Below is
a rough translation of John’s resurrection story (John 20:1-18) the Revised
Common Lection for Easter Sunday. Your comments are always welcomed. Blessings!
1 Τῇ δὲ μιᾷ τῶν σαββάτων Μαρία ἡ Μαγδαληνὴ ἔρχεται πρωῒ σκοτίας ἔτι
οὔσης εἰς τὸ μνημεῖον, καὶ βλέπει τὸν λίθον ἠρμένον ἐκ τοῦ μνημείου.
And on the first of the Sabbaths,
Mary the Magdalene comes in the morning while it is yet dark to the tomb, and
sees the stone that has been removed out of the tomb.
ἔρχεται: PMI 3s, ἔρχομαι, 1) to come 1a)
of persons
οὔσης: PAPart gsf, εἰμί, 1) to be, to exist, to
happen, to be present
βλέπει: PAI 3s, βλέπω, 1)
to see, discern, of the bodily eye
ἠρμένον: PerfPPart, asm, αἴρω, 1) to raise up, elevate,
lift up 1a) to raise from the ground, take up: stones … to bear
away what has been raised, carry off 3a) to move from its place …
3c) to remove
1. “on the first of the Sabbaths”: If you
google this phrase, prepare yourself for all manner of conspiracy-theorist
venom. The phrase is typically translated
as “the first day of the week,” which – according to the venom – is an
anti-Semitic means of hiding the Jewish roots of Christianity. A kindlier
interpretation – which recognizes that lexicons and commentaries are all
written from and shaped by some manner of perspective, and that some of those perspectives were indeed
tainted with anti-Semitism – could be something like this: We may be looking at
a colloquial expression that we can only make sense of by seeing its use in NT
and contemporary sources, then guessing what the pattern is. So, e.g., when the
Pharisee in 18:12 says, “I fast twice a Sabbath,” it would seem that “Sabbath”
can mean “week,” as opposed to this man boasting that he fasts twice in one
day. If “Sabbath” can mean “week,” then interpreting our verse to say “on the
first day of the week,” is not an attempt to erase the Sabbaths from the story,
but to figure out the meaning of the colloquial expression and express it
meaningfully today.
2. Still, it is a curious phrase that
shows up in every gospel account of the resurrection (Mk. 16:2, Mt.28:1,
Lk.24:1). For a good time, compare Mk.16:1-2 with Matthew 28:1 and we might see
that the reference to “the first day of the Sabbaths” was under interpretive
construction even in the 1st century!
3. Unlike other accounts, this one has
Mary the Magdalene coming to the tomb alone.
4. I often try to translate ἔρχομαι as “enters”
rather than “comes” when it is in the middle voice. That works in this verse,
but not really in the next, so I’ll leave it as “comes.” All of the verbs here
and in 2a are present, but are interpreted as past in most translations because
of the opening phrase of v.1.
2 τρέχει οὖν καὶ ἔρχεται πρὸς Σίμωνα Πέτρον καὶ πρὸς τὸν ἄλλον μαθητὴν
ὃν ἐφίλει ὁ Ἰησοῦς, καὶ λέγει αὐτοῖς, ηραν τὸν κύριον ἐκ τοῦ μνημείου, καὶ
οὐκ οἴδαμεν ποῦ ἔθηκαν αὐτόν.
Therefore she runs and comes to
Simon Peter and to the other disciple whom Jesus loved and says to them, “They removed
the lord out of the tomb, and we have not known where they put him.”
τρέχει : PAI 3s, τρέχω,
1) to run 1a) of persons in haste
ἔρχεται: PMI
3s, ἔρχομαι, 1) to
come
ἐφίλει: IAI 3s, 1) to love 1a) to approve of 1b) to like
1c) sanction 1d) to treat
affectionately or kindly, to welcome, befriend
λέγει: PAI 3s, λέγω, 1) to say, to speak
ηραν: AAI 3pl, αἴρω, 1) to raise up, elevate,
lift up 1a) to raise from the ground, take up: … to bear away what has
been raised … to remove
οἴδαμεν : PerfAI, 1p, εἴδω, to know
ἔθηκαν: AAI 3pl, τίθημι, 1) to set, put,
place 1a) to place or lay 1b) to put down, lay down
1. Why does Mary use the plural “we”? On whose
behalf is she speaking? In the synoptic traditions, Mary is not alone but is
with other women.
2. The phrase “we have known” or “we have not
known,” in the perfect tense, is used often in John’s gospel. I’m remembering
it from c.9 – the story of the man born blind – when the religious leaders say,
“We have not known where this man (Jesus) is from.” I’m not sure what the
impact of the perfect tense should be.
3. This is the first post-resurrection proclamation
in John’s gospel. However, it is a testimony that draws erroneous conclusions
from what Mary encountered at the tomb. It does raise the issue that testimony
is more than simply ‘authenticity.’ There is some degree of ‘right and wrong’
regarding the testimony that is based on the authentic experience.
3 Ἐξῆλθεν οὖν ὁ Πέτρος καὶ ὁ ἄλλος μαθητής, καὶ ἤρχοντο εἰς τὸ μνημεῖον.
Therefore Peter and the other
disciple went out and were going to the tomb.
Ἐξῆλθεν : AAI 3s, ἐξέρχομαι,
1) to go or come forth of 1a) with mention of the place out of which one
goes, or the point from which he departs
ἤρχοντο : IMI 3p, ἔρχομαι,
1) to come 1a) of persons
4 ἔτρεχον δὲ οἱ δύο ὁμοῦ: καὶ ὁ ἄλλος μαθητὴς προέδραμεν τάχιον τοῦ
Πέτρου καὶ ἦλθεν πρῶτος εἰς τὸ μνημεῖον,
And the two were running together;
and the other disciple swiftly outran Peter and came first to the tomb,
ἔτρεχον : IAI 3p, τρέχω,
1) to run 1a) of persons in haste
προέδραμεν : AAI 3s, προτρέχω,
1) to run before, to outrun
ἦλθεν: AAI 3s, ἔρχομαι, 1) to come
1. This race is a curious detail for John to describe, isn’t it? As
it continues, they run, the Beloved Disciple (BD) is faster, but stops to stoop
and look in to see the linen; Peter is slower, but rushes in directly to see
the linen and the hanky; BD goes in and sees it all and believes; until this
point, neither of them understood the writings about Jesus’ resurrection; then
they both return to the others.
2. Some biblical scholars make the race metaphorical to the
difference of faith between Peter and BD. But, it seems to me that such
speculation leads to unanswerable dead ends. Does DB have greater faith because
he runs faster? Or, does Peter have greater faith because he goes in while DB
stands outside and looks in? I don’t see these questions as answerable from the
text itself. Besides, it seems that, for
John, neither of them has faith until at least v.8 below.
3. Mary ‘runs’ to tell the disciples, then BD and Peter run. It
seems to me that the references to running here point to their feeling of
urgency. I’m not inclined to read anything more into it.
5καὶ παρακύψας βλέπει κείμενα τὰ ὀθόνια, οὐ μέντοι εἰσῆλθεν.
And stooping over he sees the linen
lying, but yet he did not enter.
παρακύψας : AAPart, nsm, παρακύπτω,
1) to stoop to a thing in order to look at it 2) to look at with head
bowed forward
βλέπει : PAI 3s, βλέπω,
1) to see, discern, of the bodily eye
κείμενα : PMPart, apn, κεῖμαι, 1) to
lie 1a) of an infant 1b) of one buried 1c) of things that
quietly cover some spot 1c1) of a city situated on a hill
εἰσῆλθεν: AAI 3s, εἰσέρχομαι, 1) to go out or
come in: to enter
1. Bear with me on this one: I’ve always felt that “the disciple
whom Jesus loved” (v.2) is not a reference to “John,” as traditionally understood,
but to “Lazarus,” who is described this way in John 11:3. (Not many people are
willing to go there with me, but some are. Real people; real scholars!) If so,
I would certainly understand why BD/Lazarus would stop outside of the tomb
instead of entering it. I hear that being dead for four days in a tomb makes
you react like that afterwards. (Just to be clear, I don’t know if “Lazarus”
actually existed in real life or, if so, why the Synoptics missed the
significant story of his death/resuscitation. I’m speaking from the perspective
of the story in this gospel. I can’t speak to the reality of the 1st
century more directly than that.)
6 ἔρχεται οὖν καὶ Σίμων Πέτρος ἀκολουθῶν αὐτῷ, καὶ εἰσῆλθεν εἰς τὸ
μνημεῖον: καὶ θεωρεῖ τὰ ὀθόνια κείμενα,
Then, Simon Peter arrived
following him, and entered into the tomb; and observes the linens which are
lying there,
ἔρχεται : AAI 3s, ἐξέρχομαι,
1) to go or come forth of
ἀκολουθῶν : PAPart, nsm, ἀκολουθέω,
1) to follow one who precedes
εἰσῆλθεν : AAI 3s εἰσέρχομαι,
1) to go out or come in: to enter
θεωρεῖ : PAI 3s θεωρέω,
1) to be a spectator, look at, behold
κείμενα: PMPart apn, κεῖμαι, 1) to lie 1a) of
an infant 1b) of one buried 1c) of things that quietly cover some
spot 1c1) of a city situated on a hill
7καὶ τὸ σουδάριον, ὃ ἦν ἐπὶ τῆς κεφαλῆς αὐτοῦ, οὐ μετὰ τῶν ὀθονίων
κείμενον ἀλλὰ χωρὶς ἐντετυλιγμένον εἰς ἕνα τόπον.
And the handkerchief, which was on
his head, is not lying with the linens but has been rolled up apart in one
place.
ἦν : IAI 3s, εἰμί,
1) to be, to exist, to happen, to be present
κείμενον : PMPart, asn, κεῖμαι,
1) to lie 1a) of an infant 1b) of one buried
ἐντετυλιγμένον : PerfPPart asn, ἐντυλίσσω,
1) to roll up, wrap together
1. Another detail that seems to be important to the narrator, but
the importance of which escapes me at present.
2. This detail of the hanky, however, is similar to the detail
regarding Lazarus as he emerged from the tomb in Jn.11:44: ἐξῆλθεν ὁ τεθνηκὼς
δεδεμένος τοὺς πόδας καὶ τὰς χεῖρας κειρίαις, καὶ ἡ ὄψις αὐτοῦ σουδαρίῳ
περιεδέδετο. “The dead man came out, his hands and feet wrapped with strips of
linen, and a handkerchief around his face.”
8τότε οὖν εἰσῆλθεν καὶ ὁ ἄλλος μαθητὴς ὁ ἐλθὼν πρῶτος εἰς τὸμ νημεῖον,
καὶ εἶδεν καὶ ἐπίστευσεν:
Therefore then the other disciple
who arrived first also entered into the tomb, and saw and believed.
εἰσῆλθεν : AAI 3s, εἰσέρχομαι, 1) to go out or come in: to enter
ἐλθὼν : AAPart nsm, ἔρχομαι, 1) to come 1a) of persons
εἶδεν : AAI 3s, ὁράω,
1) to see with the eyes
ἐπίστευσεν: AAI 3s, πιστεύω, 1) to think to be
true, to be persuaded of, to credit, place confidence in 1a) of the
thing believed
1. Is the BD, then, the first “believer”? It seems that he sees the
signs (linen and hanky) and believes.
2. In a very good article, “The Faith of the Beloved Disciple and
the Community of John 20”, Brendan Byrne calls the BD’s faith “sign faith,”
perhaps picking up on the “Book of Signs” that seem to comprise the early part
of John’s gospel or simply John’s own use of the word “signs” and John’s
attention to their significance. At any rate, says Byrne: “'Sign' faith is, of
course, variously evaluated in John's Gospel.18 But where such faith is
negatively rated (e.g., 2.23-24; 3.2-3; 4.45-48; 6.14-15; 7.3-7) the problem is
not so much that a sign initiates the process of faith as that the
preoccupation with the sign proceeds from purely human categories and needs in
a way that obscures rather than serves the divine revelation in Jesus.” (Journal for the Study of the New Testament,
Feb., 1985, p.89)
2. v.8 pertains to BD alone – all the nouns and verbs are singular.
But, v.9 uses “they” and a plural verb to indicate BD and Peter did not (but
later did) understand the writings about the resurrection before it happened.
3 .What is it about seeing things from the inside of the tomb and
seeing them from the outside that makes the difference for BD? Does it have to
do with the separate places of the linen and hanky? That makes no immediate
sense to me as a 21st century reader, but that distinction seems to
be how the story is structured. It seems like a lot of good Midrash and some
very bad sermons could come out of this.
9οὐδέπω γὰρ ᾔδεισαν τὴν γραφὴν ὅτι δεῖ αὐτὸν ἐκ νεκρῶν ἀναστῆναι.
For as of yet they had not
understood the writings that he is bound to rise out of the dead.
ᾔδεισαν : PluAI 3p, εἴδω, to know
δεῖ: PAI 3s, δέω, 1) to bind tie, fasten
ἀναστῆναι: AAInf, ἀνίστημι, 1) to cause to rise
up, raise up
1. John sees the resurrection (among other
things) as being a revelatory event.
- After Jesus went into the temple and
overturned tables, John says, “After he was raised from the dead, his disciples
remembered that he had said this; and they believed the scripture and the word
that Jesus had spoken” (2:22).
- After Jesus enters into Jerusalem, John says,
“His disciples did not understand these things at first; but when Jesus was
glorified, then they remembered that these things had been written of him and
had been done to him” (12:16).
2. In this story, Peter and the other disciple
had not yet understood the writings about Jesus’ resurrection, but when the
other disciples saw, he believed.
3. John does not say which “writings,” exactly,
are the writings that say Jesus is bound to rise from the dead. Perhaps Ps. 16:10
(quoted in Acts 2:27)?
10 ἀπῆλθον οὖν πάλιν πρὸς αὐτοὺς οἱ μαθηταί.
Then the disciples returned again
to them.
ἀπῆλθον : AAI 3p, ἀπέρχομαι,
1) to go away, depart
1. Curiously, “to them” (πρὸς αὐτοὺς) is a
translation/interpretation challenge. I have translated is very literally, but
it leaves the question open, “to whom does ‘them’ refer’?” Here are attempts to
answer: KJV: “their own home” YLT: “their own friends” ESV: “their homes” NIV:
“where they were staying” NRSV: “their homes.” There is not really an
antecedent in this story, as far as I can tell.
11 Μαρία δὲ εἱστήκει πρὸς τῷ μνημείῳ ἔξω κλαίουσα. ὡς οὖν ἔκλαιεν
παρέκυψεν εἰς τὸ μνημεῖον,
But Mary had stayed at the tomb
weeping outside. Then as she was weeping she stooped to look into the tomb,
εἱστήκει : PluAI 3s, ἵστημι,
1) to cause or make to stand, to place, put, set
κλαίουσα: PAPart nsf, κλαίω, 1) to mourn, weep,
lament
ἔκλαιεν : IAI 3s, κλαίω,
1) to mourn, weep, lament
παρέκυψεν : AAI 3s, παρακύπτω,
1) to stoop to a thing in order to look at it
1. In the description of the footrace between Peter and BD, the
narrator has failed to say that Mary had returned. Before anyone wants to get
all Da Vinci Codey on us and suggest that Mary herself is the BD, there is v.2
to contend with.
2. Is there any significance in the difference between ‘stooping to
look’ into the tomb (παρακύπτω, of the BD in v.5 and of Mary in v.11) and
‘entering’ into the tomb (ἔρχομαι, of Peter in v.6 and the BD in v.8) ?
12 καὶ θεωρεῖ δύο ἀγγέλους ἐν λευκοῖς καθεζομένους, ἕνα πρὸς τῇ κεφαλῇ
καὶ ἕνα πρὸς τοῖς ποσίν, ὅπου ἔκειτο τὸ σῶμα τοῦ Ἰησοῦ.
And beholds two angels who are
sitting in white garments, one to the head and one to the feet, where the body
of Jesus was lying.
θεωρεῖ : PAI 3s, θεωρέω
1) to be a spectator, look at, behold
καθεζομένους: PMPart, apm, καθέζομαι, 1) to sit down,
seat one's self, sit
ἔκειτο : IMI 3s, κεῖμαι,
1) to lie 1a) of an infant 1b) of one buried
1. This is story-telling, so John does not have to tell us why
Peter and BD did not see these two angels when they were in the tomb. Of
course, that won’t stop us from wondering; only from answering.
2. Dear John: This would have been a good place for the pluperfect
tense, “where the body of Jesus had been lying.” But, if you want to use
the imperfect tense, “was lying,” that’s
your business. Sincerely, Curious Reader.
13 καὶ λέγουσιν αὐτῇ ἐκεῖνοι, Γύναι, τί κλαίεις; λέγει αὐτοῖς ὅτι ηραν τὸν
κύριόν μου, καὶ οὐκ οἶδα ποῦ ἔθηκαν αὐτόν.
And they say to her, Woman, why
are you crying? She says to them “They removed my lord and I have not known
where they put him.”
λέγουσιν: PAI 3p, λέγω, 1) to say, to speak
κλαίεις: PAI 2s, κλαίω, 1) to mourn, weep,
lament
λέγει : PAI 3s, λέγω,
1) to say, to speak
ηραν : AAI 3pl, αἴρω,
1) to raise up, elevate, lift up 1a) to raise from the ground, take up: …
to bear away what has been raised … to
remove
οἶδα : PerfAI 1s, εἴδω, to know
ἔθηκαν: AAI 3pl, τίθημι, 1) to set, put,
place 1a) to place or lay 1b) to put down, lay down
1. The use of the perfect in “I have not known” is kind of odd to
my 21 century ears, but it is consistent with the tense of v.2 and throughout
the gospel. In v.2 Mary uses the plural “we have not known” instead of the
singular.
2. “Woman, why are you crying?” Jesus will repeat this question.
3. Mary’s response indicates that whatever BD “believed” in v.8, it
was not a shared group experience, at least not for her. She is still seeing
“signs” and even greater signs than BD and Peter (if you think 2 live angels
are better than a linen and hanky), and yet she still thinks Jesus’ body has
been moved.
14ταῦτα εἰποῦσα ἐστράφη εἰς τὰ ὀπίσω, καὶ θεωρεῖ τὸν Ἰησοῦν ἑστῶτα, καὶ
οὐκ ᾔδει ὅτι Ἰησοῦς ἐστιν.
Having said these things she
turned around into the back and beholds Jesus who has been standing, and she had
not known that he is Jesus.
εἰποῦσα : AAPart nsf, λέγω,
1) to say, to speak
ἐστράφη : API 3s, στρέφω,
1) to turn, turn around
θεωρεῖ : PAI 3s, θεωρέω,
1) to be a spectator, look at, behold
ἑστῶτα: PerfAPart asm, ἵστημι, 1) to cause or make to
stand, to place, put, set
ᾔδει : PluAI 3s, εἴδω, to know
ἐστιν: εἰμί, PAI 3s, 1) to be, to exist, to happen, to be present
1. The tenses – though awkward in my rough
translation – seem important to John, so I am leaving them in order in their
unpolished form.
2. This is the 3rd reference to Mary
“not having known,” the first two of which were by her own admission. Quite
different from the BD who sees and believes.
15 λέγει αὐτῇ Ἰησοῦς, Γύναι, τί κλαίεις; τίνα ζητεῖς; ἐκείνη δοκοῦσα ὅτι ὁ
κηπουρός ἐστιν λέγει αὐτῷ, Κύριε, εἰ σὺ ἐβάστασας αὐτόν, εἰπέ μοι ποῦ
ἔθηκας αὐτόν, κἀγὼ αὐτὸν ἀρῶ.
Jesus says to her, “Woman, why are
you crying? Whom are you seeking?” She – supposing that he is the gardener –
says to him, “Lord, if you carried him off, tell me where you put him, and I
will remove him.
λέγει : PAI 3s, λέγω,
1) to say, to speak
κλαίεις: PAI 2s, κλαίω, 1) to mourn, weep,
lament
ζητεῖς: PAI 2s, ζητέω, 1) to seek in order to
find
δοκοῦσα : PAPart, nsf, οκέω,
1) to be of opinion, think, suppose
ἐστιν: εἰμί, PAI 3s, 1) to be, to exist, to happen, to be present
λέγει : PAI 3s, λέγω,
1) to say, to speak
ἐβάστασας : AAI 2s, βαστάζω,
1) to take up with the hands … to bear away, carry off
εἰπέ : AAImpv2s, λέγω,
1) to say, to speak
ἔθηκας : AAI 2s, τίθημι,
1) to set, put, place 1a) to place or lay 1b) to put down, lay down
ἀρῶ: FAI 1s, αἴρω,1) to raise up, elevate,
lift up 1a) to raise from the ground, take up: … to bear away what has
been raised … to remove
1. I need to come clean on this. I’d love to
pick up more on this question, “Woman, why are you crying?” and explore its
relation to faith. But, I don’t want to fall into the old and tired trap of
always depicting women as the weepy emotional types, whereas the guys “see and
understand the cryptic writings.” Still, there is something fully human about
Mary’s misery here that I think touches on aspects of faith that often lie
beyond rational thinking. (One reason I’ve often had trouble with Josh
McDowell-type “apologetics evangelism” is that it assumes that people are
one-dimensional calculators.)
2. With the caveat above, “Woman why are you
crying?” remains an arresting question, showing the disconnect between one’s
experience and the good news of the resurrection. I wonder how many of my own
tears fall into this caveat.
3. “Supposing him to be the gardener …” what a
great piece of storytelling. I love the ingenuity behind the supposition that
when Jesus arose, after removing his linens he walked out of the tomb naked, so
he grabbed the gardener’s garments of the clothesline to cover himself up.
Ingenious … and completely speculative.
16 λέγει αὐτῇ Ἰησοῦς, Μαριάμ. στραφεῖσα ἐκείνη λέγει αὐτῷ Ἑβραϊστί,
Ραββουνι {ὃ λέγεται Διδάσκαλε}.
Jesus says to her, “Mary.” Having
turned she says to him in Hebrew, “Rabbouni” (which is to say, ‘Teacher.’)
λέγει : PAI 3s, λέγω,
1) to say, to speak
στραφεῖσα : APPart, nsf, , στρέφω,
1) to turn, turn around
λέγει : PAI 3s, λέγω,
1) to say, to speak
λέγεται: PPI 3s, λέγω, 1) to say, to speak
1. What an empty tomb, two angels, folded linens, and a separated
wrapped up hanky could not do, the call of one’s name does. This is a beautiful
moment.
2. Seems a curious time to introduce the term “Rabbouni.” The
curiousity of the term and the detail of the story adds a tone of authenticity
to it, IMHO.
17 λέγει αὐτῇ Ἰησοῦς, Μή μου ἅπτου, οὔπω γὰρ ἀναβέβηκα πρὸς τὸν πατέρα:
πορεύου δὲ πρὸς τοὺς ἀδελφούς μου καὶ εἰπὲ αὐτοῖς, Ἀναβαίνω πρὸς τὸν πατέρα μου καὶ πατέρα ὑμῶν καὶ θεόν μου καὶ θεὸν ὑμῶν.
Jesus says to her, “Do not hold
me, for I have not yet ascended to the father; but go to my brothers and say to
them, “I am ascending to my father and your father and my God and your God.”
λέγει : PAI 3s, λέγω,
1) to say, to speak
ἅπτου: PMImpv 2s, ἅπτω, 1) to fasten to, adhere
to 1a) to fasten fire to a thing, kindle, set of fire
ἀναβέβηκα : PerfAI 1s, ἀναβαίνω,
1) ascend 1a) to go up
πορεύου : PMImpv 2s, πορεύομαι,
1) to lead over, carry over, transfer 1a) to pursue the journey on
which one has entered
εἰπὲ : AAImpv 2s, λέγω,
1) to say, to speak
Ἀναβαίνω : PAI 1s, ἀναβαίνω,
1) ascend 1a) to go up
1. I have read that the aspect of a present
imperative refers to an ongoing command, as opposed to a one-and-done command.
If that means something for this verse, the command “do not hold me” (ἅπτου) might be something like “do not keep holding onto me.”
If that’s the case, then the present command “keep going to my brothers” would
refer less to Mary’s messaging and more to the ongoing communication to others.
Maybe?
2. The command not to keep holding Jesus but to
go back to the others seems necessary if one imagines oneself in this moment.
How hard it must be to let go and go back, when the alternatives of staying
right there or dragging Jesus along would seem much more convincing.
18 ἔρχεται Μαριὰμ ἡ Μαγδαληνὴ ἀγγέλλουσα τοῖς μαθηταῖς ὅτι Ἑώρακα
τὸν κύριον, καὶ ταῦτα εἶπεν αὐτῇ.
Mary the Magdalene goes announcing
to the disciples “I have seen the lord,” and the things he said to her.
ἔρχεται : PMI 3s, ἔρχομαι,
1) to come 1a) of persons
ἀγγέλλουσα : PAPart nsf,
Ἑώρακα : PerfAI 1s, ὁράω,
1) to see with the eyes 2) to see with the mind, to perceive, know
εἶπεν: AAI 3s, , λέγω, 1) to say, to speak
1. Byrne makes the point that Mary’s faith is like that of Thomas
and the rest of the disciples, except BD. He argues that the difference between
BD and the others is that BD’s act of ‘seeing the signs and believing’ as
opposed to Mary, Thomas, etc. ‘seeing Jesus and believing,’ makes BD more like
John’s readers, who must believe without seeing (being a couple of generations
removed from Jesus’ life, death, and resurrection appearances.)
I'm inclined to think that what the BD (love that!) believes in v. 8 is not the Resurrection, but rather what Mary had just told him in v. 2 - that they had taken Jesus' body somewhere and he was no longer in the tomb. This would be shocking, to say the least, and would make verification by sight important - as well as giving more meaning to v. 9, that he (and Peter) didn't really understand the prophetic message about the Resurrection until later. If it's indeed the Resurrection in which he believes at the sight of the empty tomb, you run into a lot more difficulty in v. 9. This is just my thought, by the way - I have no idea if anybody else agrees with it or not as I've never read anything that concurs with it.
ReplyDeleteIf BD and Peter fully believed, they didn't tell, which seems to me to be the fundamental difference between their experience and Mary's. Secondly, if one of the things John is about is harkening back "to the beginning," then Jesus being "the gardener," (i.e. the new Adam) is another case of a mistake being actually, ironically, correct.
ReplyDeleteI've long wondered: what did BD actually believe? He saw the empty tomb and the burial linens - did he believe that Jesus had been raised, or did he believe what Mary Mag said, that the tomb was empty and "they" have taken Jesus' body?
ReplyDeleteI've long wondered: what did BD actually believe? He saw the empty tomb and the burial linens - did he believe that Jesus had been raised, or did he believe what Mary Mag said, that the tomb was empty and "they" have taken Jesus' body?
ReplyDeleteHi Cynthia,
DeleteIt seems to me that the "believe" in v.8 is directly related to the comment in v.9 about the writings that suggest Jesus would be raised from the dead. I guess I've assumed that for so long that it's taking me a while to wrap my head around the other option as a viable one. I'll need to stew on it for a while. Which do you feel lis more likely?
Thanks for the note. MD
Thanks for responding, and a blessed Easter to you! I'm not sure which is more likely, but my "what if" actually comes from vs. 9 suggesting that they do not yet understand that Jesus must be raised, so perhaps are not in a "position" to believe it. And there's no reaction from them; they just go home!
DeleteI am one of those who agree that the beloved disciple was indeed Lazarus. Glad you "went there." Of course that means that Jesus must have indeed raised Lazarus from the dead among other things.
ReplyDeleteAlrighty, Neil!
DeleteI've always thought the BD suffered from Napoleon complex. With the use of 3rd person to describe oneself, it feels like the BD is making up for short comings, ie. ran faster/got there first. It is speculation and reading way too much into the text, but it makes me chuckle.
ReplyDeleteA couple of things: in v. 10, "they" go back to "the disciples"; this is only evident retrospectively, as we later see them all in the locked room - but it makes sense of the "erkonto" in verse 4; they only went out of a place they would not otherwise leave because of the urgency of Mary's news.
ReplyDeleteAnd, I am one of those who believe "John" IS John; in this story he is just a kid - maybe 13 or 14 - who of course outraces Peter, who wears more clothing (including shoes?) and is worn from years of hard work. The conflict of their respective later congregations may be on view here, but I prefer to think not.
'nother year, 'nother comment. I like to think of those "not having known"s as having a psychological component: "and STILL hadn't figured it out!" Don't know if that's grammatically justifiable...
ReplyDeleteDon't let that stop you, Terry!
DeleteDo you have a Mark 16 lection translation somewhere?
ReplyDeleteCan you point me to a link?
DeleteI have not published anything on Mark 16:1-8 to this point. Sorry.
DeleteMD
Now I have: https://leftbehindandlovingit.blogspot.com/2024/04/marks-curious-resurrection-story.html
DeleteHi Bruce,
ReplyDeleteI'm actually working on one right now for a Text Study class. Perhaps too late for your Easter preparations, but those text studies are online if you're interested.