Do the obvious, often-cited conflicting Gospel details regarding [1] the number of women visitors to the empty tomb of Jesus of Nazareth (c. 6–4 BCE – 30–33 CE) and, second, [2] the number of angels encountered there indicate inconsistencies and contradictions, thereby rendering reasonable doubt regarding these Gospel traditions? This post will show that this is not necessarily the case.

The Number of Women Visitors to the Empty Tomb of Jesus

The four canonical gospels of Mark, Matthew, Luke, and John offer the following details regarding the number and names of the women who visited and discovered the empty tomb of Jesus:

Mark: Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James, and Salome (16:1–10).
Matthew: Mary Magdalene and the “other Mary” (mother of James and Joseph) (28:1–10).
Luke: Mary Magdalene, Joanna, Mary the mother of James, and “the other women with them” (24:1–10)
John: Mary Magdalene (20:1-2).

Clearly, there is a diversity of details in the reporting here.

One often-cited inconsistency is that the Gospel of John only names Mary Magdalene, whereas Mark, Matthew, and Luke describe more than one woman. We will return to this shortly.

To begin, it is important to observe what all four gospels agree on. Mary Magdalene is noticeably present in all four accounts as one of the women to visit the tomb where Jesus had been entombed. All four agree that it was women who visited the tomb and became the first eyewitnesses of the empty tomb. With the exception of John, the accounts directly reference multiple women (i.e., a group).

An additional note: why did the women decide to visit the tomb in the first place? According to Mark’s account (16:1), they went to anoint Jesus’ deceased body with spices, which was a common ancient Jewish custom. This scenario therefore makes historical sense.

A point Christian apologists rightly stress as lending credibility toward the historical accuracy of these accounts is the central role of the testimony of women. Readers learn, based on ancient rabbinic sources, that their testimony was generally considered legally invalid and unreliable. One Jewish source states a “principle,” namely that “Any testimony for which a woman is unfit, these too are unfit. Although in certain cases a woman’s testimony is accepted, e.g., to testify to the death of someone’s husband, in the majority of cases her testimony is not valid” (Rosh Hashanah 1.8). Various other sources contain similar sentiments (see Sotah 19a and Yad, Edut 9:1).

It is therefore unlikely that the gospels fabricated these events since those willing to deceive readers would not invent from whole cloth major figures in their stories whose testimony would be strongly distrusted, therefore potentially undercutting the very central message of earliest Christianity, namely that of a resurrected Jesus whose body was discovered missing from the tomb in which he was laid.

In fact, this distrust of women’s testimony might be at play in John’s account too, as the author deliberately excises the role women had in discovering the empty tomb of Jesus (whose role is widely attested in the other gospels, as we have seen), although even he indirectly acknowledges there were multiple women visitors (as in Mary’s use of the plural pronoun, “we” [20:2]).

When viewed side-by-side, there is no patent contradiction or inconsistency here between these four accounts regarding the number of women visitors to the tomb. The Gospel authors are not describing different numbers of women. Instead, they intend to identify different women by name and all explicitly (or implicitly, i.e., John) mention a group. John mentions just one woman, Mary Magdalene, rather than several because he is more invested in stressing his own credibility as a witness (21:24) rather than that of women, whose testimony was considered dubious. Clearly, Luke found it important enough to include Joanna in his account and Mark that of Salome.

In conclusion, all the authors speak of a group, and some identify specific members of this group based on their personal perspective and interests.

The Number of Angels at the Empty Tomb of Jesus

On to the second point of contention, all four canonical gospels provide information regarding the number of angels or figures witnessed by the women visitors to the empty tomb of Jesus.

Mark: “As they entered the tomb, they saw a young man dressed in a white robe sitting on the right side, and they were alarmed” (16:5).

Matthew: “There was a violent earthquake, for an angel of the Lord came down from heaven and, going to the tomb, rolled back the stone and sat on it. His appearance was like lightning, and his clothes were white as snow” (28:2–3).

Luke: “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 wondering about this, suddenly two men in clothes that gleamed like lightning stood beside them” (24:2–4).

John: “Now Mary stood outside the tomb crying. As she wept, she bent over to look into the tomb and saw two angels in white, seated where Jesus’ body had been, one at the head and the other at the foot” (20:11-12).

Therefore, in summary:

Mark: A young man, wearing a white robe.
Matthew: An angel of the Lord with clothes that gleamed like lightning.
Luke: Two men in dazzling clothing.
John: Two angels in white.

Despite the superficial discrepancies, the differences tend to dissipate upon analysis. For instance, an apologetic response is that despite these differences, none of the four accounts specifically state that there was just one angel or figure at the tomb. Although Mark and Matthew mention only one figure, neither says that there was just one angel or figure at the tomb. They therefore do not preclude there being two figures, as recorded by Luke and John.

The differences between the four accounts can be understood best by stressing the writers being interested in different aspects of the same event. Mark and Matthew addressed one question, and Luke and John another.

Both Mark and Matthew focus on the earthquake and the removal of the stone. They answer the question as to who rolled away the stone, namely, one angel, who would then become the focus of their accounts. Luke and John, on the other hand, stress the concerns the women had about the missing body of Jesus. After expressing this concern, the writers describe the women seeing two angels and their interactions with these two angels.

In summary, when describing who rolled away the stone at the tomb’s entrance, the writers report only one angel. When describing who helped Jesus from the tomb, the authors report two angels. In other words, there were two angels at the tomb of Jesus. One rolled away the stone, and both helped Jesus from the tomb.

References and Recommended Resources

Warner, J. Warner. 2017. “How Many Women Visited the Tomb of Jesus?” Cold Case Christianity. Available.

Warner, J. Warner. 2023. “How Many Angels Were Present At Jesus’ Tomb?” Cold Case Christianity. Available.