TEXT [Commentary]
O. The Resurrection of Jesus (28:1-10; cf. Mark 16:1-11; Luke 24:1-12; John 20:1-18)
1 Early on Sunday morning,[*] as the new day was dawning, Mary Magdalene and the other Mary went out to visit the tomb.
2 Suddenly there was a great earthquake! For an angel of the Lord came down from heaven, rolled aside the stone, and sat on it. 3 His face shone like lightning, and his clothing was as white as snow. 4 The guards shook with fear when they saw him, and they fell into a dead faint.
5 Then the angel spoke to the women. “Don’t be afraid!” he said. “I know you are looking for Jesus, who was crucified. 6 He isn’t here! He is risen from the dead, just as he said would happen. Come, see where his body was lying. 7 And now, go quickly and tell his disciples that he has risen from the dead, and he is going ahead of you to Galilee. You will see him there. Remember what I have told you.”
8 The women ran quickly from the tomb. They were very frightened but also filled with great joy, and they rushed to give the disciples the angel’s message. 9 And as they went, Jesus met them and greeted them. And they ran to him, grasped his feet, and worshiped him. 10 Then Jesus said to them, “Don’t be afraid! Go tell my brothers to leave for Galilee, and they will see me there.”
NOTES
28:1 The comparison of Matthew’s resurrection narrative with that of the other Gospels raises a number of questions regarding chronology and harmonization (cf. Mark 16:1-11; Luke 24:1-12; John 20:1-18; see the last paragraph of the commentary below for other resources on the resurrection).
Early on Sunday morning, as the new day was dawning. Lit., “after the Sabbath, as the first day of the week was dawning.”
visit the tomb. Lit., “see the tomb.” Their purpose in doing so is explained more clearly in Mark 16:1. It is significant that once again the female disciples were the closest to Jesus at a crucial juncture of the story (cf. 26:7; 27:56, 61). Evidently the disciples were still scattered (26:31-35).
28:2 a great earthquake! This severe earthquake reminds the reader of the earthquake which had occurred when Jesus died on Friday afternoon (27:51-53). It is possible to regard this as an aftershock of the previous earthquake (Blomberg 1992:427), which was accompanied by the epochal events that lead up to the resurrection of Jesus. Or, it may be better to see the quake as due to the angelic work mentioned in the next note. The sequence of the events in 28:2-3 is not clear. Either the earthquake had already occurred by the time the women arrived or it occurred as they viewed the tomb.
an angel . . . rolled aside the stone. The appearance of the angel to roll the stone aside evidently coincided with or caused the earthquake, but it is not clear whether this was visible to the women. Either way, the stone was rolled aside, not to let Jesus out, but to show the women that the tomb was empty because the resurrection had already occurred.
28:3 His face shone like lightning. The description of the awesome appearance of the angel is similar to other biblical accounts of angelic visitations (Dan 7:9; 10:6; Acts 1:10; Rev 10:1; 15:6). It is noteworthy that Matthew begins and ends with angelic activity; angels are involved with both the birth and resurrection of Jesus (1:20; 2:19).
28:4 The guards shook with fear when they saw him, and they fell into a dead faint. As it turns out, the detachment of guards and the imperial seal on the stone (27:65-66) were powerless to stop the removal of Jesus’ body because it was not stolen by the disciples but raised by the Father. The glorious angel who rolled away the stone so astonished the guards that they fainted as if they were the dead ones.
28:5-6 He is risen from the dead. Lit., “he was raised from the dead”; this shows that the power of another, the Father, accomplished the miracle.
Come, see where his body was lying. After the angel told the women not to fear (cf. Luke 1:13, 30; 2:10), the angel coupled his announcement of the resurrection with an invitation for the women to look into the tomb and see for themselves. His words, “just as he said would happen,” remind the women that Jesus had repeatedly predicted his resurrection (cf. 12:40; 16:21; 17:9, 23; 20:19; 26:32).
28:7 he is going ahead of you to Galilee. Jesus’ earlier promise to meet the disciples in Galilee (26:32) is repeated here by the angel and later by Jesus himself (28:10). The promise was originally uttered in the context of Jesus’ prediction that the disciples would desert him (26:31). It is the power of the resurrection that transforms the deserters back into disciples.
go . . . tell his disciples. . . . Remember what I have told you. Lit., “Behold, I have told you.” This detail, which indicates that the women were the first witnesses of the empty tomb, is unusual and adds a ring of truth. Blomberg (1992:426) points out the high probability that if the story had been invented, male witnesses would have been fabricated.
28:8-9 as they went, Jesus met them. As the women hastened to report the news to the absentee apostles in obedience to the angel, they were met and greeted by none other than the risen Jesus himself.
grasped his feet, and worshiped him. Their worship of Jesus reminds the reader of similar actions by the Magi and others (2:2, 11; 8:2; 9:18; 14:33; 15:25; 18:26; 20:20; 28:9, 17). In view of Jesus reminding Satan that only God is to be worshiped (4:9-10), the women’s worship is indicative of Matthew’s high Christology. This first post-resurrection appearance of Jesus sets the tone for the proper response to him from now on—worship. The reader is evidently to picture them prostrated before Jesus, face to the ground, with arms outstretched and hands grasping Jesus’ feet.
28:10 Go tell my brothers to leave for Galilee. Jesus himself reaffirmed the angel’s promise (28:7), and referred to the disciples as his brothers (12:49-50; 23:8; 25:40; cf. Rom 8:29; Heb 2:11). This use of the family metaphor indicates great love and patience, since the disciples could be said to have “run away from home” in abandoning Jesus. Jesus welcomed the prodigals back home again.
COMMENTARY [Text]
In this section, the resurrection of Jesus is announced, not explained. The central focus of 28:1-10 is the empty tomb, revealed by an angel who rolled away the stone, causing an earthquake. He then showed the two women that their crucified master was no longer entombed. The glorious angel and the empty tomb caused the guards to faint. For the faithful women, the significance was that Jesus is indeed the Messiah and that they no longer needed to mourn him. They ran to tell his disciples the good news that he had risen. According to this passage, there were six witnesses to the resurrection:
1. The Father, whose miraculous activity is the presupposition of everything else and who is the implied agent of all the passive verbs that state that Jesus will be raised up (16:22; 28:6)
2. The glorious angel, who actually made the announcement (28:6a)
3. The empty tomb itself, which says nothing but signifies everything (28:6b)
4. The faithful women, who hurried to announce the resurrection to the disciples (28:8)
5. Jesus himself, who met the women on their way and reiterated that he would meet the disciples in Galilee (28:9-10)
6. The guards, who regained consciousness and told the leading priests what had happened (28:11)
In addition to these six witnesses, two other factors in the narrative provide additional testimony that Jesus was raised: the earthquake which accompanies the stone being rolled away marked the occurrence of an epochal event (28:2), and the religious leaders’ conspiracy to deny the resurrection amounts to an indirect and ironic testimony that it did happen.
The Theological Significance of Jesus’ Resurrection. Although often relegated to Easter Sunday, the resurrection of Jesus is the heart of the Christian gospel. Without the resurrection, the ministry of Jesus ends on a dismal note. But everything changes with the announcement: “He isn’t here! He has risen from the dead, just as he said would happen” (28:6). The resurrection is not only the climax of Matthew’s passion narrative, it is the heart of redemption itself. It may be helpful to remember that the resurrection of Jesus is the necessary prerequisite, the sine qua non, of several themes in Matthew’s theology.
Without the resurrection of Jesus, there would be no Savior, since Jesus would have been a deluded liar instead of an exalted Lord. He had predicted several times that he would rise from the dead (12:40; 16:21; 17:9, 23; 20:19; 26:32). If he did not, he would be worthy only of pity, not faith and obedience (1 Cor 15:16-19).
Without the resurrection of Jesus, there would be no salvation, for Jesus’ mission to save his people from their sins (1:21) would have come to the ignominious end of a cursed person who hung upon a tree (Deut 21:22-23; Gal 3:13). Jesus would not drink the new wine that represented his redeeming blood in the Father’s Kingdom with his disciples. The blood of the new covenant would have been shed in vain (26:27-29).
Without the resurrection of Jesus, there would have been no apostolic foundation for the church, for it was the resurrection of Jesus that turned the deserters back into disciples (26:31-32). What could have brought the scattered disciples back into the fold except the message brought to them by the two women (28:7, 10)? What would Jesus have built his church upon (16:18) if Peter and his fellow disciples had remained deserters and deniers?
Without the resurrection of Jesus, there would be no model of sacrificial living instead of selfish living. Jesus taught his disciples the oxymoron of the crucified life, convincing them that the truly abundant life is the life dead to self-interest and that the truly miserable life is the life lived for self-interest. But this model would be incomplete if Jesus’ suffering did not end in glory, and if his cross was never replaced with the crown (10:38-39; 16:24-26; 20:26-28; 23:12; Rom 6:1-11).
Without the resurrection of Jesus, there would be no rectification of all the wrongs done on earth since the fall of humanity in Genesis 3. The blood of the martyrs would cry out for all eternity without vindication (23:35; Rev 6:9-11). Those who did evil and violence to their fellow humans would never give account, and there would be no such thing as justice (13:37-42; cf. Dan 12:2). The resurrection guarantees the final judgment of all mankind (13:37-42; 16:27; 25:31; cf. Dan 12:2; Acts 17:31). Without the resurrection, Satan would win.
Without the resurrection of Jesus, there would be no resurrection and reward of his people (27:51-53). At the heart of Jesus’ ethical teaching is the eschatological promise of the coming Kingdom (4:17). That Kingdom becomes the focus of the disciples’ hope and values (6:10, 33), but how could it ever come to earth if its ruler remained in the grave? If Jesus remained in the grave he could not be exalted to sit on his throne, and with his throne unoccupied, what would become of the twelve thrones of his apostles, and of the rewards he promised to all who left what this world has to offer for the sake of his name (6:19-21; 13:43; 19:27-29; cf. Dan 12:3; Rev 2:26-27; 3:21)?
Without the resurrection of Jesus, there would be nothing. Therefore, those who want to communicate the good news of Jesus the Messiah must make sure that they stress the resurrection of Jesus as the essential explanation of the significance of his death. Attempts to communicate the gospel in ways that gain the attention and understanding of the lost are laudable, but not if such encapsulation amounts to truncation. Any so-called gospel which does not include focus on the resurrection of Jesus is not the authentic message of Jesus and the apostles (Acts 2:32; 3:15, 26; 4:2, 10, 33; 5:30; 10:40; 13:30ff; 17:18, 31; 23:6; 24:21; 25:19; 26:8, 23; Rom 1:4; 4:25; 6:4-5; 8:11; 10:9; 1 Cor 15; 2 Cor 4:10, 14; 13:4; Gal 1:1; Eph 1:20; 2:5; 4:10; Phil 2:8-9; Col 2:12; 3:1-4; 1 Thess 4:14; 1 Tim 3:16; Heb 1:3; 10:12; 12:3; 1 Pet 1:22; 3:18-22; Rev 5).
Studies of the resurrection are numerous. For a conservative attempt to answer the questions that arise when the four Gospel accounts are compared, see J. Wenham (1984). For the unique emphases of each Gospel, see Osborne (1984). Blomberg (1987:100-110) discusses historical matters. For an apologetic approach, see Craig in Wilkins and Moreland (1995:142-176).