B. Peter at the tomb (24:12)
B. Peter at the tomb (24:12)
RSV and other authorities omit this verse (though see mg.) presumably because it is difficult to see why anyone would leave it out if original. But reasons can be suggested: some scribes may have thought the absence of any reference to John a contradiction of the Fourth Gospel, or they may have found the verse hard to harmonize with verse 34. The words are read by almost all our best authorities for the text, the Codex Bezae and other representatives of the Western text being the only notable exceptions. The suggestion that it is a quick summary of the appearance narrated by John will not stand up. If that is its origin, why should there be no mention of the beloved disciple, especially since that narrative culminates in his believing (John 20:8)? And as far as Peter is concerned, the important thing in John is that he went into the tomb, which Luke does not mention. On the other hand Luke tells us, as John does not, that Peter went off wondering at what had happened. In view of such difficulties it is hard to think that this verse derives from John. And if it does not, then in view of its overwhelming attestation it should be accepted, as it is by Moffatt, Leaney, Harrington, JB, GNB, NIV, etc.2 It gives us Peter’s characteristic reaction to the news brought by the women. He ran to the tomb (which action seems to be referred to in v. 24). He saw the linen cloths by themselves, which underlines the fact of the empty tomb. But Peter did not yet believe in the resurrection for he went home wondering at what had happened. But at least he had been impressed. Something marvellous had taken place.