text size

Top comments

{{ annotation.praises_count }} Likes
{{ annotation.creator_alias }}
{{ annotation.creator_score }}

There are no comments yet. Be the first to start comment or request an explanation.

The resurrection appearances in the Fourth Gospel include four distinct stories that focus on individual characters: Mary Magdalene, Thomas, and Peter. [Looking for commentary on Mark 16:1-8? See this [commentary for Easter Sunday](http://www.workingpreacher.org/preaching.aspx?commentary_id=2406) by Lance Pape.] By specifying a single person around whom the episode revolves, John once again emphasizes the importance of the individual encounter with Jesus as central to believing who he is and the necessity of reciprocity when it comes to relationship. The first appearance of the resurrected Jesus is to Mary Magdalene, yet the first acknowledgment of the resurrection is not that Jesus has been raised but that the stone has been rolled away from the tomb. Mary comes to the tomb when it is still dark. The reference to the time of day again reinforces one of the major theological themes of the Gospel, light and darkness. That it is dark at the tomb indicates that full recognition and belief is yet to come and like other encounters with Jesus in the Gospel, there will be a progression of sight throughout this first resurrection story. Mary’s conclusion to what she finds is peculiar. The text does not say that she ever actually looked into the tomb but only that she saw that the stone had been rolled away. She goes to Peter and the beloved disciple with the first announcement about the resurrection that is not the claim of having seen the empty tomb but the moving of the stone. Mary’s inaccurate assumption, “They have taken the Lord out of the tomb, and we do not know where they have laid him” (John 20:2) succeeds in delaying the real truth that lies behind the stone having been rolled away. We should ask why Mary assumes a missing body. Why not say to the disciples, the stone has been rolled away? Her report, however, succeeds in getting Peter and the disciple whom Jesus loved to the tomb. Preaching on this portion of the first resurrection appearance might explore our assumptions about resurrection and new life. How does what we see, or what we are willing to see, determine what we believe? What does the stone represent? Like other passages in the Gospel such as the foot washing and the anointing of Jesus, this first discovery in the garden is narrated in real time, creating a sense of wonder and suspense. Verses 3-8 could easily be condensed into a brief summary of what they discovered. Instead, the experience is described to delay the discovery but also to give witness to the very real and embodied sense of what this experience would be like. They saw and believed but yet would not know the truth about what they have seen, in part because they do not give testimony to what they have witnessed. To believe in who Jesus is also requires acting on that belief, particularly in the form of being a witness. Peter and the beloved disciple return to their homes after the event at the tomb without saying a thing about what they saw. This Gospel, however, is not content with leaving the individual encounter with Jesus at the level of that alone. To be a true believer, a disciple, a follower, of Jesus in the Fourth Gospel is to then give witness to what you have experienced in encountering Jesus, not only for the sake of making it true for yourself, but also for the sake of those who would hear and have their own encounter with Jesus. As a result, the story returns to Mary for we have yet to hear how she will respond. We find her back at the tomb, presumably having returned there after reporting to the disciples what she had seen. She is weeping. While not the same verb as that used for Jesus in John 11:35 about Lazarus, there is certainly a connection to the death of Lazarus. Now here again, there is weeping over the loss of a friend. That Mary cries, weeping in her grief, also draws attention to the deep and intense manifestations of humanity that permeate this Gospel. For the incarnation to be taken seriously, being human must be taken seriously. When a friend dies, we cry. Mary’s weeping is mentioned no less than four times in four verses. The repetition has the function of emphasizing this important expression of what it means to be human and also validates her response. Of course Mary should cry. The scene would suffer a strange and awkward void if her emotions were not given voice. Preaching this scene in the story would acknowledge the levels of grief that would accompany this experience. That Mary decides at this moment to look in the tomb and not before is interesting. What does she hope or expect to see? The angels call attention to her weeping, asking her why she is doing so. Her answer for the angels is the same as her announcement to Peter and the beloved disciple, but with one striking difference, the switch from a first person plural confession to a first person singular testimony, “and I do not know where they have laid him (John 20:13). “_I_ do not know!” She is alone at the tomb, like the woman at the well, and being alone with Jesus will result in a public confession. The resurrected Jesus appears for the first time, to Mary, asking her the same question that the angels asked of her but now with an additional inquiry, “Whom are you looking for?” This is the third time this question has appeared in the Gospel, every time asked by Jesus. They are his first words to the first disciples, with the only difference being “what” instead of “whom” (John 1:38). To ask this question of Mary here takes the reader back to the calling of the disciples and implies that Mary, too, is considered a disciple. Jesus poses the same question to the Roman soldiers and the Jewish police who come to arrest Jesus at the garden (John 18:4, 7). We are then reminded of the setting of this first resurrection appearance in a garden (John 19:42-43). Mary assumes that Jesus is the gardener because this is taking place in a garden. This setting is unique to John. The arrest, death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus take place in a garden and is an image worth exploring when it comes to preaching this passage. All of which the garden has symbolized up until this point should be brought to bear in this encounter, particularly its intimation of life. To locate the death and burial of Jesus and the first resurrection appearance in a garden brings this Gospel full circle from its start. “In the beginning” situates this story of Jesus first outside the temporal constraints of the incarnation and at the same time alludes to the theological premises of the creation story in Genesis. Themes of creation, new creation, surround the presentation of abundant life in the Gospel of John. To preach the meaning of the resurrection against the background of the creation story extends our sense of what the resurrection can mean beyond simply eternal life or some heavenly reality beyond our death. Resurrection is nothing short of re- creation. That the burial and resurrection of Jesus take place in a garden underscores the Fourth Gospel’s unrelenting commitment to holding the divine and the human together. Death is the reality of life, but resurrection points to the reality of abundant life. It is not until Jesus calls Mary by name that her recognition comes. Two passages in the Gospel must be brought to bear if choosing to preach on this moment in this resurrection story. The first is the Shepherd Discourse (John 9:40-10:18), Jesus’ interpretation of the healing of the blind man. The blind man’s first reaction to Jesus is hearing and not sight so that the blind man is, in the end, truly a sheep, a disciple. The sheep know and recognize the voice of the shepherd and he calls them by name. Now here, in the garden, Jesus calls Mary by name and that is the moment of recognition. Mary is the first person to whom Jesus appears and she is the first person to realize that it is him, the good shepherd, her shepherd. The second episode that hovers in the background of this moment of recognition between Jesus and Mary is the raising of Lazarus. Lazarus exits the tomb when he is called by name, “Lazarus, come out.” Responding to his name being called, Lazarus is brought to new and resurrected life with Jesus. The same is most certainly true for Mary. Her life will be made new, once again, in the presence and power of the resurrected Christ. Preaching would explore the specificity of the resurrection for Mary. What does it mean for her that is perhaps different from Lazarus? All too often our preaching on the resurrection stops short of particularity in favor of general and safe claims. In Mary’s resurrection moment, how might she begin to understand what it means _for her_? One clue to her express experience of the resurrection is Mary’s response to Jesus. She calls him “Rabbouni” meaning teacher, the very same title given to Jesus by the first disciples (John 1:39). That she recognizes Jesus as teacher is simultaneously an acknowledgment about who Jesus is and a confirmation of her own identity. She is a follower, a disciple, with Jesus as her teacher. John 20:17 has always been a puzzling verse for interpreters and preachers of John. Why was Mary holding on to him? Is this a literal or figurative holding? Given the previous tendencies of this Gospel toward misunderstanding and ambiguity, it is likely both. Yet, why provide this detail in the first place? What is Jesus meaning by asking this question? What is Mary holding onto, besides, perhaps, him? The incarnation? What are we? What are we being asked to let go of? A theological answer to these questions would focus on the certainty that that which becomes flesh must eventually go away. One of the striking aspects of this Gospel, typically overlooked because of the assumption of its “high Christology” is certain truth that the revelation of God in Jesus must end. This unique expression of God, this one and only period of history in which God entered our world as a human being, cannot be forever. When Jesus says “do not hold on to me” he is stating that truth and that he knows what that truth feels like. It is important to note that his words of comfort that follow his command do not lie in the promise of the resurrection but the future of the ascension. It is the ascension that is presented as that in which we can have hope. Yes, the resurrection means release from the grave, but it is the ascension that assures the promise of abiding relationship with the Father. This abiding relationship with the Father, promised in John 1:18 for all believers, is then affirmed by Jesus in his commission to Mary. Jesus does not tell Mary to share the fact that he has been raised from the dead, but rather, that he is ascending, “to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God.” This is the promise. Jesus confirms that all of which he has shared about his relationship with the Father will be for every believer in his ascension. The incarnation will come full circle in Jesus’ return to the Father. Mary’s announcement to the disciples of what she experienced in the garden has great significance for this Gospel and for preaching. She does not offer the disciples a third person, impersonal, doctrinal statement about Jesus’ resurrection, much like our liturgical responses at Easter, “Christ is risen! He is risen indeed! Alleluia!” Rather, it is a first person claim, a testimony, a witness to what she has experienced. She gives voice again to that which is so critical for this Gospel, one’s own experience and encounter with Jesus so as to recognize who Jesus is. Mary’s proclamation is not only a witness to her encounter with the resurrected Jesus, but also an interpretation of it. She realizes that for Jesus to be raised from the dead is also an assertion about her own resurrection, her own future. The first person statement is simultaneously an announcement about what she saw and a statement of belief in her promise of future life with Jesus and with God.

read all comments

1 Sarah R = ""The beloved disciple" is John, the author of this gospel, who is identified at the end of the gospel is verse 21:24."
2 Sarah R = "The empty tomb is a big problem for those who try to deny the resurrection of Jesus Christ. Why was the tomb empty? We know it was, because if not, skeptics could just point to the tomb and say, look, here's Jesus' dead body! But that's not what happened then, and that's not what's happening now. Then they tried to say that the disciples stole the body (Mt. 28:11-15). But for what motive would the disciples have stolen the body? So that they could live the rest of their lives in poverty, facing persecution, torture, and martyrdom as they professed Jesus resurrected even though they knew it to be a lie? Doesn't seem very likely. The Pharisees and Romans certainly had no motive to steal the body, either - they wanted Jesus to stay dead! Today's skeptics try to come to terms with the empty tomb by denying Jesus ever existed at all. Unfortunately for them, the historical evidence (from Christian and non-Christian sources) is so ample they look pretty ridiculous for trying to deny His historical existence. So how then can we account for the empty tomb? Only by accepting that Jesus did exactly what He said He would do - He rose from the dead in three days, showing that His claims of being the Messiah and the Son of God were in fact true."
3 Yaakov ben Chaim Tzvi = "A common argument I often hear from those who try to prove to me that Jesus rose from the dead, is that because the tomb where Jesus was supposedly buried was empty the only logical conclusion was that he must have risen from the dead. The difficulty with this argument is that Christians try to prove something by an absence of proof. Not only is this illogical but the same argument can be used to ‘prove’ virtually anything. A silly example might be that because we don’t see evidence of aliens on earth, they must have been here long ago and left. With the God of Israel, it is not lack of evidence that proved he was God but the open fulfillment of prophecy that we can still see today, right now, this very minute as you look at your clock. The Bible tells us in Leviticus 26:33 “I will scatter you among the nations and will draw out my sword and pursue you. Your land will be laid waste, and your cities will lie in ruins.” Approximately 2,000 Years ago, the Jewish nation was exiled from the land of Israel by the sword of the Romans and scattered across the ends of the earth just as the Bible foretold 1,400 years earlier. Our holy city of Jerusalem was laid waste and the land of Israel was in ruins. As far as being conquered, the Jewish nation is certainly not unique. All throughout history, native people were conquered by others, hundreds possibly thousands of times throughout the ages. While most other cultures die out and assimilate into the nations they are scattered to however, the Jewish people has been the only nation in history to defy those odds and return to the land of their origin. The reason we survived as an independent people comes straight from Leviticus 26:44 “Yet in spite of this, when they are in the land of their enemies, I will not reject them or abhor them so as to destroy them completely, breaking my covenant with them. I am the Lord their God.” It was God’s personal promise that we would not be assimilated like everyone else. It was only God’s faithful word to keep the covenant he made with our ancestors that allowed us to survive and defy the impossible odds against us. For 2,000 years through pogroms, inquisitions, crusades and holocausts the Jewish nation survived “never to be destroyed completely” just as promised in Leviticus. The Jewish people are living proof of these prophecies.The Prophet Isaiah in Chapter 66:8 says something that should send shivers down your spine, he says “Who has ever heard of such things? Who has ever seen things like this? Can a country be born in a day or a nation be brought forth in a moment? Yet no sooner is Zion in labor than she gives birth to her children.” This prophecy was fulfilled on May 14th 1948 when the nation of Israel was reborn in an instant just as Isaiah had prophesized nearly 3,000 years ago. The Prophet Amos in Chapter 9:14 says “I will bring back my exiled people Israel; they will rebuild the ruined cities and live in them. They will plant vineyards and drink their wine they will make gardens and eat their fruit. I will plant Israel in their own land, never again to be uprooted from the land I have given them,” says the Lord your God”. The return of the Jewish people to the Land of Israel was a fulfillment of prophecy that everyone in the world currently sees and the Bible openly predicted. This coincides with what we discussed earlier when we spoke of prophecy being a revelation that is clearly witnessed by everyone. There is no one alive today that can honestly claim the Jewish nation does not live in the land that God promised to us. In the 1500’s, the founder of Protestantism Martin Luther said that the Jews were so blinded as to be rejected and despised by God that they never had any hope of returning to the land of Israel. Apparently, Martin Luther was unfamiliar with his own Bible because time and again it openly rejects his statements. The Jewish nation living in Israel is a physical sign that everyone can see, this is not absence of proof like an empty tomb, but a visible manifestation of Gods promise to the Jewish people. It is not the absence of Israel, but its physical presence which is the sign. An absence of proof is no proof at all.The reason that we know dinosaurs once existed is because their fossilized bones are evidence of their once great existence. We have physical proof that ancient civilizations once existed because of the remains of the cities and artifacts they left behind. The ancient land of Israel and the remnants of our past culture bear witness that we have now returned to the land. In 1867, Mark Twain visited Israel and published his impressions in his book “The Innocents Abroad”.  He described Israel as a desolate country devoid of both vegetation and human population: He said, “….. A desolate country whose soil is rich enough, but is given over wholly to weeds… a silent mournful expanse…. a desolation…. we never saw a human being on the whole route…. hardly a tree or shrub anywhere. Even the olive tree and the cactus, those fast friends of a worthless soil, had almost deserted the country.” However upon the return of the Jewish people to the land of Israel, God promised in Isaiah 35:1 “The desert and the dry land will be glad; the wilderness will rejoice and blossom like the crocus flower. They will burst into bloom, and rejoice with joy and singing”. He continues to repeat this theme in Chapter 51:3 “The Lord will surely comfort Zion and will look with compassion on all her ruins; he will make her deserts like Eden, her wastelands like the garden of the Lord. Joy and gladness will be found in her, thanksgiving and the sound of singing.” In fact, the borders of Israel are commonly referred to as the Green Line which separates the dry desert lands of the Arab nations with the blossoming land of the Jewish people in Israel. For 2,000 years the land lay barren awaiting the return of the Jewish nation just as Mark Twain had witnessed in 1867, however less than 100 years later the same desolate land bloomed into a productive nation as God promised thousands of years earlier. This is tangible proof.In Deuteronomy 28:7 it says “The Lord shall cause your enemies who rise up against you to be defeated before you; they will come out against you one way and will flee before you seven ways.” In 1948 when the United Nations recognized Israel’s independence, the nations of Egypt, Syria, Jordan, Lebanon, Iraq, Saudi Arabia and Yemen attacked Israel. Did you count how many nations that was? Seven. This is not speculation but historical, verifiable fact. The end result of the war was exactly as God promised; the attacking nations all fell before Israel. They attacked her as a unified coalition but retreated to their respective nations utterly defeated and humiliated. Time and again, the prophecies of the Hebrew Bible have been fulfilled and continue to be fulfilled just as the Bible states.  How can some in the Christian community ignore these prophecies when the fulfillment is right before their eyes? Most Christians today have recognized that their ancestors were wrong about Israel and the Jewish people and that we are not “rejected” as they once believed. Most Christians today have recognized the importance of Israel in the world and know that God is not yet finished with the Jewish people. Had Martin Luther learned the proper way to translate and read the Jewish scriptures from the Jewish people instead of his own foolish interpretations he would have never come to such contradictory conclusions about us. It is only because he chose a different path, a non-biblical interpretation that caused him to openly ignore the incontrovertible evidence that Israel will once again exist as a nation.Just as Martin Luther, the founder of Protestant Christianity misinterpreted the Bible to suit his own hate-filled and anti-Semitic ideology; Christianity today misinterprets the Hebrew Scriptures and prophecies in order to prove the existence of a dying and resurrected Jewish Messiah which has no basis in Jewish scripture. Nowhere in Jewish teaching does it say that the Messiah will be a son of God or a God. Nowhere in Jewish scripture does it say that the Messiah will be born of a virgin. Nowhere in Jewish scripture does it say that the Messiah is to die for the sins of the world, and nowhere in Jewish scripture are Moses’ laws nullified or “completed”."
4 Sarah R = "I'm not sure which part of the argument you are saying has an absence of proof. We have evidence, from Christian and non-Christian sources, that Jesus lived and died. We have the testimonies of eyewitnesses of Jesus' life and the disciples of those eyewitnesses who continued to lead the church after their death who testify that the disciples (among others) saw the resurrected Jesus. We have testimony that they were tortured and killed for saying Jesus resurrected from the dead. We have Paul saying that the church was teaching Jesus died, was buried and resurrected within only 1-7 years of Jesus' resurrection (see 1 Cor 15). We have the fact that those who wanted to deny Jesus' resurrection were unable to produce a body or explain away the empty tomb - and didn't even try to. I do know from your previous posts that you do not believe the NT is historically accurate or authentic, but that it was "corrupted" or "invented" hundreds of years later. After having investigated the evidence for myself, I found it overwhelming for the accuracy, authenticity, and reliability of the NT. Therefore, I feel comfortable in saying that Jesus' tomb was empty, as recorded by the gospels, and that my Redeemer lives."
5 Sarah R = "Sometimes as a Christian church we get distracted with lights and music and presentation, and we forget that the best testimony we have is just one-on-one, sharing how Jesus changed our lives."