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 etc. proves Jesus’ 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 etc. testifies to it” as evidentially valuable.

  • They’d judge it valuable for story-reasons
  • SHOW/HIDE MENU