Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadInternational Critical Commentary NT - John 20:1 - 20:99
(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)
This Chapter Verse Commentaries:
The Sepulchre Found Empty by Mary Magdalene, and by Peter and John (20:1-10)
1. τ δ μᾷτνσβάω …πω, σοίςἔιοσς Mar_16:2 says in like manner, λα πω τςμᾶ σβάω. For πω, see on 18:28. Luk_24:1 and Mat_28:1 agree in mentioning “the first day of the week, “and in describing the visit to the tomb as being made in the half-light just before dawn.
Jn. names Mary Magdalene only as visiting the tomb, but the plur. οδμνof v. 2 suggests that she was not alone, and that her perplexity as to how the Lord’s body had been disposed of was shared by others. It is unlikely that a woman would have ventured by herself outside the city walls before daylight, and the Synoptists agree in telling that she was accompanied by others. Mar_16:1 names as her companions Mary the mother of James (i.e. the wife of Clopas; see on 2:12) and Salome, the Virgin’s sister, who were also present at the Crucifixion with her (19:25). Mat_28:1 only names “Mary Magdalene and the other Mary.” Luk_24:10 mentions “Mary Magdalene and Joanna and Mary the mother of James and the other women.” Pseudo-Peter (§11) also notes that Mary Magdalene was accompanied by other women.
Jn. does not say what the purpose of this visit to the tomb was; and in this he is in agreement with Mat_28:1, where it is merely told that they went “to see the sepulchre.” But Mar_16:1 and Luk_23:56, Luk_24:1 explain that the purpose of the women was to anoint the body of Jesus. In Jn.’s narrative (see 19:39) the body was hastily laid in spices on the Day of Crucifixion by Joseph and Nicodemus, but there was no time for any anointing then, or final disposition of the body. Nothing further could be done on the Sabbath, and the women came as early as possible the next morning, with the spices and unguents that they had provided for themselves (Mar_16:1, Luk_23:56).1
We hold that Mary Magdalene is the same person as Mary of Bethany (see Additional Note on 12:1-8); and her desire to anoint the body of her Master is thus significant in connexion with His words to her when she anointed His feet at Bethany (12:7). She had kept the ointment “against the day of His burying.” Jn., however, does not introduce this point expressly. He narrates Mary’s visit to the tomb briefly, because what he is anxious to describe is the subsequent visit of Peter and the Beloved Disciple, which was suggested by her report.
Both Mk. and Lk. agree with Jn. in the statement that Mary (and the other women) found the stone taken away from the tomb. For τνλθνἠμννἐ τῦμηεο, see on 11:38, 39.
According to the Johannine narrative, Mary does not suspect as yet that anything out of the ordinary course of nature has happened. She sees that the stone which sealed the sepulchre has been removed, and (seemingly) she looks in to assure herself that the tomb is empty2 (v. 2); but her inference is only that the body has been removed to some other resting-place.
2. τέε ονκλ The haste with which the women ran back from the tomb is mentioned also Mar_16:8, Mat_28:8.
ἔχτιπὸ Σμν Πτο. Peter was still, despite his denial of Jesus, reckoned as the leader, or at any rate as one of the leaders, of the disciples; and so it is naturally to him that the surprising news of the tomb being empty is carried first. He has not been mentioned since 18:27; and so on his reappearance in the narrative, Jn., according to his habit (see on 18:15), gives his full name Simon Peter. The names of the disciples to whom the women brought the news are not specified in Mat_28:8; but cf. Luk_24:12.
κὶπὸ τνἄλνμθτνκλ As Bengel observes, the repetition of πό indicates that Peter and “the other disciple” were not lodging in the same house. The women had to visit them separately. Cf. πὸ ατύ of v. 10, and see 19:27.
ὃ ἐίε ὁἸσῦ. See 13:23, and cf. 21:17. This association of Peter and the “Beloved Disciple” is significant, in view of the identification of the Beloved Disciple with John, the son of Zebedee. See Introd., pp. xxxiv ff.
῏ρντνκρο κλ “they have taken away the Lord from the tomb, and we do not know where they have laid Him.” The subject of ἦα is indefinite; Mary and her companions did not know who they were. For the designation of Jesus as “the Lord,” see the note on 4:1.
The plur. οδμν as has been noted on v. 1, suggests that Mary was speaking for her companions as well as for herself.
3. Peter takes the lead, more suo. ἐῆθνονὁΠτο κὶὁἄλςμθτς For the singular verb ἐῆθν see Mat_28:1.
κὶἤχνοκλ “and they set out for the tomb.”
In the Musé du Luxembourg at Paris there is a remarkable picture by E. Burnand of Peter and his young companion hastening to the sepulchre, which will repay examination.
4. ἔρχνδ κλ “So they began to run, the two together, and the other disciple ran on in front more quickly than Peter.” πορχι occurs again in N.T. only at Luk_19:4. Cf. 1 Macc. 16:21.
κὶἦθνπῶο κλ The Beloved Disciple was probably the younger man of the two.
5. κὶπρκψςβέε κίεατ ὀόι. This sentence invites comparison with the parallel passage Luk_24:12 in the rec. text, viz.: ὁδ Πτο ἀατςἔρμνἐὶτ μηεο κὶπρκψςβέε τ ὀόι κίεαμν·κὶἀῆθ πὸ ατν θυάω τ γγνς With ἀῆθ πὸ ατνcf. Joh_20:10, ἀῆθνονπλνπὸ ατὺ ο μθτί
The verse Luk_24:12 is found in אΓΘ the old and the Pesh. Syriac, and in c f ff2, a strong combination. It is omitted in D a b e l r ful etc., and on that account Westcott-Hort place it in double brackets, treating it as a “Western non-interpolation.” They regard it as “condensed and simplified” from Joh_20:5-9, θυάω τ γγνςbeing added to the Johannine account. Yet Hort’s view of what he calls “Western non-interpolations” is not universally accepted;1 and, in this instance, it is hard to believe that a scribe would be bold enough to alter so materially a statement made in the Fourth Gospel after it had received general acceptance,2 and thus to omit all mention of the Beloved Disciple as Peter’s companion. On the contrary, the evidence for Luk_24:12 being part of the original text of Lk. is too strong to be set aside by the authority of D, an admittedly eccentric manuscript; and the true inference from the verbal similarities between Luk_24:12 and Joh_20:5 seems to be that Jn., here as often elsewhere (see Introd., p. xcix), is using Lk.’s words for the purpose of correcting him. It was not Peter, he says, who peeped into the tomb and saw the linen wrappings lying on the ground, but it was the Beloved Disciple, who had arrived at the tomb before Peter did. He retains the words of Lk. so as to make it clear that he is dealing with the same incident, but he corrects the narrative of Lk. in so far as Peter is represented as being alone. Thus “he went home” in Luk_24:12 becomes “the disciples went home” in Joh_20:10.
The difference between Lk. and Jn. is that between a man who is reproducing a generally accepted tradition, and that of an author relying on and reproducing what he has been told by an eye-witness of, and a participator in, the events narrated. Lk., indeed, implies at 24:24 that he had heard that more than one disciple had gone to the tomb to verify the women’s report that it was empty; but there is no reason to think that he alludes there to the visit of Peter and John. Pseudo-Peter says there were many visitors to the sepulchre.
πρκψςβέε. πρκπεν in its primary and etymological meaning, would suggest “to stoop down for the purpose of looking.”3 But in this sense the verb is seldom used, and in the LXX it always means “to peep” through a door or a window (cf. Gen_26:8, Jdg_5:28, 1Ki_6:4, 1Ch_15:29, Pro_7:6, Son_2:9, Ecclus. 14:23, 21:23), without any stooping being implied4 Cf. also Jam_1:25, 1Pe_1:12. Nor does the word imply an earnest or searching gaze.5 The Beloved Disciple “peeped in and saw” is the rendering which best gives the sense.
κίεατ ὀόι (see on 19:40 for ὀόι). The participle κίεαis put first for emphasis. What startled the disciple was that he saw the grave-cloths lying on the ground. If the body had been removed to some other resting-place, as Mary had suggested, it would presumably have been removed as it had been originally prepared for burial. The cloths would also have disappeared.1
ο μνο (for μνο, see on 12:42) εσλε. That the first disciple to note the presence of the grave-cloths in the tomb did not actually go into it first is not a matter that would seem worth noting, to any one except the man who himself refrained from entering. This strongly suggests that we are dealing with the narrative of an eye-witness. As to why John (for we believe the disciple to have been John) waited for Peter to go in first, we do not know. He may have been afraid, or overcome with emotion. Peter was a man of coarser fibre, more hasty, and more ready to put himself forward. That may be the whole explanation.
6. Peter’s part in what happened is now resumed, and so he is given his full name ΣμνΠτο (cf. v. 2, and see on 18:15). He did not hesitate, but entered the tomb at once.
κὶθωε τ ὀόι κίεα “and notices (he did not merely glance in: see on 2:23, 9:8 for θωεν the linen cloths lying.” In the parallel passage, Luk_24:12, we have βέε τ ὀόι κίεαμν. Jn. leaves out μν, but explains carefully in v. 7 what it means in this context.
7. τ συάιν See on 11:44. The napkin for the head was not lying with the grave-cloths for the body.
ἀλ χρςἐττλγέο εςἕατπν ἐτλσενis a rare verb, not found in the LXX; and in the parallels Mat_27:59, Luk_23:53 (not again in N.T.) it is used of wrapping the body of Jesus in a cloth, ἐεύιε ατ σνόι Here it is the head-covering itself or “napkin” that is “rolled up.” Latham believes that the language in vv. 6, 7 implies that the body had withdrawn from the grave-cloths, the swathes, and the turban-like napkin; the body-cloths being thus not scattered about, but lying flat, and the napkin, retaining the shape into which it had been wound (so as to cover the head), lying where the head had been. This is reverently and suggestively worked out in The Risen Master (pp. 39, 89); but it cannot be regarded as certain.
Milligan (s.v. ἐτλσω cites a remarkable verbal parallel from a third-century magical papyrus, ἐτλσετ φλαἐ συαί κιῷ
8. ττ ονεσλε κλ Peter may have told John what he saw; at any rate, John no longer refrained from entering the tomb, “and he saw and believed” (εδνκὶἐίτυε). He had no vision of the Risen Christ, but the sight of the abandoned grave-cloths was sufficient to assure him that Jesus had risen from the dead. Jn. (16:16) and the Synoptists (Mar_8:31, Mar_8:9:9, Mar_8:31, Mar_8:10:34 with parallels) agree in telling that Jesus had, on one occasion or another, assured the disciples that He would rise from the grave, and that they would see Him again. They had not understood or appreciated what He meant. But when John, the Beloved Disciple, saw the grave-cloths and the napkin in the tomb, the meaning of the strange predictions to which he had listened came to him with a flash of insight. “He saw and believed.” This was a moment in his inner life, which was so charged with consequence, that he could never forget it, and the incident is recorded here as explaining how and when it was that he reached the fulness of Christian faith. That he “believed” without “seeing” his Risen Lord was in marked contrast to the attitude of Thomas, to whom it was said, “Blessed are they that have not seen and yet have believed” (v. 29).
ἐίτυε. Syr. sin. has “they believed,” and 69, 124 give ἐίτυα, a mistaken correction due to a desire to include Peter as also “believing.” For, although Peter “believed,” it seems to have been after the Risen Christ had appeared to him (Luk_24:34, 1Co_15:5), and not after his first glance at the tomb. He went away, according to Luk_24:12, “wondering at that which was come to pass.”
Dsupp has the eccentric reading οκἐίτυε, the scribe being misled by the words which follow.
For πσεενused absolutely, without the object of belief being specified, see on 1:7.
9. οδπ (cf. 19:41) γρᾔεσντνγαή. γρis often used by Jn. to introduce a comment on incidents or words which have been recorded (cf. e.g. 3:16 and 5:21). Here γρdoes not introduce the reason for, or explanation of, the faith of John. Its meaning is, “You must remember that,” etc. Jn. is thinking of his readers, who may be surprised that Peter and the Beloved Disciple were not more quick to recognise what had happened. “You must remember that they did not yet know (i.e. understand) the scripture which had foretold the Resurrection of Christ.”
ᾔεσνis used as in Mar_12:24 μ εδτςτςγαά, “not appreciating the meaning of the scriptures.”
The γαή or particular passage of Scripture in the evangelist’s mind, was probably Psa_16:10 (see on 2:22).
ὅιδῖατνἐ νκῶ ἀατνι The Divine necessity which determined the course of Christ’s Ministry, Passion, and Resurrection has been often indicated by Jn.; see on 3:14 for Jn.’s use of δῖin this connexion, and cf. 2:4. That the Scriptures must be “fulfilled” is fundamental in Jn.’s thought; see Introd., pp. cxlix-clvi.
10. ἀῆθνονπλνκλ “Dans un trouble extrê” is Renan’s description of their state of mind. But for this there is no evidence. Luk_24:12 describes Peter as bewildered rather than troubled, while Joh_20:8 records that the Beloved Disciple’s faith in the Risen Christ was already assured.
πο ατύ, i.e. chez eux, “to their lodgings.” John had brought the Virgin Mother εςτ ἴι (19:27), and nothing could be more probable than that he should bring the wonderful news to her without any delay, as it is here recorded that he did.
πὸ ατύ is used in a similar way by Josephus (Antt. viii. iv. 6), πὸ ατὺ …ἀῄσν “they returned home.”
ο μθτί sc. the disciples Peter and John. See on 2:2.
The Appearance of Christ to Mary and Her Report to the Disciples (vv. 11-18)
11. Μρά δ εσήε κλ For the spelling Μρά (here supported by א 1, 33), see on 19:25; and for εσήε, see on 1:35.
Mary, according to Jn., had returned to the tomb, after she had told Peter and John that it had been found empty. She “was standing by the tomb outside, weeping.” πὸ τ μηεῳἔωκαοσ is read by ABDsuppLNW, as against πὸ τ μηεο καοσ ἔωof the rec. text. אhas ἐ τ μηεῳ which is inconsistent with ἔω Mary is not represented by Jn. as having entered the tomb at all.
For the introductory ὡ ον…see on 4:40.
For καεν see above on 11:31, where it is the verb used of Mary’s weeping at the tomb of Lazarus; an interesting correspondence in connexion with the identity of Mary Magdalene with Mary of Bethany (see Introductory Note on 12:1-8).
As she wept, she “peeped” into the tomb. For πρκπωsee on v. 5.
12. κὶθωε δοἀγλυ κλ “and she notices (see on 2:23 and esp. v. 14 below) two angels in white” (ἐ λυοςἱαίι being understood, the Greek idiom being the same as the English) “sitting, one at the head, and one at the feet, where the body of Jesus had lain.”
All four Gospels agree in telling of an angelic appearance to the women at the tomb, but there are discrepancies in the various accounts. In Mar_16:5 the women “entering into the tomb, saw a young man sitting on the right side, arrayed in a white robe”; in Mat_28:2f. the women (apparently) see an angel descending from heaven who rolls away the stone from the tomb and sits upon it As in Mk., he tells the women that Jesus is risen, and has gone into Galilee. In Luk_24:4, after the women have entered the tomb and found it empty, “two men stood by them in dazzling apparel,” who remind them that when Jesus “was yet in Galilee” He had predicted that He would rise on the third day. The Marcan saying about the risen Lord having gone to Galilee is thus altered by Lk., who mentions no Galilæ appearance, and follows a Jerusalem tradition. It is noteworthy that “two men in white apparel” are mentioned again by Lk. in Act_1:10, as appearing to the apostles at the Ascension. In Jn. we have “two angels in white,” who only ask Mary why she is weeping. They do not give any message or counsel, for Jesus Himself is immediately seen by Mary.
It was a common belief that angels or celestial visitants were clad in white. Cf. Dan_10:5 εςἐδδμνςβσια and Eze_9:2; Rev_15:6 ἄγλι ἐδδμνιλννκθρνκὶλμρν In Enoch lxxxvii. 2 mention is made of beings coming forth from heaven “who were like white men.” Mk. and Mt. only mention one angel, but Lk. and Jn. mention two. The appearance of a pair of angels seems to be a not unusual feature of what were believed to be heavenly visitations; e.g. in 2 Macc. 3:26 two young men appeared to Heliodorus, “splendid in their apparel” (δαρπῖ τνπρβλν So, too, in the Apocalypse of Peter (§3) two men suddenly appeared, κὶφτιὸ ἦ ατνὅο τ ἔδμ. The development of legend is well illustrated by the fanciful narrative which is found in the Gospel of Peter of the appearances at the sepulchre. First (§9) the soldiers saw “three men coming out of the tomb, two of them supporting the other,” i.e. two angels supporting Christ. Then (§10) the heavens are opened and “a man descended and entered the sepulchre”; and (§11) when Mary and her companions look into the tomb “they see there a young man sitting in the midst of the tomb, fair and clothed with an exceeding bright robe,” who speaks to them as in Mk.
That Mary reported having seen and addressed two persons at the tomb, whom the evangelist calls “angels,” is all that is involved in the Johannine narrative. Lk. also tells of two men, but Mk. of one man only. What really happened is not possible now to determine. That the women saw some person or persons at the tomb can hardly be doubted; and that they were heavenly or angelic visitants was evidently the belief of Mt. and, probably also, of Lk. and Jn. Latham supposes them to have been members of the Essene sect who were accustomed to wear white clothing, or “young men of the priestly school.”1 But there is no sufficient evidence of this.
ἕαπὸ τ κφλ κὶἕαπὸ τῖ πσν Wetstein observes that as the body of Jesus had hung between two thieves on the Cross, so the place where His body had lain was guarded between two angels; and he recalls the cherubim on the mercy-seat (Exo_25:22, 1Sa_4:4, Psa_80:1, etc.). But there is no evidence of such thoughts being those of the evangelist
13. κὶ(אa b d f g sah om. κί λγυι κλ All they say is “Woman, why are you weeping?” There is nothing in the Johannine narrative of any counsel given by the watchers at the tomb, or (except the use of the word “angels”) any hint that they were not ordinary men. In the other Gospels, the women are represented as being terrified when addressed by the angels at the tomb; but in Jn. Mary shows no fear, nor does she indicate by her demeanour that she has seen anything unusual. She answers her questioners quite simply, by telling them why she is in grief. The story, so far, has nothing of the miraculous about it; and it probably represents a tradition more primitive than that of the other Gospels, in that it may go back to Mary herself
For γνιas a mode of address, see on 2:4.
῏ρντνκρο κλ repeated from v. 2 with the significant addition of μῦafter κρο.
οκοδ, not οδμνas in v. 2, for the other women were not with Mary on this, her second, visit to the tomb.
14. τῦαεπῦακλ So אΘ but the rec. prefixes κί The absence of connecting particles in vv. 14-18 is noteworthy.
For εςτ ὀίωcf. 6:66, 18:6. Mary turned round, perhaps being half-conscious (as often happens) that some one was behind her.
κὶθωε τνἸσῦ ἑττ, “and notices Jesus standing.” The two watchers in the tomb had been seated. θωεν(cf. v. 12, and see on 2:23) is the verb used in the promise to the disciples ὑεςθωετ μ (14:19). Such “seeing” would be impossible for unbelievers; it was a vision possible only for faith.
κὶοκᾔε ὅιἸσῦ ἐτν She did not recognise Him. A similar thing in like words is told of the disciples on the lake (21:4); and of the two on the way to Emmaus (Luk_24:16). The Marcan Appendix says of this latter incident that He was “manifested in another form” (ἐ ἑέᾳμρῇ Mar_16:12). Cf. Mat_28:17, where “some doubted.” See further on 21:4.
This appearance of the Risen Lord to Mary is not mentioned by Lk., but the Marcan Appendix (Mar_16:9) agrees with the Fourth Gospel in mentioning it as the first manifestation of Jesus after His Resurrection. Cf. Mat_28:9, Mat_28:10.
An essential difference between the Gospel stories of visions of the Risen Lord, and the stories widespread in all countries and in all times of visions of departed friends after death, is that all the Gospels lay stress on the empty tomb.1 It was the actual body that had been buried which was revivified, although (as it seems) transfigured, and, so to speak, spiritualised. This must be borne in mind when the evangelical narratives of the Risen Jesus speaking, and eating (Luk_24:43; cf. Joh_21:13, Joh_21:15), and being touched (Luk_24:39, and perhaps Joh_20:27) as well as seen, are examined critically. Such statements are difficult of credence, for no parallel cases are reported in ordinary human experience; but they must be taken in connexion with the repeated affirmations of the Gospels that the tomb of Jesus was empty, and that it was His Body and not only His Spirit which was manifested to the disciples. See also on v. 20.
The question has been asked, how did the evangelists believe the Risen Lord to have been clothed, not only when Mary saw Him in the garden, but when He manifested Himself to the assembled disciples (vv. 19, 26)? It is difficult to suppose (with Tholuck and others) that He appeared only in the loin-cloth in which He had been crucified and buried. His appearances after death were more intense, indeed, than the appearances of dead men to their friends (for which there is some evidence); but just as in the latter case the eye of love clothes the vision in familiar garments, so it may have been in the more objective and more significant manifestations of the risen body of Jesus.
15. λγιατ Ἰσῦ. א om. the rec. ὁbefore Ἰσῦ (see on 1:29, 50).
Γνι τ καεσ This is a repetition of the question put to Mary (v. 13) by the watchers at the tomb. In like manner, in Mat_28:7, Mat_28:10 the message given by the angel to the women is repeated by the risen Jesus, when they see Him. But, whether this be only a coincidence or no, in the Johannine story Jesus adds τν ξτῖ; He knew whom she was seeking, and what was the cause of her grief, whereas there is nothing in vv. 11-13 to show that the watchers at the tomb understood her tears, or knew that she was a disciple of Jesus.
Mary does not recognise Jesus at once, nor do His first words tell her who He was. She thinks He may be the gardener, probably because at so early an hour the gardener was the most likely person to be met in the garden (see 19:41). It is plain, however, that she does not find anything abnormal in the appearance or dress or voice of Him who speaks to her.
ὁκπυό. The word does not occur again in the Greek Bible, but is common in the papyri (see Milligan s.v.).1
Κρε(an ordinary title of respect), ε σ ἐάτσςατν “Sir, if you have stolen Him away.” Her mind is so full of her quest, that she does not answer the question “For whom are you looking?” She assumes that every one must know who it is For βσάενin the sense of “to steal,” see on 12:6.
επ μιπῦἔηα ατνκλ “tell me where you have laid Him, and I will take Him away.” She does not stay to consider if she would have strength by herself to remove the body to a fitting resting-place.
16. λγιατ͂Ἰσῦ. Here (see on v. 15) BD om ὁbefore Ἰσῦ, but ins. אΓ.
Μρά So א 1 33; but the rec., with ADΓΘ has Μρα See on 19:25 for the spelling of the name.
Apparently Mary had turned her face away from Jesus towards the tomb, taking no interest in the gardener who gave her no help in her quest; for when she hears her name, she turns round again (σρφῖα in amazement. Who is this that calls her “Mary”? The personal name, addressed to her directly, in well remembered tones, reveals to her in a flash who the speaker is.
λγιατ Ἑρϊτ. So אΘ although the rec., with AΓ om. Ἑρϊτ. Mary addresses Jesus in the Aramaic dialect which they were accustomed to use. See on 5:2 for Ἑρϊτ.
Ραβυε (ὃλγτιΔδσαε The form Rabboni, “my Teacher,” is found in N.T. here only and at Mar_10:51, but it is hardly distinguishable in meaning from Rabbi, the pronominal affix having no special force.1 Jn. interprets it here for his Greek readers, as he interprets “Rabbi” (see on 1:38). It will be remembered that Martha and Mary were accustomed to speak of Jesus as the Rabbi ὁδδσαο (see 11:28), when talking to each other
An interpretative gloss is added here by אΘand fam. 13, viz. κὶποέρμνἅαθιατῦ which appears also in Syr. sin. in the form “and she ran forward unto Him that she might draw near to (or to touch) Him.” So also the Jerusalem Syriac. The gloss “et occurrit ut tangeret eum” is found in several Latin texts with Irish affinities; e.g. in the Book of Armagh, the Egerton MS. (mm), Cant., Stowe, and Rawl. G. 167. The idea behind the gloss is probably that Mary approached to clasp the Lord’s feet in respect and homage; cf. Mat_28:9 where it is said of the women that “they took hold of His feet, and worshipped Him.”
17. This verse must be compared with Mat_28:9, Mat_28:10 where, again, the Risen Lord is seen by Mary Magdalene and speaks to her and her companion. In that passage the women, returning from the tomb to tell the disciples of the angel’s message, are at once in fear and joy. Jesus greets them by saying Χίεε They clasp His feet in worship. He then tells them not to fear, Μ φβῖθ, and adds ὐάεεἀαγίαετῖ ἀεφῖ μυἵαἀέθσνεςτνΓλλίν κκῖμ ὄοτι This almost reproduces the words of the angel in v. 7, with the significant change of μθτῖ into ἀεφῖ. Only here in the Gospels (Joh_20:17, Mat_28:10) is Jesus represented as speaking of His disciples as “my brethren”. Cf. Heb_2:11, Heb_2:12 (quoting Psa_22:22).
It is likely that the account in Mat_28:9, Mat_28:10 of the appearance of Jesus to the Maries was based on the lost conclusion of Mk.; for Mat_28:1-8 is plainly an amplified version of the simpler Mar_16:1-8. The phrase “tell to my brethren” was probably in Mk.’s story, and we have already seen that Jn. knew Mk.,1 whose narrative he corrects, when he thinks it necessary. In this instance, the message sent to the disciples is not, as in Mk. and Mt., that they should go to Galilee, where they would see their Risen Master. Jn. represents the message quite differently. It is: “Say to them, I go up to my Father.”
This expression ἀααν πὸ τνπτρ μυis only another form of the words spoken so often by Jesus, ὑάωπό τνπτρ (16:10; cf. 7:33, 16:5), or πρύμιπὸ τνπτρ (14:12, 28, 16:28). He had warned the disciples repeatedly that He would return to the Father who had sent Him. The time for this had not been reached on the day of the Resurrection, οπ γρἀαέηαπὸ τνπτρ, but it was near. ἀααν πὸ τνπτρ. It is said for the last time.
The term “Ascension” for us indicates the climax of the earthly life of Christ, but ἀααεν ἀάαι, are common Greek words, which at first were not always used of the Ascension of Christ, still less appropriated to it. They are not used of the Ascension in the Synoptists (Luk_24:51 has ἀεέεο while [Mk.] 16:19 has ἀεήθ). ἀαανι is thus used in Eph_4:8, which is a quotation from Psa_68:18, but Paul does not use the verb again of the ascending Christ. In Act_2:34 we have ο γρΔβδἀέηεςτὺ ορος which contains an allusion to the fact that Christ did thus “go up.” But, apart from these, the only other places in N.T. where ἀαανι is thus used, are Joh_6:62 (see note, in loc.) and the present passage. Barnabas (§15) employs the verb thus, and so does Justin (Tryph. 38); but Justin also uses ἀέεσς(Apol. i. 26) and ἄοο (Tryph. 82) of the Ascension of Christ. It was not until the days of Creed-making that the Church settled down to ἀαανι, ἀάαι, as the technical terms for Christ’s ascending. We miss the point of the employment of ἀαανι in the present verse if we do not treat it as an ordinary verb for “going up,” which would be recognised by the disciples as practically equivalent to ὑάενor πρύσα often used by Jesus when predicting His departure.1
Thus the message which Mary was bidden to give to the disciples would recall to them words such as those of 14:2, 3. Jesus was going to the Father’s house, where He would prepare a place for them. It is remarkable that the form of the message is like that of Mat_28:10 (probably based on the lost conclusion of Mk.), although there the place where He is to see His disciples again is not heaven but Galilee (cf. Mar_14:28). Luk_24:6, as has been already said, alters the Marcan and Matthæ tradition here, by substituting for the promise of a meeting in Galilee, the words μήθτ ὡ ἐάηε ὑῖ ἔιὢ ἐ τ Γλλί, λγν that the Son of Man must die and rise again, etc. Abbott’s inference from this comparison is that “an expression misunderstood by Mk. and Mt. as meaning Galilee, and omitted by Lk. because he could not understand it at all, was understood by Jn. to mean My Father’s place, i.e. Paradise.”2 This is precarious reasoning, but at any rate it is certain that Jn. (a) was aware of the Matthæ (? Marcan) tradition and (b) that he corrected it, bringing the message into correspondence with a saying of Jesus which he has previously recorded more than once.
Attention must now be directed to the words Μ μυἅτυ which (according to all extant texts) Jesus addressed to Mary, His reason being “for I have not yet ascended to My Father.” It is not said explicitly in this chapter that Jesus was ever touched by His disciples after He was risen, although it is suggested both in v. 22 and in v. 27. In the latter passage, Thomas is actually invited to touch the Lord’s wounded side (although it is not said that he did so), just as in Luk_24:39, Jesus says ψλφστ μ to the assembled disciples. The only explicit statement in the Gospels of the Risen Christ being touched is Mat_28:9. Nevertheless Luk_24:39 and Joh_20:27 sufficiently indicate that, in the judgment of the evangelists, it was possible to touch Him, and that He invited such experiment to be made. (See further on v. 20.)
Hence “Touch me not, for I have not yet ascended,” is difficult of interpretation, inasmuch as within a week at any rate, and before His final manifestation at His departure, Jesus had challenged the test of touch. We can hardly suppose that Jn. means us to believe that in the interval between v. 17 and v. 27 the conditions of the Risen Life of Jesus had so changed that what was unsuitable on the first occasion became suitable on the second. And there is the further difficulty, that as the words μ μυἅτυοπ γρκλ stand, it is implied that to “touch” Jesus would be easier after His Ascension than before. The gloss et occurrit ut tangeret eum, which is inserted before noli me tangere in some texts (see on v. 16), shows that the primitive interpretation of the words implied a physical touching, and not merely a spiritual drawing near. The parallel Mat_28:10 confirms this. Accordingly, to give to the repulse, “Touch me not,” a spiritual meaning, as if it meant that freedom of access between the disciple and the Master would not be complete until the Resurrection had been consummated in the Ascension and the Holy Spirit had been sent, seems over-subtle. Yet this is what the words must mean if μ μυἅτυis part of the genuine text of Jn.
Meyer cited a conjectural emendation of these words (by Gersdorf and Schulthess) which he dismissed without discussion, but for which nevertheless there is a good deal to be said. We have drawn attention already to the parallel passage, Mat_28:10, but there is yet another point to be noted. By all the Synoptists the fear of the women at the tomb is emphasised. ἐοονογρ(Mar_16:8), although the νάικςhad said μ ἐθμεσε(Mar_16:6). They were ἔφβι(Luk_24:5). And in Mat_28:5, Mat_28:10 not only the angel, but Jesus Himself prefaced His message to the disciples by saying to the women (after they had clasped His feet) μ φβῖθ. Now in our texts of Jn. there is no hint that Mary Magdalene (who is the only woman mentioned here by this evangelist) was frightened at all. She is without fear, apparently, when she recognises the Lord. The parallel passage, Mat_28:9, would suggest (as the gloss here does) that she cast herself at His feet in awestruck homage. We should expect here (as in Mk., Mt.) that Jesus would encourage her by forbidding her to be afraid. Instead of this, we find the enigmatic words μ μυἅτυ But if these words are a corruption of μ πόυ as might very well be the case, “be not affrighted,” all is clear This is the verb used of the fright of the disciples in Luk_24:37 (ποθνε), caused as Lk. says by their idea that they saw a spirit. And μ πόυwould come exactly where μ φβῖθ comes in Mat_28:10, viz. after the Lord’s feet have been clasped in homage and fear. The sequence, then, is easy. “Be not affrighted, for I have not get gone up to my Father”: I am still with you, as you knew me on earth; I have not yet resumed the awful majesty of heaven. Do not fear: carry my message to the disciples, as in the old days.
The best supported reading is μ μυἅτυ but B has μ ἅτυμυ and two cursives (47ev and dscr) omit μυaltogether. If the text were originally μ πόυ an easy corruption would be μ ἅτυ and then μυwould naturally be added either before or after ἅτυto make the sense clear.
οπ γρἀαέηα “for I have not yet gone up …” i.e. taken my final departure. For Jn., a week at the least (v. 27, and see on 21:1) elapsed between the Resurrection and that last of the manifestations of the Risen Christ which we call the Ascension. He says nothing of the interval of forty days for which our only authority is Act_1:3. But Jn., nevertheless, uses language (6:62) which implies not only that the final departure of Christ was a startling and wonderful incident, but that it was visible, in this agreeing with Luk_24:50-52, Act_1:9; cf. Appx. to Mk. (16:19).
Ἀααν πὸ τνπτρ μυ That was what He had said often before (in effect); but now He adds κὶπτρ ὑῶ. His Father was their Father too, although there was a difference in the relation (see on 2:16); and of this He would remind them now. Observe He does not say “Our Father.”
κὶθό μυ So He said “My God” on the Cross (Mar_15:34); cf. Rev_3:2. He is still Man, and so Paul repeatedly has the expression “the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ” (Rom_15:6, etc.). And His God is the God also of His disciples — the only God.
18. ἔχτιΜρὰ ἡΜγ. ἀγλοσ κλ א have ἀγλοσ, as against the rec. ἀαγλοσ (NΘ W has ἀαγλοσ.
Luk_24:11 and [Mk.] 16:11 say that the disciples did not believe the report of the women. Mt. does not tell whether the message to the disciples was delivered or no.
ὅι(recitantis) Ἑρκ τνκρο. This was the first thing Mary said before she gave her message (cf. v. 25). א a g support ἑρκ, as against the rec. ἐρκ (with ADLΔ).
For ὁκρο as a title used by Mary, see on 4:1.
The appearance to Mary is not mentioned by Paul in his summary of the visions of the Risen Christ (1Co_15:5-7). It is the appearances to the leaders of the future Church (Peter and James), and to the assembled disciples, that were regarded as the basis for the Church’s faith in the Resurrection.
First Appearance of the Risen Christ to the Disciples: Their Commission and Their Authority (vv. 19-23)
19. οσςονὀίς This appearance is described also in Luk_24:36f. Lk. places it after the return of the two from Emmaus, who reported to the apostles their meeting with the Risen Jesus; this would necessarily be late in the evening (cf. Luk_24:29), probably about 8 p.m. (see for ὀί on 6:16). The Appendix to Mark (16:14) states that He appeared to the Eleven “while they sat at meat.” It is not improbable that they were assembled in the room where the Last Supper was eaten (cf. also Act_1:13), and where Jesus had spoken the discourses of farewell (Jn. 14-16).
It would appear from Luk_24:36 that the two Emmaus disciples were present, as well as the apostles, and probably some others also (Luk_24:33). This is not necessarily inconsistent with Jn., although He speaks only of “the disciples,” for μθτίoften includes others besides the inner circle of apostles (see on 2:2). But in the later chapters of Jn. ο μθτίgenerally stands for the Eleven, and the Lord’s manifestation of Himself to them in particular, as had been promised (16:16), is mentioned as fundamentally important in 1Co_15:5. Whether others were present or not, it is His appearance to the apostles on this occasion that is treated as of special significance; and the words of His commission in v. 21 are most naturally limited to those who were commissioned by Him as “apostles” at the beginning of His ministry.1
τ ἡέᾳἐεν, a favourite phrase in Joh_1:39; Joh_5:9; Joh_11:53; Joh_14:20; Joh_16:23; Joh_16:26, and see on 1:29 for Jn.’s precision in noting dates. He adds here, accordingly, τ μᾷσβάω. The rec. text has τνbefore σβάω as in v. 1, but א om. τνhere.
τνθρνκκεσέω …δὰτνφβντνἸυαω. The rumour that the tomb was empty had spread (as is indicated in Mat_28:11), and the Jewish leaders were doubtless suspicious of any gathering of the disciples of Jesus For the phrase τνφβντνἸυ., cf. 7:13. It is repeated at v. 26 that the doors of the room were shut at the time of the meeting a week later.
οπυἦα ο μθτί Only ten of the original Twelve were present (v. 24); Luk_24:33 has ο ενεα See on 2:2 for ο μθτίused absolutely.
The rec. adds σνγέο (NΘ but א om. Perhaps it was inserted by scribes because of its occurrence in the words of the promise, Mat_18:20.
ἦθνὁἸσῦ. No attempt is made to explain how He came.
κὶἔτ εςτ μσν(repeated v. 26). Luk_24:36 has the more usual ἐ μσ ατν but εςτ μσνafter a verb of motion is quite correct (cf. Mar_3:3, Luk_6:8), and has classical authority (e.g. Xenophon, Cyrop&oe