A. The appearance to the women (24:1–11)
A. The appearance to the women (24:1–11)
1. The sabbath was, of course, the seventh day so that the first day of the week was our Sunday. The sabbath would have ended at sunset on the Saturday, but little could be done during the hours of darkness. So the women were astir early on Sunday and they set off for the tomb ‘at the crack of dawn’ (Fitzmyer). That they took with them the spices shows that they had in mind the completion of Jesus’ burial.
2–3. Mark tells us that as they went they discussed the problem of moving the heavy stone from the mouth of the tomb. Luke says only that when they arrived they found it already rolled away. When later on the beloved disciple came to the tomb he was diffident about entering it (John 20:5), but the women had no such hesitation. When they went in, however, they did not find the body.
4. Not unnaturally the women were ‘utterly at a loss’ (NEB). The two men who now stood there in dazzling apparel (cf. Acts 1:10) are evidently to be understood as angels. Matthew speaks of one angel who rolled the stone away and also spoke to the women. Mark refers to a young man in a white robe whom they saw after they entered the tomb. John mentions two angels in white who spoke to Mary Magdalene. It is clear that all these refer to angels. The fact that sometimes we hear of one and sometimes of two need not concern us. As many commentators point out, a spokesman is more prominent than his associates and may be referred to without mention of others. Neither should we be greatly concerned that the angels may be sitting (in John) or standing (here), nor that their words are not identical in the various accounts. It is hypercriticism that does not allow angels to change their position, and there is no reason for thinking that they spoke once only. Moreover John speaks of them in connection with a different incident. Problems there undoubtedly are, but the chief thing these minor differences tell us is that the accounts are independent. Further, with angels spiritual perception is presumably required and all may not have seen the same thing.
5–7. The reaction of the women was fear. Bowing their faces to the ground was a mark of respect in the presence of such great ones. The angels first asked, Why do you seek the living among the dead? This startling question gets to the root of the matter immediately. Jesus is not to be thought of as dead: therefore he is not to be sought among the dead. The words, ‘He is not here, but has risen’, are rejected by many critics, since they are not found in one important Greek MS and a few other authorities. It is argued that they might have been imported from Mark 16:6. But against this, they are attested by an overwhelming majority of MSS including the very old P75. Moreover they seem to be implied by verse 23. They should be accepted. The passive, ‘has been raised’ (ēgerthē), points to the truth that the Father raised him. The angels go on to remind the women that this was in accordance with Jesus’ prediction while he was still in Galilee. Then he had said that he would be crucified, and on the third day rise (cf. 9:22; this teaching continued after Galilee, 17:25; 18:32f.). Matthew and Mark omit this, but they tell us, as Luke does not, that Jesus would go into Galilee before the disciples and that they would see him there. Perhaps Luke omitted this because he did not propose to include any account of Jesus’ appearances in Galilee.
8–9. They remembered and evidently this brought some measure of conviction to them. They had heard the words before, but Jesus had often spoken metaphorically and they had probably taken the strange words about resurrection in some such way. Now they saw that Jesus had intended them to be taken literally. The women went off to the eleven with their news and they told it also to all the rest, i.e. the other followers of Jesus in the locality.
10. Luke lists the names of some of the women. Mary Magdalene, the first to see the risen Lord (cf. Mark 16:9), is mentioned in each of the four Gospels in the resurrection narrative. But apart from her connection with the crucifixion and resurrection we hear of her only in 8:2 (where see note). Joanna is mentioned only here and in 8:2 (where see note). ‘James’s Mary’ (as Mark 16:1) would normally be taken as ‘Mary, the wife of James’ but RSV’s the mother of James is probably correct (cf. Mark 15:40); she appears to be ‘the other Mary’ (of Matt. 28:1). These and the other women (who will include Salome, Mark 16:1) told the apostles what they had seen and heard.
11. But the lordly males were not impressed. They thought the story ‘nonsense’ (NEB), and they did not believe them. The apostles were not men poised on the brink of belief and needing only the shadow of an excuse before launching forth into a proclamation of resurrection. They were utterly sceptical. Even when women they knew well told them of their experiences, they refused to believe. Clearly irrefutable evidence was needed to convince these sceptics.