Would Christians disfavor this report: “Mary and the women are Jesus’s empty tomb discoverers”

“Yes, after all…
  • They’d hate them as first witness-heralds

      In general, Christians would disfavor Mary & women being first witness-heralds of the resurrection.[Full article] This full article analysis 3 reasons to agree, namely…
      • It’d clearly be self-stigmatizing for their Gospel.
      • It’d clearly be subpar as an evidence source (in their origin story).
      • Later Christians downplayed their role.

  • “No, after all…
  • They’d like "missing body" evidence

      Early Christians would have found favorable—to acquire and use—evidence for their belief that Jesus’ body went missing (to ultimately support Jesus’ resurrection) [Full article.] This is relevant because they may consequently find this argument evidentially valuable: “The testimony of Mary et. al. proves Jesus’s tomb was empty!”

      But against the truth of that first claim,…
      • ‘Missing body’ evidence…
         • …seemed lame or easy to dismiss (e.g. “theft!”).
         • …didn't function as evidence in the Gospels.
         • …wasn't used as evidence in general.
         • …seemed superfluous (at least later: Jews already believed the tomb was empty ).
      • E.g. Paul didn’t much desire to acquire/use “missing body” apologetics.

      And against the relevance of that first claim…
      • …they wouldn’t see “Mary et. al. testify to it” as evidentially valuable.

  • They’d judge it valuable for story reasons

  • SHOW/HIDE MENU