Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadHeinrich Meyer Commentary - Matthew 28:1 - 28:1
(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)
This Chapter Verse Commentaries:
Mat_28:1. On the various ways of viewing and interpreting the story of the resurrection, see, as regards their critical aspect, Keim, III. p. 527 ff.; and on the apologetic side, consult Steinmeyer, Apolog. Beitr. III. 1871.
ὀψὲ δὲ σαββάτων ] but late on the Sabbath, means neither … after the close of the Sabbath (Olshausen, de Wette, Baumgarten-Crusius, Ewald, Bleek), nor: after the close of the week (Severus of Antioch, Euthymius Zigabenus, Grotius, Wieseler, p. 425); for ὀψέ , sero, with a defining genitive (without which it occurs nowhere else in the New Testament) always denotes the lateness of the period thus specified and still current ( τὰ τελευταῖα τούτων , Euthymius Zigabenus). Comp. in general, Krüger, § xlvii. 10. 4; Kühner, II. 1, p. 292. Take the following as examples of this usage from classical authors: Xen. Hist. ii. 1. 14; Thuc. iv. 93. 1 : τῆς ἡμέρας ὀψέ ; Dem. p. 541, ult.: ὀψὲ τῆς ὥρας ἐγίγνετο ; Luc. Dem. enc. 14, and de morte Peregr. 21 : ὀψὲ τῆς ἡλικίας . Hence by: late on the Sabbath, we are not to suppose Saturday evening to be intended,—any such misunderstanding being precluded both by the nature of the expression made use of, an expression by no means synonymous with the usual ὀψίας γενομένης (in opposition to Keim), and by what is still further specified immediately after,—but far on in the Saturday night, after midnight, toward daybreak on Sunday, in conformity with the civil mode of reckoning, according to which the ordinary day was understood to extend from sunrise till sunrise again. Lightfoot, comparing the Rabbinical expression áôé÷é ùåáà , aptly observes: “ ὀψέ totam noctem denotat.” Comp. so early a writer as Augustine, de cons. ev. 24. Consequently the point of time mentioned here is substantially identical with that given in Luk_24:1 : τῇ μιᾷ τῶν σαββάτων ὄρθρου βαθέος , and in Joh_20:1 : τῇ μιᾷ τῶν σαββ . πρωῒ σκοτίας ἔτι οὔσης ; while, on the other hand, Mar_16:2 represents the sun as already risen. For ὀψέ comp. Ammonius: ἑσπέρα μὲν γάρ ἐστιν ἡ μετὰ τὴν δύσιν τοῦ ἡλίου ὥρα · ὀψέ δὲ ἡ μετὰ πολὺ τῆς δύσως .
τῇ ἐπιφωσκ . εἰς μίαν σαββάτων when it was dawning toward Sunday, i.e. as the light was beginning to appear on the morning of Sunday. Understand ἡμέρα after ἐπιφωσκ .; and for ἐπιφώσκει ἡ ἡμέρα , comp. Herod, iii. 86: ἁμʼ ἡμέρῃ διαφωσκούσῃ , also Mar_9:45. The participial expression without the ἡμέρα is similar to ἡ ἐπιοῦσα , and the like (Kühner, II. 1, p. 228). Keim supposes the evening to be intended, since, according to the Jewish mode of reckoning, the day began with the rising of the stars or the lighting of lamps, so that the meaning of our passage would be as follows: “In the evening after six o’clock, just when the stars were beginning to twinkle”[39] But to say nothing of the startling discrepancy that would thus arise between Matthew and the other evangelists, we would be under the necessity, according to Luk_23:54 (see on the passage), of understanding the words immediately following as simply equivalent to: τῇ μίᾳ σαββάτων ἐπιφωσκούσῃ ; comp. ΣΑΒΒΆΤΟΝ ἘΠΙΦΏΣΚΕΙ , Ev. Nicod. 12, p. 600, Thilo’s edition. Nor, if we adopt Keim’s interpretation, is it at all clear what substantive should be understood along with τῇ ἐπιφωσκ . Ewald, Apost. Zeit. p. 82, unwarrantably supplies ἑσπέρᾳ , and, like Keim, supposes the reference to be to the evening lighting of the lamps, though he is inclined to think that Matthew intended summarily to include in his statement what the women did on Saturday evening and early on Sunday, a view which finds no support whatever in the text; as for the intention to embalm the body, there is no trace of such a thing in Matthew. Lastly, to suppose that in framing his statement as to the time here in question, the author of our revised Gospel has had recourse to a combination of Mar_16:1-2 (Weiss), is to give him but little credit for literary skill; for instead of taking the trouble to form any such combination, he had only to take Mark’s two statements and place the one after the other, thus: διαγενομένου τοῦ σαββάτου , λίαν πρωῒ τῆς ΜΙᾶς ΣΑΒΒΆΤΩΝ . But so far from that, he has proceeded in entire independence of Mark.
The expression ΜΊΑ ΣΑΒΒΆΤΩΝ corresponds exactly to the Rabbinical mode of designating the days of the week: àçã áùáú , Sunday; ùðé áùáú , Monday; ùìéùé áùáú , Tuesday, and so on. See Lightfoot, p. 500. Observe that ΣΆΒΒΑΤΑ denotes, in the first instance, Sabbath, and then week; and similarly, that the ἩΜΈΡᾼ to be understood with ἘΠΟΦΩΣΚ . is to be taken in the sense of day light (Joh_4:4; Joh_11:9; Rom_8:12; 1Th_5:5).
ἡ ἄλλη Μαρία ] as in Mat_27:56.
In Joh_20:1 only Mary Magdalene is mentioned, whereas in the Synoptists we have an amplified version of the tradition as regards the number of the women, Matthew mentioning two, Mark three (Salome), while Luke (Mat_24:10) gives us to understand that, in addition to the two Marys and Joanna, whom he specially names, there were several others. In dealing with such discrepancies in the tradition we should beware of seeking to coerce the different narratives into harmony with one another, which can never be done without prejudice to their respective authors. We see an illustration of this in the supposition that Mary Magdalene came first of all to the grave, and then hastened back to the city to inform Peter of what had taken place, and that during her absence Mary the mother of James, Joanna, Salome, and the other women arrived (Olshausen, Ebrard). Comp. on Joh_20:1. The same thing is exemplified by the other view, that Mary Magdalene went to the grave along with the rest of the women, but that on the way back she outran the others, etc. For the various attempts to harmonize the divergent narratives, see Griesbach, Opusc. II. p. 241 ff.; Strauss, II. p. 570 ff.; Wieseler, p. 425 ff.
ΘΕΩΡῆΣΑΙ ΤῸΝ ΤΆΦΟΝ ] to look at the grave; according to Mark and Luke, to anoint the body. This latter statement is the more original and more correct of the two, though Matthew could not consistently adopt it after what he had said about the sealing and watching of the grave.
[39] This idea of Keim’s about the twinkling of the stars is an importation; for the expression ἐπιφώσκει , as applied to the evening, has reference only to the ordinary domestic lighting of the lamps. See in particular, Lightfoot on Luk_23:54.