article33

§28 The Resurrection (Matt. 28:1–20)

The resurrection stands as the cornerstone of the Christian faith. The crucial importance of this historic event is clearly set forth by Paul in the fifteenth chapter of First Corinthians. If there is no resurrection, then Christ has not been raised (v. 13), faith is useless (v. 14), the apostolic witness is false (v. 15), believers are still in their sins (v. 17) and are to be pitied (v. 19). The account of the events surrounding the resurrection is given in each of the four Gospels. John tells of Mary Magdalene finding the tomb empty and running to tell Peter and John. Jesus then appears to Mary and later that evening to the eleven disciples who had gathered behind locked doors.

The synoptic accounts run parallel, but several differences are found. It is hardly correct, however, as Beare contends, that Matthew has “radically revised the Markan story” (p. 541). The major differences are, first, that Mark (16:1) has Salome go with the two Marys to the tomb; second, that Matthew (28:1) says they “went to see the tomb,” whereas Mark (16:1) says they “bought spices … to anoint him”; third, that Matthew (28:5) has an “angel” speak to the women whereas Mark (16:5) says it was a “young man” (Luke 24:4 has “two men”); and fourth, that Matthew (28:8) says the women departed, “afraid yet filled with joy” and “ran to tell his disciples,” whereas Mark (16:8) says that “trembling and bewildered,” they “said nothing to anyone.” All such variations are of little significance in parallel accounts of an event as unprecedented in human history as the resurrection. Had they been carefully harmonized in every detail by the synoptic writers, we would have serious reason to doubt their veracity. Upon examination they appear to be rather easily understood and present no grave problem for the interpreter open to the possibility that the bodily resurrection of Jesus was a historical occurrence.

It is instructive to note that in the biblical account there is no actual description of the resurrection. The major point is the empty tomb. By way of comparison, the narrative as recorded in the second-century noncanonical Gospel of Peter tells of three men who emerge from the tomb with a cross following them. Two of the men (whose heads “reached unto heaven”) were sustaining the third (whose head “overpassed the heavens”). A voice from heaven asked if he had preached to those that sleep and is answered in the affirmative by the cross (10:39–42).

28:1–10 / At dawn on the first day of the week, Mary Magdalene and Mary the mother of James (cf. Mark 16:1) went to the tomb where Jesus had been buried. The Greek text has been interpreted to mean either late on the Sabbath when the first day of the week was about to begin (hence, Saturday evening) or late in the night after the Sabbath when the new day was about to dawn (hence, Sunday morning). Probably Knox is right in his translation, “On the night after the Sabbath, at the hour when dawn broke on the first day of the week.”

Matthew records a violent shaking of the earth, followed by the descent of an angel from heaven, who rolled away the stone and sat on it. There is no definite indication as to when these specific events happened, although the imperfect ekathēto (“was sitting”) suggests that it was before the women arrived. The earthquake and heavenly descent recall passages such as Exodus 19:18 and 1 Kings 19:11–12. In verses 1–10 the demonstrative particle idou (“behold/lo”) is used four times (vv. 2, 7 [twice], 9), marking the striking nature of the events. Matthew says that the appearance (perhaps “face”) of the angel was like lightning and that his clothes were white as snow (cf. Dan. 7:9 and 10:5–6; also Rev. 1:14). When the guards saw the heavenly visitor, they trembled with fear and “collapsed like dead men” (Phillips).

The angel encouraged the women not to be afraid (v. 5). They were looking for the crucified Jesus, but the angel knew that Jesus had been raised from the dead. The angel invited the women to come and see for themselves the place where he lay. The women are then told by the angel to go quickly and tell his disciples that Jesus had been raised and was going to Galilee ahead of them and would see them there. Leaving the tomb at once, frightened, yet filled with joy, they ran to break the news to the disciples.

Since both Luke and John record the appearance of the risen Christ in Jerusalem (Luke 24:36–49; John 20:19–29), some have questioned Matthew’s Galilean account. It should be noted that the entire twenty-first chapter of John takes place in Galilee as well. The angel did not say that he would not see any of them in Jerusalem, only that he was making a definite appointment to meet them in Galilee. To “go before” (proagō, v. 7) may mean “to go ahead (and wait)” or “to go to the head of” like a Palestinian shepherd. Green holds that the second meaning is also present in the charge (p. 228). There is no discrepancy between “afraid yet filled with joy” in Matthew (2:8) and “trembling and bewildered” in Mark (16:8). The mingled emotions of awe and ecstasy would be expected. That the women ran to tell the disciples (Matt. 28:8) but “said nothing to anyone” (Mark 16:8) may indicate no more than that they did not share the remarkable news with anyone but the disciples.

As the women were on their way to tell the disciples, Jesus appeared in their path and greeted them (the AV “all hail” is a bit stilted, whereas Williams’ “good morning” is too contemporary). The women fell before him according to custom and grasped his feet as a sign of submission. Jesus encouraged them not to fear but to go and tell his brothers (even as the risen Christ he retains the family relationship) to set out for Galilee for the appointed meeting.

28:11–15 / While the women were still on their way to tell the disciples what had happened, some of the guards went into the city to report to the chief priests. Since Pilate had placed the Roman guards at the disposal of the Jewish leaders (Matt. 27:62–66), it would not be unusual for them to report to the chief priests rather than to Pilate. In the Gospel of Peter, however, the guards to go Pilate and beg him to order that no one say anything about what had happened (9:45–49). Matthew reports that after meeting with the elders the chief priests agreed to give the soldiers a large sum of money, with the instructions that they were to say that during the night while they were asleep the disciples came and stole the body of Jesus (vv. 12–13). Schweizer questions the incident, noting that “to ask them to say they had fallen asleep while on watch and allowed what they were guarding to be stolen is asking them to sign their own death warrant” (p. 526). True, but what was the alternative? The Jewish leaders who had successfully engineered the crucifixion of Jesus promised that if news of the incident reached the governor they would intervene and persuade him (against taking any action). They would keep the soldiers out of trouble (v. 14). Matthew adds that the guards did as they were told and that this story has been making the rounds in Jewish circles ever since.

Beare holds that verses 11–14 are “completely incredible as a whole” (p. 543). Stendahl would argue that it is “reasonable to suggest that the resurrection tradition in the Gospels has its nucleus in an experience of an empty tomb,” although around this basic tradition Matthew has added legendary and apologetic material (p. 798). All such decisions reflect an attitude toward the reliability of the text that arises more from basic presuppositions than from critical study itself. Otherwise, scholars would not read the same material and come up with widely differing conclusions. The position held throughout this commentary is that the text of Matthew is reliable and supplies us with a trustworthy record of what Jesus said and did during his time on earth.

28:16–20 / The eleven disciples (cf. death of Judas at 27:5) went to Galilee to the mountain where Jesus had arranged to meet them. When they saw him there, they worshiped him (proskyneō taken literally means “to prostrate oneself [in homage]”), although some doubted. Since the following verse says that Jesus came to them, we should understand verse 17 as taking place when the eleven first saw Jesus at some distance. From that vantage point, “some were in doubt” (Goodspeed) or were “somewhat skeptical” (Norlie) that Jesus was really there. Throughout the resurrection accounts there are a number of instances of uncertainty (the encounter on the road to Emmaus, Luke 24:13–35; Mary outside the tomb, John 20:11–18; the disciples fishing in the Sea of Tiberias, John 21:1–8). It has been suggested that those who doubted were not the eleven but some of the “more than five hundred brethren” mentioned in 1 Corinthians 15:6. That Jesus had arranged to meet them there would account for the large group.

Jesus stepped forward and delivered to his disciples what has become known as the Great Commission. It begins with the powerful proclamation that God had given to him (has been given to me is a reverential circumlocution) all authority in heaven and on earth. In Daniel’s vision of the Four Beasts, “one like a son of man” receives from the Ancient of Days “authority, glory, and sovereign power” (Dan. 7:13–14; cf. Phil. 2:6–11). Exousia (authority) in this context refers to absolute power and jurisdiction. There is nothing outside the sovereign control of the risen Christ. It is on that basis that the disciples are to go and make disciples of all nations. The Greek verb mathēteuō means “to make a learner” (coming, as it does, from manthanō, “to learn”). A disciple is not simply one who has been taught but one who continues to learn.

The full scope of making disciples involves baptizing them (v. 19b) and teaching them (v. 20a). Both baptizontes and didaskontes are participles governed by the imperative mathēteusate. The gist of the sentence is “make disciples by baptizing and teaching.” Much has been written about the trinitarian formula in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit (v. 19). This is the only occurrence of the formula from the first century, with the possible exception of Didache 7.1 (a church manual normally dated second century A.D.). Elsewhere baptism is said to be “in the name of Jesus Christ” (Acts 2:38; 10:48) or “in the name of the Lord Jesus” (Acts 8:16; 19:5). Mention of Father, Son, and Spirit occurs in 1 Corinthians 12:4–6 and 2 Corinthians 13:14, but not as a specific formula. Questions regarding the divine essence and the relationships between the members of the Godhead belong to the later theological development of the church. That Jesus should gather together into summary form his own references to “the Father” (11:27; 24:36), to himself as “the Son” (11:27; 16:27), and to “the Spirit” (12:28) in his final charge to the disciples seems quite natural. Though we are not dealing with an advanced trinitarian formulation, we certainly have more than the concept of God as going beyond the intellectual to include “the instant experience of love” and “also the assurance of future love” (Schweizer, p. 534).

Making disciples includes teaching as well. Note that the teaching is here set forth as ethical rather than doctrinal. The disciples are to teach the new converts to obey all that Jesus has commanded them. But discipleship is not a lonely road, because the risen Lord promises that he will be with them always, to the very end of the age. The present age will end when Christ returns in glory and the eternal state begins. Until that final moment in human history, Jesus, who in Matthew 1:23 was given the name “Emmanuel,” will be to them exactly what the name indicates, “God with us.”