Which Resurrection Apologetic do you Prefer?

[Nita]

Aahh, interesting. So you think she went there, found no one, told the disciples that someone had stolen the body, went back to the tomb again, met the angels, who told them Jesus had risen. Only trouble is, Matthew says otherwise:

Now after the Sabbath, as it began to dawn toward the first day of the week, Mary Magdalene and the other Mary

The Matthew text doesn’t say when or to whom, specifically by name, the angel spoke. Just that an angel (at some point) spoke to some women (plural).

There are some assumptions you’re making. The text says “Mary Magdalene and the other Mary came to look at the grave”. It does not say they walked there together or even arrived at the same time. Thus, Mary Magdalene could well have arrived first, alone. And then gone to the apostles either immediately, or after “the other Mary” arrived, returning after telling the apostles the body was not there - that it was stolen. (The plural “we” in John’s gospel indicates that someone besides Mary Magdalene was there before she left,)
John 20:1-2 Now on the first day of the week Mary Mag’dalene came to the tomb early, while it was still dark, and saw that the stone had been taken away from the tomb. So she ran, and went to Simon Peter and the other disciple, the one whom Jesus loved, and said to them, “They have taken the Lord out of the tomb, and we do not know where they have laid him.” Naturally, after receiving the angel’s message the women (plural) would go to take the message to the apostles.

So after being told by the angels that Jesus had risen, and after meeting the risen Jesus on the way, clasping his feet and worshiping him, why would she tell the disciples someone had stolen his body? Sorry, Nita, you’re idea is in opposition with Matthew.

As you can see, what I was proposing was just the “other way around”. Mary first thought the body was stolen and ran and told that to the apostles. Then returned to the tomb and, along with others (Luke 24:10), learned differently from the angel/s. Whereupon the women returned to tell the apostles what had truly happened. Peter and John may or may not have been there when the group of women came. Again, the evangelists don’t give us a minute by minute account. (eg. at 5:53 am Mary arrived; at 5:55 am Peter and John left for the tomb. ) The gospels are not like a 21st century record of a courtroom legal proceeding.

 

[vicwestlad]

fhansen:

Sketchy generally means not a lot of details are given. And, IMO, considering the resurrection event for what it was, along with the rest of the gospels, I’m a bit surprised that brevity was the rule.

Fair point

fhansen:

A few eye-witnesses or disciples of eye-witnesses recorded their memories to the best of their abilities…

Just wanted to interrupt at that point and say, to me, “to the best of their abilities” doesn’t make sense if they’re being helped by a god.

This is probably the focal point of where we diverge. You said the following:

fhansen:

The help-the inspiration-was the resurrection itself-about which they had no doubt.

I don’t get why God would help to make sure they said there was a resurrection but not help with the narration of the event or the entire gospel for that matter. But, I’ve made that point before and you disagree, so probably best, at this point, to leave it at that.

Thank you for responding. You’ve been very patient.

 

[vicwestlad]

Nita:

The Matthew text doesn’t say when or to whom, specifically by name, the angel spoke to. Just that an angel (at some point) spoke to some women (plural).

What? He states them by name. Mary Magdalene and the other Mary were the only women in his narration. Here, I’ll give you the text again with a slight edit for continuity:

Now after the Sabbath, as it began to dawn toward the first day of the week, Mary Magdalene and the other Mary came to look at the grave…The angel said to the women, “Do not be afraid; for I know that you are looking for Jesus who has been crucified. He is not here, for He has risen, just as He said.

If the angel wasn’t talking to Mary Magdalene and the other Mary, who was the angel talking to? Can you name them please?

Nita:

The text says “Mary Magdalene and the other Mary came to look at the grave”. It does not say they walked there together or even arrived at the same time. Thus, Mary Magdalene could well have arrived first, alone. And then gone to the apostles either immediately, or after “the other Mary” arrived, returning after telling the apostles the body was not there - that it was stolen.

Wow, I didn’t think you’d go there. Ok let’s examine this then. So you’re saying when Matthew said,

“Now after the Sabbath, as it began to dawn toward the first day of the week, Mary Magdalene and the other Mary came to look at the grave,”

you’re saying he actually meant Mary went alone and the other Mary came later with other women? But why would you think this when Matthew says nothing of the kind and the only women he mentions at all are Mary Magdalene and the other Mary? Where are you getting the other women from?

Let’s check out Luke for confirmation:

But on the first day of the week, at early dawn, they came to the tomb bringing the spices which they had prepared. And 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 perplexed about this, behold, two men suddenly stood near them in dazzling clothing; and as the women were terrified and bowed their faces to the ground, the men said to them, “Why do you seek the living One among the dead? He is not here, but He has risen. Remember how He spoke to you while He was still in Galilee, saying that the Son of Man must be delivered into the hands of sinful men, and be crucified, and the third day rise again.” And they remembered His words, and returned from the tomb and reported all these things to the eleven and to all the rest. **Now they were Mary Magdalene and Joanna and Mary the mother of James; also the other women with them were telling these things to the apostles. **

Unfortunately for you, Luke even specifically names Mary Magdalene as one of the women who was telling the disciples about meeting the angels and being told by them that Jesus had risen. Luke can’t make it any clearer Nita. Sorry.

 

[Nita]

What? He states them by name. Mary Magdalene and the other Mary were the only women in his narration. Here, I’ll give you the text again with a slight edit for continuity:

If the angel wasn’t talking to Mary Magdalene and the other Mary, who was the angel talking to? Can you name them please?

Wow, I didn’t think you’d go there. Ok let’s examine this then. So you’re saying when Matthew said,

you’re saying he actually meant Mary went alone and the other Mary came later with other women? But why would you think this when Matthew says nothing of the kind and the only women he mentions at all are Mary Magdalene and the other Mary? Where are you getting the other women from?

Let’s check out Luke for confirmation:

Unfortunately for you, Luke even specifically names Mary Magdalene as one of the women who was telling the disciples about meeting the angels and being told by them that Jesus had risen. Luke can’t make it any clearer Nita. Sorry.

I never denied Mary Magdalene was one of the women who told “the disciples about meeting the angels and being told by them…”
I said she may have gone to speak to the apostles twice – the first time alone (“while it was still dark” John 20:1) and before the angel had spoken to her and/or the others.
Per John 20:2 * So she ran, and went to Simon Peter and the other disciple, the one whom Jesus loved, and said to them, “They have taken the Lord out of the tomb, and we do not know where they have laid him.”*

BTW, I never said the “other Mary” came with all the other women. Those women may all have arrived separately. Who knows. I doubt they were all staying in the same place!!! and they didn’t have telephones and clocks to coordinate when and where to meet.

 

[Nita]

If you read John’s account he specifically mentions twice that Mary Magdalene reports to disciples:

John 20:2 So she ran, and went to Simon Peter and the other disciple, the one whom Jesus loved, and said to them, “They have taken the Lord out of the tomb, and we do not know where they have laid him.”

and

John 20:18 Mary Mag’dalene went and said to the disciples, “I have seen the Lord”; and she told them that he had said these things to her.

 

[petra22]

So only those things can occur which science has determined are possible. Something can’t occur prior to science figuring out it is possible?

Probably both.

 

[petra22]

Probably both.

This is my vote. There is probably truth in both versions that the authors neglected to put in. When you write a news article there are things left out due to author’s preference. You just want to get to the meat of the event. Probably both versions if we had been there in person would line up with the actual events in a way we would say, “Oh yes, that makes perfect sense now…”

 

[Nita]

This is my vote. There is probably truth in both versions that the authors neglected to put in. When you write a news article there are things left out due to author’s preference. You just want to get to the meat of the event. Probably both versions if we had been there in person would line up with the actual events in a way we would say, “Oh yes, that makes perfect sense now…”

My “Probably both” in Post #33 was a response to vic’s question
Did Mary Magdalene meet angels at the tomb and tell the disciples that Jesus had risen, or did she find no one and tell the disciples the dead body had been stolen?
Chapter 20 in John’s gospel leaves little doubt that Mary went twice to apostles - once early, and probably alone, to report to Peter and John that Our Lord’s body was gone/taken and then a second time later with the other women.

I just wish I would have read John’s gospel account more thoroughly right away and caught how it shows Mary went twice. But for some reason it just slipped by me at first and I didn’t pick up on it until the time of my later post #45. Sloppy research on my part.

 

[vicwestlad]

Nita:

I never denied Mary Magdalene was one of the women who told “the disciples about meeting the angels and being told by them…”

Yes I know you didn’t. But is clear that “the women” in Luke’s version told the disciples about the angels once. Luke specifically names them Mary Magdalene and Joanna and Mary the mother of James. The disciples didn’t believe them. What didn’t they believe? The claim that Jesus had risen, not that someone had stolen the body, because that’s not what Mary Magdalene told them in Luke’s version.

Here’s what you’re doing, Nita. You’re trying to complete a jigsaw but the only piece you have left is too big and doesn’t fit. So you take a hammer, and hammer and squash it till fits and then say, “See if fits perfectly”.

If John’s gospel didn’t exist, you’d never claim that Mary split up from the other women because it’s simply not in Matthew, Mark, or Luke. It’s only because there’s a problem with John’s gospel that you have to invent the idea of Mary splitting up from the others in order to force John to fit. It doesn’t.

Let’s go to Mark to see how he puts it.

When the Sabbath was over, Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James, and Salome, bought spices, so that they might come and anoint Him…They were saying to one another, “Who will roll away the stone for us from the entrance of the tomb?” Looking up, they saw that the stone had been rolled away, although it was extremely large. Entering the tomb, they saw a young man sitting at the right, wearing a white robe; and they were amazed.

See, Mary Magdalene doesn’t run away and leave the other two. It’s very clear to any objective observer that Mark thinks the angel was talking to the three he names at the start of his narrative. That’s who he’s talking about. These three clearly went to anoint the body together. “They” saw the stone had been rolled away, and “they” saw the angel who spoke to them.

You’re free to believe what you like but forcing the narratives to fit when they don’t actually makes the believer look worse than just admitting that they disagree.

Nita:

BTW, I never said the “other Mary” came with all the other women. Those women may all have arrived separately.

The idea of the women arriving separately is just not credible given Mark’s quote above (as well as Matthew and Luke). Again, any objective reader reading Mark above would never conclude that they arrived separately if there wasn’t a problem with John’s gospel and the need to make them fit.

I notice, too, that you still haven’t answered my question from a previous post. I’ll try it again. First I quoted Matthew:

Now after the Sabbath, as it began to dawn toward the first day of the week, **Mary Magdalene and the other Mary **came to look at the grave. And behold, a severe earthquake had occurred, for an angel of the Lord descended from heaven and came and rolled away the stone and sat upon it…The angel said to the women “Do not be afraid; for I know that you are looking for Jesus who has been crucified. He is not here, for He has risen, just as He said.

Since you say Mary would have taken off before the angel spoke to “the women” (plural), who was the angel talking to? Can you name these women please?

 

[IrishRush]

Vic, if I may ask a question…
Why are you working so hard to convince us that what we believe is wrong?
If you don’t believe, fine. But why do you try to bring the rest of us along in your unbelief?
This is something I’ve always wondered about non-believers. Why is it so important for you all to take our faith from us?

 

[vicwestlad]

IrishRush:

Vic, if I may ask a question…

Of course

IrishRush:

Why are you working so hard to convince us that what we believe is wrong?

Not trying to convince anyone because people who want to maintain a belief will do so no matter what the evidence is.

Why do I take the time to critique? I could probably cite a number or reasons: I’m interested in why people think the way the do, how the human mind works. I think superstitious thinking should be confronted. I think religion impedes societal progress. I could go on, but I could also ask you, why are you interested in apologetics and participating in an apologetics forum? It’s interesting isn’t it?

IrishRush:

This is something I’ve always wondered about non-believers. Why is it so important for you all to take our faith from us?

I’m so glad someone put my faith to the test. But, let me ask you this (and I ask to illustrate a point), if, many years ago, you went to India and saw Hindus throwing old women onto the funeral pyre of their deceased husbands, would you feign from confronting their beliefs so as not to offend?

 

[Nita]

…I notice, too, that you still haven’t answered my question from a previous post. I’ll try it again. First I quoted Matthew:

Since you say Mary would have taken off before the angel spoke to “the women” (plural), who was the angel talking to?

The angel spoke to women — including Mary Magdalene. But the angel did not speak to Mary Magdalene until after she had returned from telling Peter and John that the tomb was empty.
You quote Matthew’s gospel that begins by naming the 2 Mary’s. Next there is the whole interlude describing the earthquake and its effect on the guards. After that we are told, “But the angel said to the women…”. Probably correct to assume both Mary’s were there, but perhaps others had also arrived.

Regarding whether Mary had arrived & “taken off” at some point earlier, did you read John 20:1-18? John says that Mary’s initial trip to the tomb took place while it was still dark. John personally knew that Mary had spoken to the apostles twice – because he was there the first time when Mary told him (“the one whom Jesus loved”) and Peter that the tomb was empty and the body taken. And, I’m assuming he was probably among those disciples he refers to in verse 18 - the ones Mary spoke to later, after seeing the angel and after speaking to Jesus.

John 20:1 Now on the first day of the week Mary Mag’dalene came to the tomb early, while it was still dark, and saw that the stone had been taken away from the tomb. 20:2 So she ran, and went to Simon Peter and the other disciple, the one whom Jesus loved, and said to them, “They have taken the Lord out of the tomb, and we do not know where they have laid him.”
…
20:18 Mary Mag’dalene went and said to the disciples, “I have seen the Lord”; and she told them that he had said these things to her.

Can you name these women please?

No, because the Scriptures don’t give us all their names.
(Luke 24:10 Now it was Mary Mag’dalene and Jo-an’na and Mary the mother of James **and the other women with them **who told this to the apostles;
From Mark we know one more name: Salome.)

Neither do we know how many times an angel or angels appeared to the various women. IMO, it would be a mistake to think there was only one apparition which occurred only at some point when all the women were present together. The texts just don’t support such an occurrence.

If John’s gospel didn’t exist, you’d never claim that Mary split up from the other women because it’s simply not in Matthew, Mark, or Luke.

If John’s gospel didn’t exist, you wouldn’t have this thread.

Naturally I wouldn’t claim a separate trip by Mary to Peter and John since it’s only thru John’s gospel that we know they were told at first by her that Jesus’ body had taken.

But John’s gospel does exist. Of the 4 evangelists, John is the one with firsthand knowledge of the incident, and so we get this additional information and a more complete account of what took place on that Sunday.

It’s only because there’s a problem with John’s gospel that you have to invent the idea of Mary splitting up from the others in order to force John to fit. It doesn’t.

What problem for heaven’s sake? You may have a problem with John’s gospel, but I sure don’t.
(Actually, I know you don’t have a problem with it, but you’re sure trying hard to get us Christians to think we should have a problem with it.)

 

[Nita]

Yes I know you didn’t. But is clear that “the women” in Luke’s version told the disciples about the angels once. Luke specifically names them Mary Magdalene and Joanna and Mary the mother of James. The disciples didn’t believe them. What didn’t they believe? The claim that Jesus had risen, not that someone had stolen the body, because that’s not what Mary Magdalene told them in Luke’s version.

Please note that in John’s gospel he specifically mentions that Mary spoke only to Peter and John about Our Lord’s body being “taken” ---- not to a group categorized as “the disciples”. According to John’s gospel, the other disciples were not present when Mary gave that message to him and Peter.

Luke’s version is not about the earlier time Mary Magdalene went only to Peter and John. It is about when she accompanied the other women later, after they had all learned of Jesus’ resurrection.

 

[vicwestlad]

Nita:

Regarding whether Mary had arrived & “taken off” at some point earlier, did you read John 20:1-18? John says that Mary’s initial trip to the tomb took place while it was still dark.

Interesting. So when it was still dark, Mary Magdalene went to the tomb, found it empty, then went to tell the disciples someone had stolen the body. So, then, my question would be, why did Mark say she came to anoint the body later when the sun had risen?

Mark:

When the Sabbath was over, Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James, and Salome, bought spices, so that they might come and anoint Him. Very early on the first day of the week, they came to the tomb when the sun had risen.

Since she’d already told the John the body was stolen, what body was she going to anoint? See, you’re just digging yourself in deeper Nita.

Also, I have a question about something in Mattew’s gospel:

Matthew:

And they left the tomb quickly with fear and great joy and ran to report it to His disciples. And behold, Jesus met them and greeted them. And they came up and took hold of His feet and worshiped Him.

Who took hold of his feet and when did this happen?

Nita:

But John’s gospel does exist. Of the 4 evangelists, John is the one with firsthand knowledge of the incident, and so we get this additional information and a more complete account of what took place on that Sunday.

Are you saying Matthew, Mark, and Luke didn’t know that Mary Magdalene had told Peter and John that the body had been stole when they wrote their gospels?

 

[Nita]

Are you saying Matthew, Mark, and Luke didn’t know that Mary Magdalene had told Peter and John that the body had been stole when they wrote their gospels?

I’m not saying one way or the other because I don’t know.
It’s certainly possible that they didn’t. But assuming Peter, John or Mary had mentioned it to one or all of them, then they obviously didn’t see a need to mention in their testimony to Jesus’ resurrection.

 

[glendab]

…I don’t think you can appeal to “modern standards”…as I’ve demonstrated for you. Since they both can’t be right, one must be wrong…Not sure how this gets you out of the problem. You’d have to explain that to me.

Vic, I’m not the one with the problem with the Gospels. As 've said before, they are the inerrant Word Of God. If there seems to be a difficulty, it lies with modern standards of expectation in recounting deeds of others. Some expect they Bible to read like the Sunday News - in chronological order and just the facts. But this isn’t so.

You’ve stated, as I’ve quoted above, that you don’t believe the Gospel accounts of the Resurrection. and yes, sadly you are probably right in a shared disbelief by others of the same kind. But it really isn’t God’s job to prove Himself to you. You should just ask Him for the gift of Faith. Once that happens, you too will believe. Then your arguments will be ended.

Presenting two different “solutions” to YOUR problem with the Gospels and asking us to decide for you which you should believe or thinking we’re renouncing the Resurrection by simply picking one of YOUR arguments against it over the other isn’t Kosher either. Nice try.

Glenda

 

[glendab]

Dear Vic,

Your reply to Nita:

Why would I accept claims of the scientifically impossible made 2,000 years ago by superstitious people who thought deafness and muteness was caused by evil spirits? …Why do you say I “think” there are errors? There are, as I’ve demonstrated. If you don’t think so then answer the question I’ve posed above.

I think you’re bordering on rude here. We are convinced that you don’t believe. That’s okay. That’s you. But why do you insist that others get “enlightened” to the scientifically impossibility of the accounts of the Resurrection?

You don’t believe. I really feel bad for you. If you take the time to sit down and read a Bible and come away scoffing at what you perceive as flaws in its accounting of things that occurred, that is really sad. God loves you and died for you. You can get over your problems with the Gospel with prayer.

Glenda

 

[vicwestlad]

Nita:

I’m not saying one way or the other because I don’t know.
It’s certainly possible that they didn’t. But assuming Peter, John or Mary had mentioned it to one or all of them, then they obviously didn’t see a need to mention in their testimony to Jesus’ resurrection

That doesn’t hold water. John’s was the last gospel written and it was written decades after the others. That means, Mark, Matthew of Luke would have left the reader with the wrong impression for decades, leaving them to think that Mary Magdalen was the first one to talk to the angels, and the first one to meet Jesus, even while knowing that wasn’t true. Either they’re terrible writers, or they didn’t know about Mary’s fist visit.

Which brings up another important question. Who was the first person to meet the risen Jesus?

And I notice you missed a couple of other important questions. I’m going to give it another shot on those two.

Since you use John’s gospel to say Mary’s first, solo visit to the tomb “while it was still dark” was when she found it empty and went to tell Peter and John someone had stolen the body, why does Mark say that she later (when the sun had risen) went to anoint the body?

When the Sabbath was over, Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James, and Salome, bought spices, so that they might come and anoint Him. Very early on the first day of the week, they came to the tomb when the sun had risen.

Why would she go to anoint a stolen body?

And when Matthew says the following:

And they left the tomb quickly with fear and great joy and ran to report it to His disciples. And behold, Jesus met them and greeted them. And they came up and took hold of His feet and worshiped Him.

Which women took hold of his feet and worshiped him, and when did this happen?

 

[vicwestlad]

glendab:

Vic, I’m not the one with the problem with the Gospels. As 've said before, they are the inerrant Word Of God.

That’s simply an assertion, not an argument. I’ve given you a known and acknowledged problem with inerrancy and you haven’t dealt with it.

Tell you what. Since you claim that the gospels are inerrant and there’s no problem with the resurrection narratives, why don’t you tell me what happened that morning in your own words. I’ll start you off (change this start if you like):

When the Sabbath was over, Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James, and Salome…

glendab:

But it really isn’t God’s job to prove Himself to you. You should just ask Him for the gift of Faith. Once that happens, you too will believe. Then your arguments will be ended.

Em…I guess you missed it. I grew up Catholic and used to be a full believer. I read the Bible cover to cover several times.

And, as I’ve said, if this god sets up a binary system of choice whereby the wrong one could result in him assigning me to unbelievably horrible suffering, the very least he can do is to, at least, prove he exists.

glendab:

I think you’re bordering on rude here.

Rude? What exactly was “rude”?

glendab:

You don’t believe. I really feel bad for you

Why would you? I feel great.

glendab:

God loves you and died for you.

Got any good evidence for that, the second part I mean?

 

[Nita]

That doesn’t hold water. John’s was the last gospel written and it was written decades after the others. That means, Mark, Matthew of Luke would have left the reader with the wrong impression for decades, leaving them to think that Mary Magdalen was the first one to talk to the angels, and the first one to meet Jesus, even while knowing that wasn’t true. Either they’re terrible writers, or they didn’t know about Mary’s fist visit.

Maybe it’s that you’re a terrible reader, , neglecting to examine the type of writing involved so the text can be read and comprehended accordingly. Or maybe you’re just refusing to recognize it because doing so would negatively affect your interpretation of the texts.

Examine the synoptics. They are not a presentation of individual accounts by the participating women. The synoptic author gives a conflation,** a single synthesized/melded account** of events - constructed from the various testimonies of individuals, each individual revealing what happened to her/him. Thus what is presented in the synoptics is a reasonably brief general account/description of what went on at Our Lord’s tomb on Sunday morning.
Now this is obvious if you examine the synoptic texts. Altho specific names are given here and there, they are always grouped - more than one, and given only once in the account (with one exception in Mark 16:9). Matthew gives 2 names; Mark gives 3; Luke give 3. In all other instances a collective noun or pronoun is used – “women” or “they”. In some instances, the “women” is in addition to the particular names.

John’s gospel is different. He does give particular accounts. He does pick a particular woman, Mary, and gives specific information that applies to her by name. He also relates specific acts to himself and to Peter.

Which brings up another important question. Who was the first person to meet the risen Jesus?

Mark says “he appeared first to Mary Magdalene”. None of the other gospels name someone as being “first”.

And I notice you missed a couple of other important questions. I’m going to give it another shot on those two.

Since you use John’s gospel to say Mary’s first, solo visit to the tomb “while it was still dark” was when she found it empty and went to tell Peter and John someone had stolen the body, why does Mark say that she later (when the sun had risen) went to anoint the body?

Round and round we go over the same ground.
You are trying to take the synoptic generalized/conflated account and apply it as the personal individual account of Mary’s actions and experience.

If you want - again (I already gave one possible way in Post 41) - a way I could coordinate John’s account with the synoptics:
Mary got up while it was still dark in order to come to Our Lord’s tomb and anoint His body. She was probably joined by some others who were also going there for the same purpose. When they arrived, Mary and any others with her (“we” in John’s gospel) noticed the opened tomb. Mary ran, by herself, to tell Peter and John the body had been taken. (A logical assumption on seeing the tomb broken into.) She then returned and joined the other women still at the tombsite. (Some may have already entered the tomb, encountered angel/s, left prior to Mary’s return. I don’t know; the gospels do not give a minute by minute account for each of the participants.) Mary’s specific actions then are the ones starting at John 20:11. I’m not going to bother repeating that whole section. After communicating with the angels (John 20:12) Jesus appears and they speak together (John 20:14). After that she runs to tell the disciples. Those incidents from John’s gospel are the particulars we know for certain apply to Mary. Now, back to the generalized synoptics and what was going on with the other women. Again its just generalized. There were apparitions of angels; some saw a single angel, some saw two. Some of the women fled the area. But it seems that at some point all of the women (not necessarily tho all together and at the same time) ended up telling their story to the disciples. After appearing to MaryM, Jesus also appeared to some other women. (Mark 16:12 After this he appeared in another form to two of them, as they were walking into the country.)

Please note where “probably”, “may have”, “seems” etc. qualifies a statement. I don’t want you coming back and saying I’m claiming that IS what happened.

Why would she go to anoint a stolen body?

You keep posing this dumb question. Mary did not go to anoint a stolen body. She was one of a group of women whose identifying mark, so to speak, was the reason (to anoint Our Lord’s body) for their being up and about at that early hour. Mary was one of that group when she got up and left and she was still one of that group (someone who had come to anoint Our Lord’s body) when she finally left the tombsite for the day.

And when Matthew says the following:

Which women took hold of his feet and worshiped him, and when did this happen?

You know well enough, Matthew does not give the names. He only says “they”. Just because Matthew earlier on identified by name 2 of the women who got up and went to anoint Jesus’ body does not mean that everything he later relates as occurring that morning
a) happened only to them
or
b) that they were automatically part of a later occurrence being described.