Angelic Encounters at the Empty Tomb

Angelic encounters at the empty tomb of Jesus of Nazareth – were there two angels posing a conflict in the Gospels? Why two angels? What did they look like?

Setting the scene, by Jewish day-reckoning the Saturday Sabbath began at sunset on Friday evening. Earlier that afternoon, Jesus of Nazareth had been executed by crucifixion requiring a hasty burial before Jewish Sabbath Law restricted various activities.

Sabbath formally ended Saturday at sunset. With the Sabbath restrictions no longer a factor, this is where the chronicle of the Resurrection of Jesus begins. The three synoptic Gospels – Matthew, Mark and Luke – join the storyline at different points.

Mark’s account establishes the earliest timeline point identifying Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of the James, and Salome purchasing burial spices as soon as the Sabbath ended Saturday night.[1] The women worried about how they would move the stone from the entrance clearly not aware the tomb was sealed and guarded.

Matthew’s account sets the scene at the tomb as sunrise approached Sunday morning. The joint armed Roman-Jewish koustodia, established by the command of Pilate at the request of the Jewish council, were on-duty guarding the tomb to prevent the theft of the body. Arriving at the tomb were the two Marys, Salome, Joanna and other unnamed women.[2]

Suddenly a great earthquake struck when the women witnessed an angel rolling away the stone from the entrance to the tomb. Matthew described the angel:

MT 28:2-3 “And behold, there was a great earthquake; for an angel of the Lord descended from heaven, and came and rolled back the stone from the door, and sat on it. His countenance was like lightning, and his clothing as white as snow.” (NKJV)

At this point Mark and Luke join the storyline at the tomb with each describing differently, though consistently, the physical attire of the angels:

MK 16:5 And entering the tomb, they saw a young man clothed in a long white robe sitting on the right side…” (NKJV)

LK 24:4 “… behold, two men stood by them in shining garments.” (NKJV)

Luke unambiguously says there were two angels, while both Matthew and Mark only refer to one angel. Is there a conflict? Factoring in the details of each account into the entire scenario is revealing. Keep in mind, Luke’ investigative report was written after Matthew and Mark wrote their accounts.[3]

Matthew says that after an angel rolled away the large stone, he did a curious and unusual thing – he sat on it. Not standing or hovering in the air like the stereotypical image of an angel; instead, in dazzling array there he sat, perhaps with his legs draped over the side. Unnecessary and unexpected information, yet personifying and specific detail adding authentic realism.

Mark describes the angel inside the tomb specifically on the right side also sitting, not standing. Logically, this angel cannot be the same one sitting outside on the rolled-away stone. Such descriptive details are typically absent from a deceptive statement. Their body language indicates they were relaxed and inviting in demeanor.

As one angel sat on the tomb’s entrance stone, he spoke to the women inviting them to go inside the tomb:

MT 28:5-6  “”Do not be afraid; for I know that you are looking for Jesus who has been crucified. He is not here, for He has risen, just as He said. Come, see the place where He was lying.”(NASB)

At the angel’s invitation, at least some of the women entered the tomb. Inside, Mark describes the second angelic encounter who also spoke to the women, his message similar to the first:

MK 16:5-6 “Entering the tomb, they saw a young man sitting at the right, wearing a white robe; and they were amazed. And he said to them, “Do not be amazed; you are looking for Jesus the Nazarene, who has been crucified. He has risen; He is not here; behold, here is the place where they laid Him.’””(NASB)

Pointing out where the dead body of Jesus of Nazareth had lain on the stone slab was to the very witnesses – the two Marys, Salome and perhaps other unnamed women – who had on Friday watched Joseph of Arimathea and Nicodemus preparing the body for burial on that same spot.[4] Had the angel’s statement been untrue, the women would be expected to refute it and the angel’s message would have been suspect. They didn’t.

Witness statements to the same event are expected to vary and, as long as they are consistent on key information, it is a hallmark of authenticity and credibility. On the other hand, if two or more statements are very nearly or exactly the same, it is a strong indication of deception.

Evaluating witness statements requires investigators to consider the key facts, information, perspective, sequence of events, etc. and then, if possible during an actual interview, probe deeper. Interviews not being possible, the statements then must be evaluated based on their own merit as compared to other statements and evidence.

All three Gospels’ descriptions vary, yet they are all tightly consistent on the main details – there were two angelic beings, they spoke to the women, the tomb was empty, the body of Jesus was gone, and the angels announced Jesus is alive just as he had predicted.

Corroborating information is provided by the eyewitness John. His personal knowledge begins when the terrified women burst into the room of mourning Disciples announcing the empty tomb. John and Peter raced to see it for themselves.[5] Also arriving back at the tomb was Mary Magdalene and other women.[6] Marveling at finding the tomb empty except the burial cloths used to wrap the body, John and Peter decided to go home leaving the women behind.

Standing outside the tomb crying, Mary stooped and looked back inside where she saw two angels who spoke to her, this time she responded:

JN 20:12-13 “And she saw two angels in white sitting, one at the head and the other at the feet, where the body of Jesus had lain. Then they said to her, “Woman, why are you weeping?” She said to them, “Because they have taken away my Lord, and I do not know where they have laid Him.”(NKJV)

John was not there although his source, by all indications Mary Magdalene herself, consistently described the two angels dressed in white sitting on each end of the stone slab.[7] Mary Magdalene’s reaction, or lack of one, to the supernatural beings indicates familiarity. Unlike the first encounter, this time she is not alarmed and she spoke to them.

One other validation, though one not called out by the Gospels, is a Jewish legal fact that, if not in met, could diminish the credibility of the Resurrection event. God’s Law required two witnesses to corroborate the same point of evidence to establish a fact…two angels were witnesses at the Resurrection scene of Jesus of Nazareth.[8]

Longstanding investigative principals to decipher credible and truthful statements from deceptive ones through the use of literary analysis and other evidence, all point in one direction. Were there actually two angels at the empty tomb who witnessed the Resurrection of Jesus of Nazareth?

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

REFERENCES:

[1] Mark 16.
[2] Luke 24.
[3] Kirby, Peter. “Gospel of Luke.” EarlyChristianWritings.com. 2019. <http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/luke.html>  “The Book of Luke.” . Quartz Hill School of Theology.  n.d.  <http://www.theology.edu/biblesurvey/luke.htm>
[4] Matthew 27; Mark 15; Luke 23.  Edersheim, Alfred. The Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah.1883. Book 5, Chapter XV. pp 1419-1420. <http://www.ntslibrary.com/PDF%20Books/The%20Life%20and%20Times%20of%20Jesus%20the%20Messiah.pdf>
[5] John 20.
[6] Luke 24; John 20.
[7] Shanks, Hershel.  “Crucifixion Bone Fragment, 21 CE” The Center for Online Judaic Studies. 2004.  <http://cojs.org/crucifixion_bone_fragment-_21_ce>   Romey, Kristin. “Unsealing of Christ’s Reputed Tomb Turns Up New Revelations.” National Geographic. 2016. <https://news.nationalgeographic.com/2016/10/jesus-christ-tomb-burial-church-holy-sepulchre>
[8] Deuteronomy 17:6, 19:15; Numbers 35:30.  Soncino Babylonian Talmud.Sanhedrin. 9a; 30a; 56a, footnote #1. <https://israelect.com/Come-and-Hear/sanhedrin/index.html>  Resnicoff, Steven H. “Criminal Confessions in Jewish Law .“ Project Genesis. 2007.  <https://web.archive.org/web/20160122222638/http://www.torah.org/features/secondlook/criminal.html>

Science and the Psalms 22 Controversy

Psalms 22 poses a two-part controversy, unbeknownst to many, starting with Christian and Jewish Bibles translating one key verse very differently. That difference then plays a central role in part two of the controversy, whether Psalms 22 is a foreshadowing prophecy foretelling the crucifixion death of the Messiah.[1]

Christian Bibles are consistent with the New King James Version translation of Psalms 22:16. Appearing one verse later in Jewish Bibles, Psalms 22:17 translations are typically consistent with Complete Jewish Bible:

“Dogs have surrounded me; a band of evil men has encircled me, they have pierced my hands and my feet. (NJKV)

“For dogs have surrounded me; a band of evildoers has encompassed me, like a lion, my hands and feet.(CJB)

One tiny detail is the point of contention – the single character of one Hebrew word that completely changes its meaning. In digital text, the difference is somewhat visually easy to see:

כאריכארו

Handwritten on an ancient scroll, the difference is almost indistinguishable to the untrained eye. It is important to remember that Hebrew is written and read from right to left.[2]  Taking special care not to miss such distinctions was even a challenge for the Rabbi authors of the Talmud:

“R. Awira…as it is written [Prov. xxv. 21]: “If thy enemy be hungry, give him bread to eat, and if he be thirsty, give him water to drink; for though thou gatherest coals of fire upon his head, yet will the Lord repay it unto thee.”  Do not read ‏שלם‎ (repay it), but ‏שלים‎ (he will make him peaceful toward thee).[3]

In Hebrew, the slightest variation can alter the entire meaning of a sentence, even changing a noun to a verb.[4] In the case of Psalms 22:16 (17), the impact on the translation is striking:

כארו

(K’aru / Ka’aru) = they have bored / they have dug / they have pierced.

כארי

K’ari / Ka’ari) = like a lion my hands and feet

Jewish Bibles mostly translate the K’ari as “like a lion my hands and feet” although some read “like lions [they maul] my hands and feet;” others “like a lion they are at my hands and my feet.”[5] All are meaningfully different from the Christian Bible translation based on the word K’aru, “they have dug,” translated into either the word “pierced” or “pin.”[6]

Digging deeper, the root of the controversy lies with the source of the ancient Hebrew text.[7] In this case, one is over a millennium older than the other.

Septuagint LXX is the Hebrew-to-Greek standard translation dating to the period of 285-247 BC. According to Josephus, at the behest of Ptolemy Philadelphius, ruler of Egypt, the translation effort was performed by 72 Jewish scholars, 6 from each tribe, hence the Roman numeral “LXX”.[8]

Each translator was independently secluded until the end of the project. At the conclusion, the combined translation was presented for approval to all the priests, elders and the principal men of the commonwealth. Once approved, King Ptolemy ordered the finalized official translation to remain “uncorrupted.”

Jewish Bibles are based on two surviving Hebrew Masoretic texts (MT), the Aleppo Codex dated to 925 AD and the Hebrew Leningrad Codex c. 1008-10 AD.[9] About a third of the Aleppo text has been missing since 1947 when a riot broke out in Aleppo, Syria, where the text had been kept in a Synagogue.[10] Modern Hebrew translations now have a dependency on the more recent Leningrad manuscript to fill in the missing content.[11]

Masoretic Text is the culmination of many variations of textual sources, spelling changes, and interpretations compiled into a final text. Unlike the Septuagint, the MT lacked the benefit of a side-by-side comparison to the original “witnessing” Hebrew text. Menachem Cohen, Professor of Bible at Bar-Ilan University of Israel and director of the Miqraot Gedolot HaKeter Project explained it this way: [12]

“…the aggregate of known differences in the Greek translations is enough to rule out the possibility that we have before us today’s Masoretic Text. The same can be said of the various Aramaic translations; the differences they reflect are too numerous for us to class their vorlage [original text] as our Masoretic Text.”

Professor Cohen’s project team, using the science of textual criticism, explains how the Masoretic text diverged from the 1250-year older Septuagint translation. The changes began at some point before the Roman’s destruction of the Jewish Temple in 70 AD:[13]

“In any case, it seems that after the destruction the array of text-types disappeared from normative Judaism, and the Masoretic type alone remained.”

“During the same period, new Greek translations were being prepared in place of the Septuagint, which, by virtue of its becoming an official Christian text, was rejected by the Jews. These translations, especially that of Aqilas which was praised by the Sages, reflected the Masoretic text-type.[14]

A potentially game-changing scroll discovery was made in the 1950s at the Bar Kochba archeological site. A Jewish rebellion against Rome from 132-135 AD called the Bar-Kokhba revolt, was led by Simon ben Kochba, a rebel Jewish leader and military commander known for his strict adherence to traditional Jewish law.[15] Professor Cohen remarked:

“In the fifties, remnants of Scriptural scrolls used by Bar Kochba’s soldiers were found in the Judean desert (Wadi Murabba’at and Nahal Hever). They all show that Bar Kochba’s people used the same text which we call the MT, with only the slightest of differences.”

Nahal (Nachal) Hever scrolls, as they are now called, date to the years between 2 BC – 68 AD predating the Leningrad Codex Masoretic Text by about 1000 years, yet some 200-300 years after the Septuagint LXX translation. Essentially coinciding with the lifetime of Jesus of Nazareth, the dating of these scrolls serve to dispel the charge of Christian manipulation of the Septuagint text to fit the Gospels written years after his crucifixion.[16]

One of the Nahal Hever scrolls surviving relatively intact is Psalms 22 where the potentially game-changing text of Psalms 22:16(17) uses the word K’aru (כארו).[17] A translation by Dr. Martin Abegg Jr., Dr. Peter Flint and Eugene Ulrich Psalms 22:14-18 reads:[18]

“[I have] been poured out [like water, and all] my bon[es are out of joint.  My heart has turned to wax; it has mel]ted away in my breast.  [My strength is dried up like a potsherd], and my tongue melts in [my mouth.  They] have placed [me] as the dust of death.  [For] dogs are [all around me]; a gang of evil[doers] encircles me.  They have pierced my hands and feet.  [I can count all my bones; people stare and gloat over me.  They divide my garments among themselves and they cast lots for my] clothes.” * [19]

Archeological discovery and textual analysis of the Nahal Hever scrolls corroborate the much older Septuagint text of Psalms 22:16(17), both saying the subject in the passage was “pierced,” translated from כארו (K’aru). Do these scientific discoveries strengthen the position that Psalms 22:14-18 is a foreshadowing prophecy of the Messiah’s manner of death?

* The words appearing in brackets were missing from the manuscript and have been supplied from other texts, if available.  The words appearing in italics are those that differ from the later Masoretic text.

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

REFERENCES:

[1] Davidson, Paul. “A Few Remarks on the Problem of Psalm 22:16.” Is That in the Bible?  2015. <https://isthatinthebible.wordpress.com/2015/09/28/a-few-remarks-on-the-problem-of-psalm-2216> “Psalm 22.”  Heart of Israel.  n.d.  <http://www.heartofisrael.net/chazak/articles/ps22.htm>  <http://web.archive.org/web/20171016070503/http://www.heartofisrael.net/chazak/articles/ps22.htm>   Barrett, Ruben.  “Bible Q&A:  Psalms 22.”  HaDavar Ministries.  27 May 2008.   Archived URL.  Archive.org.  23 Aug. 2012.   <http://web.archive.org/web/20120823025747/http://www.hadavar.net/articles/45-biblequestionsanswers/54-psalm22questions.html>
[2] Hegg, Tim.  “Studies in the Biblical Text – Psalm 22:16 – “like a lion” or “they pierced”?” Torah Resource. 2013. <https://www.torahresource.com/EnglishArticles/Ps22.16.pdf>
[3] The Babylonian Talmud. Rodkinson.  Book 4: Tracts Pesachim, Yomah and Hagiga, Chapter V.
[4] Fox, Tsivya. “Aleph, the First Hebrew Letter, Contains Depths of Godly Implications.” August 30, 2016. <https://www.breakingisraelnews.com/74824/adding-aleph-helps-bring-redemption> Benner, Jeff A. “Introduction to Ancient Hebrew.”  Ancient Hebrew Research Center.  2013.  <http://www.ancient-hebrew.org/2_alphabet.html>  Benner, Jeff, The Ancient Hebrew Alphabet. 2019. http://www.ancient-hebrew.org/alphabet_letters_vav.html  Benner, Jeff A. “The Ancient Semitic (Early) Alphabet.” Ancient Hebrew Research Center. 2013. <http://www.ancient-hebrew.org/6_02.html> Benner, Jeff A. “Parent Roots of Hebrew Words.” Ancient Hebrew Research Center. 2019. <http://www.ancient-hebrew.org/2_vocab.html>  Benner, Jeff A. “Anatomy of Hebrew Words.” Ancient Hebrew Research Center. 2019. <http://www.ancient-hebrew.org/vocabulary_anatomy.html> “Punctuation.” Jewish Encyclopedia. 2011. <http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/12441-punctuation>
[5] “Psalms 22.” The Compete Jewish Bible – with Rashi Commentary. <https://www.chabad.org/library/bible_cdo/aid/16243>  “TEHILIM (Book of Psalms) Chapter 22.” Jewish Publication Society (JPS) translation. 1917. <http://www.breslov.com/bible/Psalms22.htm#17>  “Psalms 22.” Sefaria. <https://www.sefaria.org/Psalms.22?lang=bi>
[6] Bible Hub. “Psalms 22.” 2018. <https://biblehub.com/psalms/22-1.htm>  Bible.org. “Psalms 22.” 2019. <http://classic.net.bible.org/bible.php?book=Psa&chapter=22>
[7] “Psalm 22.”  MessianicArt.com. 2004.<http://web.archive.org/web/20120627010236/http://messianicart.com/chazak/yeshua/psalm22.htm>  “Psalms 22 Questions and Comments.”  JewishRoots.net. 2014. <http://jewishroots.net/library/prophecy/psalms/psalm-22/psalm-22-comments-from-hadavar-ministries.html> “”They pierced my hands and my feet” or “Like a lion my hands and my feet” in Psalm 22:16?” KJV Today. n.d. http://kjvtoday.com/home/they-pierced-my-hands-and-my-feet-or-like-a-lion-my-hands-and-my-feet-in-psalm-2216> Delitzsch, Franz. The Psalms.1880. pp 42-43, 317-320.<http://archive.org/stream/commentarypsalm01deliuoft#page/n9/mode/2up>  Benner, Jeff A. “Psalm 22:17 – “Like a lion” or “they pierced?”.” 2018. <https://www.patreon.com/posts/psalm-22-17-like-22030018>
[8] Josephus, Flavius. Antiquities of the Jews. Book XII, Chapter II.1-6. Trans. and commentary William Whitson. The Complete Works of Josephus. 1850. <http://books.google.com/books?id=e0dAAAAAMAAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false>   “The Septuagint (LXX).” Ecclesiastic Commonwealth Community. n.d. <http://ecclesia.org/truth/septuagint.html>   “Septuagint.”  Septuagint.Net. 2018.  <http://septuagint.net>  “Septuagint.” Encyclopædia Britannica. 2019. <https://www.britannica.com/topic/Septuagint>
[9] Lundberg, Marilyn J. “The Leningrad Codex.” USC West Semitic Research Project. 2012. University of Southern California. 8 Jan. 1999. <https://web.archive.org/web/20170403025034/http://www.usc.edu/dept/LAS/wsrp/educational_site/biblical_manuscripts/LeningradCodex.shtml> Abegg, Jr., Martin G., Flint, Peter W. and Ulrich Eugene Charles.  The Dead Sea Scrolls Bible:  the oldest known Bible translated for the first time into English. “Introduction”, page x. (page hidden by Google Books). 2002. <https://books.google.com/books?id=c4R9c7wAurQC&lpg=PP1&ots=fQpCpzCdb5&dq=Abegg%2C%20Flint%20and%20Ulrich2C%20The%20Dead%20Dead%20Sea%20Scrolls%20Bible%2C&pg=PP1#v=onepage&q=Isaiah&f=false>  Aronson, Ya’akov.  “Mikraot Gedolot haKeter–Biblia Rabbinica: Behind the scenes with the project team.”  Association Jewish Libraries. Bar Ilan University. Ramat Gan, Israel. n.d. No longer available free online – available for purchase:  <http://www.biupress.co.il/website_en/index.asp?category=12&id=714>
[10] Ben-David, Lenny. “Aleppo, Syria 100 Years Ago – and Today.” 23/07/15. Arutz Sheva 7 | isralenationalnews.com.  <http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/198521> Ofer, Yosef. “The Aleppo Codex.” n.d. <http://www.aleppocodex.org/links/6.html>  Bergman, Ronen. “A High Holy Whodunit.” New York Times Magazine. July 25, 2012. <https://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/29/magazine/the-aleppo-codex-mystery.html>
[11] Leviant, Curt. Jewish Virtual Library. 2019. “Jewish Holy Scriptures: The Leningrad Codex.” <https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/the-leningrad-codex>  “Leningrad Codex.” Bible Manuscript Society. 2019. <https://biblemanuscriptsociety.com/Bible-resources/Bible-manuscripts/Leningrad-Codex>
[12] Cohen, Menachem. “The Idea of the Sanctity of the Biblical Text and the Science of Textual Criticism.” Eds. Uriel Simon and Isaac B Gottlieb. 1979. Australian National University. College of Engineering & Computer Science. <http://cs.anu.edu.au/%7Ebdm/dilugim/CohenArt>
[13] “Siege of Jerusalem.” Encyclopædia Britannica. 2019. <https://www.britannica.com/event/Siege-of-Jerusalem-70>
[15] “Shimon Bar-Kokhba (c. 15 – 135).” Jewish Virtual Library. 2019. <https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/shimon-bar-kokhba> “Bar Kochba.” Livius.org. Ed. Jona Lendering. 2019.< https://www.livius.org/articles/concept/roman-jewish-wars/roman-jewish-wars-8/>
[16] “Psalm 22.”  Heart of Israel.
[17] Hegg. “Studies in the Biblical Text – Psalm 22:16 – “like a lion” or “they pierced”?”
[18] Abegg, et. al. The Dead Sea Scrolls Bible. p xiv (hidden by Google Books).
[19] Abegg, et. al. The Dead Sea Scrolls Bible. p 518. (hidden by Google Books).

The Bewilderment of Mary Magdalene

Women of Galilee – Mary Magdalene, Joanna, Mary the mother of James, Salome and “the other women” – ran from the empty tomb terrified by their encounter with the angels, breathlessly arriving at the location of the mourning disciples.[1] Mary Magdalene blurted out:

JN 20:2 “They have taken the Lord from the tomb, and we don’t know where they have put him!” (NIV, NET)

Faced with the group of excited women saying the body of Jesus had been taken was… dumbfounding to the Disciples. The tomb secured behind a large stone held the mutilated, decomposing body of Jesus, tightly bound in linens with 75 pounds of spices – who would want it?

LK 24:11 “But these words appeared to them as nonsense, and they would not believe them.”(NASB)[2]

Romans certainly didn’t want a crucified body which they typically discarded unburied, according to Josephus.[3] The Jewish council undoubtedly didn’t want to lend any credence to Jesus predicting he would rise from the dead. Furthermore, a body snatching would have broken several Jewish Laws with at least a 7-day defilement consequence.[4] Maybe the Disciples knew of the armed Roman-Jewish koustodia guarding the sealed tomb, too.

A credible eyewitness statement, as opposed to an investigative report, is expected to begin at the point when the witness becomes personally involved in the sequence of events. John’s personal involvement that Sunday morning began when the women burst into the room with their frantic news.

John quoted Mary Magdalene using the Greek word airo meaning “to lift up,” translated into English as “have taken” in the context of the body had been taken by someone.[5] Reports by Matthew, Mark and Luke recount the angels’ actual message using the Greek word egeiro translated into English as “has been raised,” “has risen” or “is risen”:  [6]

MT 28:6 “He is not here; for he has been raised [egeiro]”(NET, NLT, NRSV)

MK 16:6 “He has risen [egeiro]; He is not here.”(NASB, NIV)

LK 24:6 “He is not here, but is risen! [egeiro]”(NKJV)

Mary Magdalene did not relay the same message the angels had given to the women! Compounding the Disciples’ confusion, use of the plural pronoun “we” indicates she was still with the other women who did not dispute Mary’s assessment when she said “they have taken” his body.

How did the message get twisted? Mary Magdalene’s exclamation indicates her state of mind trying to reconcile what she had just experienced at the tomb with what she knew to be true – Jesus was dead, his body was missing and she didn’t know where it was.

Two Greek words, egeiro and airo, have similar meanings; the first being the movement action of a person and the second being the movement action of an inanimate object. Distinctions can be seen when both words were used together in a sentence by Jesus after he had performed a miracle. His words were reported by three different authors, one being the eyewitness John:

MT 9:6 “…He said to the paralytic, “Arise [egeiro], take up [airo] your bed, and go to your house.””(NKJV)

MK 2:11 “”I say to you, arise [egeiro], take up [airo] your bed, and go to your house.””(NKJV)

JN 5:8 “Jesus said to him, “Rise [egeiro], take up [airo] your bed and walk.””(NKJV)

Miraculously healed, the paralytic – the person – rose [egeiro] on his own power without assistance and took up [airo] his bed, an inanimate object, with him. Applying these word usage definitions to the statements in both scenarios brings clarity to the contexts. The angels’ message at the tomb said Jesus rose [egeiro] under his own power without any assistance – impossible for a dead man to do. In Mary Magdalene’s exclamation, she thought the inanimate body of Jesus had been “take[n] up” [airo] in the context of being “picked up” by a person or persons unknown who took it away.

Mentally processing their thoughts, suddenly a light bulb moment struck Peter and John at about the same time.[7] They raced to the tomb, John arriving first and paused while Peter charged straight inside.[8]

Mary Magdalene, still distraught over the death of Jesus and his missing body, followed John and Peter to the tomb along with others.[9] With the empty tomb containing only the burial linens, Peter and John marveled at what they had seen, then went home. Mary stayed behind weeping, still trying to make sense of what had happened.

In Jewish culture, she would not have been left completely alone. Over the past 3 days, Mary Magdalene had always been accompanied by her women friends from Galilee. The eyewitness account by Cleopas confirmed there were other women at the empty tomb:

LK 24:24 “Some of those who were with us went to the tomb and found it just exactly as the women also had said…”(NET, NRSV)

Looking back inside the empty tomb, Mary Magdalene once again saw angels who were seated on each end of the place where the body of Jesus had lain, just as she had witnessed late Friday afternoon when it was being prepared with burial spices by Joseph of Arimathea and Nicodemus.[10] The angels seemed perplexed as to why Mary was distraught asking her, “Woman, why are you weeping?”[11]

In her second angelic encounter that same morning, Mary Magdalene this time spoke to them. She answered theif question by repeating what she had told the Disciples still using the word airo:

JN 20:13 “They have taken [airo] my Lord away, and I do not know where they have put him!”(NET, NIV)

Mary’s use of “they” referring to persons not present indicates she did not think it was the angels who took the body. Using the singular personal pronoun “I,” she is now speaking only for herself, not the other women.

Another voice asked Mary why she was crying. Believing this new voice to be the gardener of the tombs, her demeanor intensified. Maybe, she thought, he might be the person responsible for carrying away (bastazo – to lift up) the body. Her imploring response was direct:[12]

JN 20:15 “”Sir, if You have carried (bastazo) Him away, tell me where You have laid Him, and I will take (airo) Him away.””(NJKV))[13]

“Mary!” – he called her by name. Not expecting this stranger to know her name and saying it in a familiar way that she immediately recognized, it snapped her to attention. Seeing Jesus, Mary cried out, “Rabboni!” meaning “my master, my teacher.”[14] Her excited utterance was a before and after death recognition of Jesus of Nazareth.

Overwhelmed with joy, Mary wanted to hug Jesus, but he told her to wait because he had not yet ascended “to My Father.”[15] Did Mary believe she was speaking to the same personage of Jesus whom she had known before he was crucified and buried?

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

REFERENCES:

NET = NET Bible translation; NASB = New American Standard Version; NIV = New International Version; NKJV = New King James Version translation; NLT = New Living Translation; NRSV = New Revised Standard Version.

[1] Matthew 28; Mark 16; Luke 24.
[2] CR Mark 16.
[3] Josephus, Flavius. Wars of the Jews. Trans. and commentary. William Whitson. The Complete Works of Josephus. 1850.  Book IV, Chapter V.2. <http://books.google.com/books?id=e0dAAAAAMAAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false>
[4] Exodus 23, 31; Leviticus 23, Numbers 19. Soncino Babylonian Talmud.  “Shabbath.” The Babylonian Talmud. Trans. Rodkinson. Book 1, Sabbath, Chapter I; Book 2, Tract Erubin; Book 3, Tract Pesachim, Book 3, Chapter IV.   “Shabbat” Jewish Encyclopedia. 2011. <http://jewishencyclopedia.com> “Festivals.” Jewish Encyclopedia.
[5] Net.bible.org. Greek text. Strong. “airo” <142The New Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible.  <http://classic.net.bible.org/strong.php?id=142>
[6] Net.bible.org. Matthew 28:11. Greek text. “egeiro” <1453>” <http://classic.net.bible.org/strong.php?id=1453>
[7] Mark 9; Luke 18.
[8] Luke 24; John 20.
[9] John 20.  CR Luke 24.
[10] Matthew 27; Mark 15; John 3, 7, 19.
[11] John 20.  NET.
[12] Net.bible.org. Greek text. “bastazo <941>.”  <http://classic.net.bible.org/strong.php?id=941>
[13] NKJV.
[14] John 20:16.  NASB, NIV. Net.bible.org. Greek text. “rhabboni <4462>” and “didaskalos <1320>.  CR Matthew 23:8.
[15] John 20. CR Matthew 28.