudged the story a little bit in the case that they weren’t looked into carefully.

      But you’re right, I’m aggressively anti-atheist. I hold the opinion that the ideas that lead to atheism fall in on themselves, and I talk about it a lot.

      • August 17, 2011 at 10:57 PM

        The only idea that leads to atheism is the notion that belief in something requires good reasons. Because of the absence of good reasons for belief in god, pixies, and intergalactic mushrooms who spy on carrots, how does non belief for agencies that have no good evidence to back them up ‘fall in on themselves’?

      • August 19, 2011 at 12:35 AM

        Tildeb, there are other ideas that lead to atheism. You mention lack of good evidence as the only reason. Some people turn to non belief based on moral disagreement (homosexuality, genocide, for examples) others because they weren’t raised around any religion and never gave it much thought either way- a default of non belief. Still more people have been hurt and abused by supposed religious figures. The conclusion being that if godly people weren’t acting in accordance with god, then god must not be real. There are other avenues to the conclusion.

      • August 19, 2011 at 9:21 AM

        Yes, there are many good reasons to leave religious beliefs behind. But atheism itself is simply a position of non belief. There no good reasons to alter this to belief. I still don’t see how having no good reasons to believe something ‘falls in on itself’.

  2. August 16, 2011 at 3:42 PM

    Oops, my mistake: the web site is actually called The Secular Web.

  1. No trackbacks yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: