John 20:1-18 is the story of the discovery of the empty tomb. The point of the passage is to establish the empty tomb as a fact. The message of the resurrection that the disciples brought back to Jerusalem could not have survived a single hour if anyone could have shown the body to be in the tomb.[1] Yet, would resurrection require an empty tomb? Impressive at first glance is the view of Herod expressed in Mark 6:14, 16, namely, that Jesus was the beheaded Baptist risen again. However, the re-embodiment of a dead person in someone else is different from an eschatological resurrection of the dead and transformation into a life that is vastly different from existence on earth.[2] Thus, the empty tomb still has its place in the story of Jesus. John's account adds to the record of the synoptists' versions by including almost completely further details. The account of Easter presented by John has only the fundamentals in common with the synoptic tradition. In fact, there is so much variation among the four gospel accounts that the basic story line shared by all includes only these details: Early on the first day of the week, at least one woman discovered that the tomb, in which Joseph (and Nicodemus) placed Jesus after the crucifixion, was empty. Trying to blend the details of all the accounts into one account is a hopeless muddle. Certainly, the variety of the details suggests a mixing of traditions about the event, even if we do not think in terms of competing stories from competing sects of the church.
1 Early on the first day of the week, while it was still dark, Mary Magdalene came to the tomb. We assume she does so out of grief. Unlike Matthew 28:1, Mark 16:1-3, Luke 24:1-3, Mary is alone. John wants to focus on the experience of one woman on this morning. Furthermore, she does not bring spices to anoint the body. Nicodemus has already fulfilled this ceremonial custom (19:40). She saw that someone had removed the stone from the tomb. John has not mentioned the positioning and sealing of the stone in his account of the burial. Of course, the removal of the stone was not necessary for the resurrection of Jesus, whose glorified body did not recognize such physical restraints. The removal of the stone simply demonstrates to the world that the once-occupied tomb is not vacant. 2 So, rather than investigating, she ran and went to Simon Peter and the other disciple, suggesting some priority to Peter, the one whom Jesus loved. The identification of this disciple as John the disciple is common. However, some think Lazarus is a better option.[3] She said to them, “They have taken the Lord out of the tomb, showing that the empty tomb itself is open to various interpretations, and we, possibly implying other women were actually present, do not know where they have laid him.” When faced with the open tomb, Mary functions as a reasonable, sane character. In a world of cause and effect, of established rules as to what can happen and how, in a closed structure that allows only for the old and familiar to recur, Mary's logic is right on target. Find the body, wherever someone took it, and get on with grieving. She also develops a conspiracy theory. In her case, the enemy conspirators are outside the intimate group of disciples.[4] Such theories make sense out of a world that suddenly become confusing. Her theory has the appeal of simplicity, for it divides her world into tracing the evil done back to a conspirator and their agents. She immediately leaped to a conclusion that suggests special and secret knowledge that others may not appreciate.[5] John then refers to 3 Peter and the other disciple. The identification of “the other disciple” is a critical detail unique to John that points to a concern of the Johannine community. Scholars have suggested repeatedly to the point of consensus that the author wanted to downplay the authority of Peter and to raise the authority of the mysterious “other disciple” in the early church. Raymond Brown is the most noted scholar to suggest that the Fourth Gospel is the work of a sectarian church on the fringe of early Christianity in competition with the Petrine church that was better established. This mysterious character has been identified as the disciple known to the high priest who let Peter into the courtyard (18:15-16), who may be the same disciple “whom Jesus loved ... who had reclined next to Jesus at the supper” (21:20). Many have assumed that the “other disciple” is the circumlocution for the author John himself. Peter and the other disciple set out and went toward the tomb. 4 The two were running together, but the other disciple outran Peter and reached the tomb first. 5 He bent down to look in and saw the linen wrappings lying there, but he did not go in. 6 Then Simon Peter came, following him, and went into the tomb. He saw the linen wrappings laying there, 7 and the cloth that had been on Jesus’ head, not lying with the linen wrappings but rolled up in a place by itself. Peter will stand in contrast to both "the other disciple" who saw an empty tomb and believed, and Thomas who could not believe until he saw Jesus' resurrected body. Peter neither believes nor doubts. He represents confused disciples who "did not understand the scripture, that he [Jesus] must rise from the dead" (v. 9). Peter's confusion does not subside until Jesus reclaims him in John 21. 8 Then the other disciple, who reached the tomb first, also went in, and he saw and believed; 9 for as yet they did not understand the scripture, that he must rise from the dead. This disciple — "the one whom Jesus loved" — holds a special place in the theology of John. He stands in sharp contrast to Thomas, who does not believe until he can see and touch Jesus' hands and side (cf. v. 25). Consequently, this unnamed disciple represents the blessed disciple who did not see Jesus, yet still believed (cf. vv. 29-31). 10 Then the disciples returned to their homes. Such belief may suggest the superiority of this disciple to that of Peter. As we look ahead in this chapter and the next, John will provide several ways people came to believe, and the disciple whom Jesus loved is the first to believe. We need to remember that this disciple is the hero of the second part of this Gospel, so his being the first to believe should not surprise us as readers. Ancient interpreters of this text claim that the Beloved Disciple was able to believe in Jesus’ resurrection because he had seen the grave clothes and thought it would be very unlikely for a grave robber to have unwrapped the body to steal it. This reasoning gave rise to his belief.[6] At the same time, belief in the gospel of John, as in many other biblical texts, has its basis in revelation from God. Therefore, even though the Beloved Disciple may have believed based on the empty tomb, he still did not know (RSV) or understand (NRSV) the Scripture “that [Jesus] must rise from the dead” (20:9). In other words, even the Beloved Disciple and Peter did not know everything, but they were also to be recipients of the ultimate revelation, the promised Paraclete (the Advocate), whom Jesus would send after his ascension. The Paraclete is the spiritual presence of Jesus among the community (14:16-17; 14:25-31; 15:26-27) and he makes known all that has been obscure throughout Jesus’ ministry. Thus, even though the Beloved Disciple has believed, there is still more to know. Yet, the text notes that they had not understood the scripture that he must raise from the dead. The two returned to their homes. This suggests that neither disciple comprehended what had happened. The whole tenor of the first 10 verses is one of confusion, fear, desolation, and depression. For example, it could be that the Beloved Disciple believed what the women said. The tomb is empty, and someone had taken had the body.[7]
11 However, shifting attention from the male disciples, Mary stood weeping outside the tomb. As she wept, she bent over to look into the tomb; 12 and she saw two angels, the synoptic gospels mention one angel, in white, sitting where the body of Jesus had been lying, one at the head and the other at the feet. 13 They said to her, “Woman, why are you weeping?” She said to them, “They have taken away my Lord, and I do not know where they have laid him.” 14 When she had said this, she turned around and saw Jesus standing there, but she did not know that it was Jesus. Throughout the appearance tradition, Jesus comes to the followers of Jesus. They do not look for him.[8] 15 Jesus said to her, “Woman, why are you weeping? Who are you looking for?” Supposing him to be the gardener, she said to him, “Sir, if you have carried him away, tell me where you have laid him, and I will take him away.” Some authorities suggest that the reference to the gardener, unique to John, is an attempt to thwart a claim that a gardener took the body. Tertullian provides one of the earliest outlines of this argument: The claim, he reports, is that the gardener absconded with the body because he was afraid the mass of expected mourners at the tomb would trample his cabbages. We can again see that the empty tomb left itself open to various interpretations. Taken alone, the reason for the empty tomb is ambivalent. In all of this, Mary is reacting to what she has seen in the way any of us would have responded. Further, as we will soon learn, no one recognizes the risen Lord immediately. They will need some time. 16 Jesus said to her, “Mary!” In John 10:14, the “good shepherd” calls the sheep by name, and they recognize him. We see that thought played out here. She turned and said to him in Hebrew, “Rabbouni!” (which means Teacher). It was the second look by Mary that provided the basis for this story. Others had given only one look. Although one might expect a more theologically rich affirmation here, we also need to remember that John is interested in a progression toward the confession of faith by Thomas. Jesus will reveal himself in stages. Mary becomes the second person to believe, even if she will need some prodding. 17 Jesus said to her, “Do not hold on to me, suggesting she is clinging to him, sorrow turning to joy, because I have not yet ascended to the Father. This means that the risen Lord has not simply returned to the reality of his earthly life.[9] Many emphasize the oddity of the reluctance of Jesus to be touched. Certainly, the idea that Mary should not touch Jesus makes no sense considering his later invitation to Thomas to precisely do that. This reluctance is overdone. The NRSV is correct in interpreting that Jesus’ reticence is not about being touched but about Mary holding on to him. The theological intent is that no one can hold down or cling to the resurrected one. While John does not state it, the message is that Jesus is even more unfathomable now than he was when alive — one is not able to grasp him. Jesus will reveal himself to those whom he wishes. The revelation of the resurrected one will necessitate a different kind of relationship, not based upon physical contact but upon a spiritual unity that will make the believer one with the risen Lord. Jesus’ command to Mary not to hold on to him is theologically significant. For the post-resurrection community, the community will not find the importance of Jesus in his physical body remaining with them, but in his spiritual presence as the Paraclete. The idea that Jesus has not ascended to the Father could mean that only at the time of the ascension is the earthly journey of Jesus over. The day of resurrection is when the body of Jesus entered glory. It may be that between this appearance to Mary and Jesus’ appearance to the disciples and especially Thomas (vv. 26-29), Jesus experiences a more complete glorification.[10] The consensus is that Jesus’ ascension in John began at his resurrection. In other words, the resurrection and the ascension have merged. Just as Jesus’ glorification begins with the crucifixion, his ascension is beginning now (a present tense verb, 20:17). In any case, Jesus’ resurrection is part of an ongoing process of glorification. Whatever the actuality of the event, what John stresses is that Jesus is fulfilling what he has promised during his life — that he and those who believe in him will become one with him and the Father (17:21-23). The most sensible understanding of this comment is not to connect it to either his glorified body, or his impending departure. Rather, we need to understand it as a reassurance to the joy-distraught woman: "You do not need to cling to me like this, because I'm not going anywhere yet." We have no record of what other words the two may have exchanged. Rather, instead of clinging to him, she is to go to my brothers and say to them, ‘I am ascending to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God.’” The risen Lord has a profound unity between himself and his disciples. 18 Mary Magdalene went and announced to the disciples, “I have seen the Lord”; and she told them that he had said these things to her.
As modern persons read a passage like this, we often assume that it was somehow easier for these ancient disciples to believe in the resurrection of Jesus than it is for us. Yet, this passage reminds us of the doubt and confusion the first Easter had for the disciples. They had the Bible. They had the words of Jesus. Yet, the resurrection was not something they found easy to believe. The emptiness of the tomb puzzles them, making them assume someone has stolen the body. Even when Mary first encounters Jesus, she assumes that he is a gardener. She does not recognize the risen Lord until he says her name. She took a second look and saw Jesus; even as she least expected it.
As important as Easter is to the church, to Christian belief, and I hope to us, it never gets easier. The confession of Mary, “I have seen the Lord,” makes her a witness to its truth and a model of faith. We believe the witnesses, not because we have such wonderful insight, but because the Holy Spirit has opened our eyes. We now see who Jesus is as the King of kings, Lord of lords, our Savior, and the Son of God. Christians now know that all that we hope to know of God, we know in Christ.
No planet knows that this,
Our wayside planet, carrying land and wave,
Love and life multiplied, and pain and bliss
Bears, as chief treasure, one forsaken grave.[11]
We often want helpful hints for the difficulties we face today. This story says that what God has done in Jesus Christ is far more significant to us than we may realize. Do we believe? Have we seen the Lord? If so, then our lives are neither more nor less than living in relationship to him, receiving the strength he gives for the journey and going where he leads.
For many people today, death and nothingness are the final word. The resurrection of Jesus is a sign that life and light may well have the final say. As a boy, Robert Louis Stevenson, living in a time before light bulbs, was intrigued by the work of the old lamplighter who went about with a ladder and a torch, setting the streetlights ablaze for the night. One evening in Edinburgh, Scotland, as young Robert stood watching with childish fascination, his parents heard him exclaim, “Look, look! There’s a man out there punching holes in the darkness!” Yes, God has punched a hole in the darkness with the resurrection of Jesus. Those who turn to this light with faith could reflect that light in their world.
Bedazzled is year 2000 movie of a modern rendition of Faust, in which the devil, in the form of a beautiful woman, played by Elizabeth Hurly, wants the soul of the naïve Elliott Richard, played by Brendan Fraser, in exchange for seven wishes that she will grant him. Of course, every wish goes wrong. He goes through six wishes, all of which begin to sound much like the seven deadly sins. He wants the love of Allison. He wishes for her to love him. He wishes for wealth and power. He wishes to be the most sensitive man in the world, but Allison gets frustrated. He then wishes to be a great professional basketball player. He wishes for popularity. He finally considers doing something for others, which starts with being President of the USA – Abraham Lincoln. At one point, (1:10:42 to 1:15:35): he goes to church, telling a minister that he needs to talk to God. When he tells the minister about his contract in which he sells his soul to the Devil, the minister has him brought to jail because he sounded so crazy. The Devil is an officer who places him in his cell. His cellmate says she is the Devil. Then he asks, “What are you in for?” “Eternity.” “Why?” “I sold my soul.” “I hope you got something good for it.” “I got nothing for it.” “You got a bad deal. But it doesn’t matter anyway. You cannot sell your soul, because it does not belong to you in the first place.” “It doesn’t? Then, who does it belong to?” “It belongs to God, the great unifying force that holds everything together. The Devil will try to confuse you. You will make mistakes along the way, everyone does. But if you just open your heart and your mind, you will get it.” “Who are you?” “Just a friend, a really good friend.” In the end (1:15:36 to 1:27:00), he decides that he does not want another wish. In fact, he cannot think of anything he wants, at least nothing the Devil can give him. He has spent his life wishing he were something else. He realized that it was not so much where we end up in life, but how we get there. He finally wishes for Allison to have a happy life. This wish breaks the contract with the Devil.
My guess is that all of us have a story in which, at some point in our lives, we became confused. We lived more with darkness and pollution than with light and health. Yet, for many of you, the light has dawned upon you.
You are in the position of Mary today. You may need to take a second look. Have you ever found yourself in a distressing circumstance, when the sky seemed to come crashing down on you, and Christian that you are, you immediately forgot all the promises of God? You felt sorry for yourself; you became anxious and upset. I have. We so quickly forget the promises of God. You need to take a second look.
We have perhaps had it all. It is not that we have never understood that something is more important than success in a career. We have simply taken the wrong path to find it. You need to take a second look at Jesus.
[1] Moltmann The Way of Jesus Christ, p. 222.
[2] Pannenberg, Systematic Theology Volume 2, 357-8.
[3] Ben Witherington III, "The Last Man Standing" BAR [March/April 2006], 24.
[4] Jesse Walker, a student of conspiracy theories, has come up with five different types:
The “Enemy Outside” refers to theories based on figures alleged to be scheming against a community from without.
The “Enemy Within” finds the conspirators lurking inside the nation, indistinguishable from ordinary citizens.
The “Enemy Above” involves powerful people manipulating events for their own gain.
The “Enemy Below” features the lower classes working to overturn the social order.
“Benevolent Conspiracies” are angelic forces that work behind the scenes to improve the world and help people.
—Jesse Walker, The United States of Paranoia: A Conspiracy Theory (Harper Perennial, 2013).
[5] Political scientist Michael Barkun identifies three reasons why conspiracy theories have such popular appeal:
“First, conspiracy theories claim to explain what institutional analysis cannot. They appear to make sense out of a world that is otherwise confusing.
Second, they do so in an appealingly simple way, by dividing the world sharply between the forces of light and the forces of darkness. They trace all evil back to a single source, the conspirators and their agents.
Third, conspiracy theories are often presented as special, secret knowledge unknown or unappreciated by others. For conspiracy theorists, the masses are a brainwashed herd, while the conspiracy theorists in the know can congratulate themselves on penetrating the plotters’ deceptions.”
—Chip Berlet, “Interview: Michael Barkun,” New Internationalist, September 2004. publiceye.org. Retrieved September 20, 2019.
[6](see Raymond E. Brown, The Gospel According to John XIII-XXI, AB 29A [New York: Doubleday, 1970], 1007)
[7] Augustine, in Tractate 120, has some interesting comments upon John:
"And he saw, and believed." Here some, by not giving due attention, suppose that John believed that Jesus had risen again; but there is no indication of this from the words that follow. For what does he mean by immediately adding, "For as yet they knew not the scripture, that He must rise again from the dead"? He could not then have believed that He had risen again, when he did not know that it behoved Him to rise again. What then did he see? what was it that he believed? What but this, that he saw the sepulchre empty, and believed what the woman had said, that He had been taken away from the tomb? "For as yet they knew not the scripture, that He must rise again from the dead." Thus also when they heard of it from the Lord Himself, although it was uttered in the plainest terms, yet from their custom of hearing Him speaking by parables, they did not understand, and believed that something else was His meaning.
[8] Barth Church Dogmatics IV.2 [64.2] 144.
[9] Pannenberg Systematic Theology Volume 2, 348-9.
[10] (C.K. Barrett)
[11] Alice Meynell
No comments:
Post a Comment