Luke 24:1-12
Wright, Tom. Luke for Everyone (New Testament for Everyone) (pp. 289-291). SPCK. Kindle Edition.
Many years ago, a colleague of mine in Oxford wrote a series of articles in a university magazine, discussing various changes that were being proposed to the way the university and the colleges were run. He warned of what would happen if certain things were done, and if certain other things were not done. His advice went largely unheeded, and in later years he looked back with the unsatisfying satisfaction of seeing his warnings come true. ‘If I ever write an autobiography,’ he once told me, ‘I shall call it I Told You So.’
It sometimes seems impossible for people to believe what they are being told. Even in a society that prides itself on thinking clearly and rationally, there are fashions in ideas just as in clothing, and often certain thoughts are so out of style as to be almost literally unthinkable. Even if people say things over and over again, if fashion dictates that we should think something else we will simply ignore them, or remain unable to understand them. We can’t, as we say, ‘hear’ them; that is, we hear the sound the words make, but they don’t go any further than our eardrums.
Jesus had spoken of his own resurrection at various stages, from 9.22 onwards. Two of his greatest stories had ended with a strong reference to rising from the dead (15.24, 32; 16.31). But nobody had ‘heard’ what he was saying. They were puzzled, and understandably so; ‘resurrection’, in that world, was what God would do in the end for all the righteous dead, giving new embodiment to everyone from Abraham, Isaac and Jacob down to the most recent righteous martyrs. Though people could speak of a prophet like Elijah or John the Baptist returning from the dead, what they probably meant by that was that someone would come who seemed to embody the same spirit, the same fiery prophecy. ‘The resurrection’ itself would be a large-scale event. After Israel’s great and final suffering, all God’s people would be given new life, new bodies.
We shouldn’t be surprised, then, at how surprised they were on the first Easter morning. It wasn’t just a lack of faith that had stopped them understanding what Jesus had said in Galilee about his rising again. It was simply that nobody had ever dreamed that one single living person would be killed stone dead and then raised to a new sort of bodily life the other side of the grave, while the rest of the world carried on as before.
The women, obviously, weren’t expecting it. They weren’t going to the tomb saying to themselves, ‘Well, we’ve got the spices in case he’s still dead, but let’s hope he’s alive again.’ They knew well enough that dead people remained dead. The eleven (the Twelve without Judas; Luke doesn’t reveal his fate until the start of Acts) certainly weren’t expecting it. If Luke had been making this story up a generation or more after the event, as people sometimes suggest, not only would he not have had women going first to the tomb (women were not regarded as credible witnesses in the ancient world, as this story itself bears out); he would have had the apostles believe the story at once, ready to be models of faith and to lead the young church into God’s future. Not so: it seemed to them a silly fantasy, exactly the sort of thing (they will have thought) that you’d expect from a few women crazy with grief and lack of sleep.
Nor does Luke attempt to describe, any more than the other gospels do, the moment when Jesus actually arose. This part of the story is a masterpiece of suspense. The whole chapter is another example of his great artistry, with the long middle story (the two on the road to Emmaus, 24.13–35) flanked on either side by the stories of the women and the eleven. These opening verses raise the question: something very odd has happened, but what? The middle story only gives us the answer step by step, because Luke is concerned that we understand what it is we’re going to hear. Only then can we, the readers, meet the risen Jesus face to face and know who he is and what’s going on.
The opening mood of Easter morning, then, is one of surprise, astonishment, fear and confusion. Yes, Jesus did say something like this would occur; he told us so all right. But we still don’t know what’s going on, what it all means, what will happen next. There is no sense here – as, alas, one sometimes finds in churches around Easter time – that throughout the story of the passion Jesus himself was regarding the coming events as an unpleasant task which would soon be over, and that we can follow the story through for ourselves in the same way. Easter is always a surprise, whether we meet it in celebrating the feast itself, or in the sudden surges of God’s grace overturning tragedy in our own lives or in the world.
No doubt our own resurrection will be as much of a surprise, in its own way, as that of Jesus. From the beginning, the gospel is good news not least because it dares to tell us things we didn’t expect, weren’t inclined to believe, and couldn’t understand. Did we expect the gospel would be something obvious, something we could have dreamed up for ourselves?
Henry, M., & Scott, T. (1997). Matthew Henry’s Concise Commentary (Lk 24:1). Oak Harbor, WA: Logos Research Systems.
Chapter 24
The resurrection of Christ
1–12
He appears to two disciples on the way to Emmaus
13–27
And makes himself known to them
28–35
Christ appears to the other disciples
36–49
His ascension
50–53
Verses 1–12
See the affection and respect the women showed to Christ, after he was dead and buried. Observe their surprise when they found the stone rolled away, and the grave empty. Christians often perplex themselves about that with which they should comfort and encourage themselves. They look rather to find their Master in his grave-clothes, than angels in their shining garments. The angels assure them that he is risen from the dead; is risen by his own power. These angels from heaven bring not any new gospel, but remind the women of Christ’s words, and teach them how to apply them. We may wonder that these disciples, who believed Jesus to be the Son of God and the true Messiah, who had been so often told that he must die, and rise again, and then enter into his glory, who had seen him more than once raise the dead, yet should be so backward to believe his raising himself. But all our mistakes in religion spring from ignorance or forgetfulness of the words Christ has spoken. Peter now ran to the sepulchre, who so lately ran from his Master. He was amazed. There are many things puzzling and perplexing to us, which would be plain and profitable, if we rightly understood the words of Christ.
Liefeld, W. L. (1984). Luke. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Matthew, Mark, Luke (Vol. 8, pp. 1047–1050). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.
C. The Resurrection and Ascension (24:1–53)
1. The Resurrection (24:1–12)
Luke 24 not only presents the climactic event of the Resurrection, but it includes a recapitulation of the saying mission of Christ (vv. 6–7, 19–27, 45–47). The Ascension, with which the chapter and the book conclude, is the final goal of Jesus’ earthly ministry (cf. 9:51 and comments). It also sets the scene for the church’s ministry as recorded in Acts. The first section of the narrative, concerning events at the empty tomb, contains elements that differ from those given in Matthew and Mark. Some of these are often alleged to be discrepancies that invalidate the NT records of the Resurrection as dependable history. Or they have been viewed as redactional (i.e., editorial) changes Luke made to express his own theological perspectives. It is not the purpose of the comments that follow to resolve apparent discrepancies or to deal with Luke’s redaction of the resurrection narrative, except as this has clear value for the expositor. The unique features of Luke’s resurrection account deserve our attention as his contribution to the reality and meaning of the event.
1–3
All four Gospels specify the first day of the week (v. 1) as the day of the Resurrection. This became the day of Christian worship (cf. Acts 20:7). The change from the traditional and biblical Sabbath is in itself a strong evidence of the Resurrection because it shows the strength of the disciples’ conviction about what happened on that day. Luke refers to the time of day by the general statement that it was “very early.” This fits well with what the other Gospels say, though each Gospel differs from the others. All four Gospels mention the removal of the stone (v. 2). While this was not, as far as the NT reports, used as an apologetic to prove the Resurrection, it could not have failed to impress those who heard of it; and its inclusion here is hardly incidental. Only Luke, who has shown particular interest in physical reality—e.g., he is the only synoptic writer to use the phrase “in bodily form” (sōmatikos) to describe the Spirit’s descent on Jesus at his baptism (3:22)—specifically says that the “body” (sōma) of Jesus was gone (v. 3).
4–5
Here (v. 4), as elsewhere (e.g., 1:29, 66; 2:19), Luke describes someone pondering a remarkable event. Luke speaks of “two men” rather than “an angel” (Matt 28:2) or “a young man” (Mark 16:5). For a writer to focus on just one person when another is also present is not unusual (both Mark and Luke single out one of the blind men at Jericho, Mark 10:46; Luke 18:35; cf. Matt 20:30). Luke’s mention of two men at the tomb seems consistent with his other references to witnesses to Jesus (cf. Simeon and Anna, 2:25–38; and esp. 24:48; cf. also the prominence of witnesses in Acts). Two witnesses are the minimum number for validation (Deut 17:6; 19:15; cf. E.G. Bode, The First Easter Morning, p. 60, who draws on Morgenthaler, Die lukanische Geschichtsschreibung, 1:97–99; 2:7–11). That Luke understands that the two “men” were angels is evident from what he says of them in v. 23. Moreover, he describes their clothes as gleaming like lightning (astraptousē, v. 4), terminology he applies to Jesus’ clothes at his transfiguration (9:29; cf. also Acts 1:10 “two men dressed in white”). Luke alone tells us that not only were the women frightened (v. 5) but in their fear they bowed face down to the ground. The response of fear in the presence of supernatural visitation occurs elsewhere in Luke (e.g., 1:12, 29 [though in Mary’s case not at the angel but at his message]; 2:9; 9:34). “The living” (ton zōnta), only in Luke, stresses the factual aspect of the Resurrection Luke also refers to in Acts 2:24: “It was impossible for death to keep its hold on him.”
6–8
What Luke gives us here is not in the other Gospels: The angels show the meaning of the empty tomb by repeating the essence of the three passion predictions (9:22, 43–45; 18:31–33, and parallel passages in Matthew and Mark). They begin with the words “Remember how he told you” (v. 6), perhaps implying that what the women should have understood earlier the Resurrection has now clarified. The third prediction (18:31–33) was followed by Luke’s statement that the saying was obscure, hidden from them (18:34; cf. also 24:16). The Resurrection is the time for revelation and understanding (v. 8). Some think the reference to Galilee (v. 6) is an alteration of the saying in Matthew 28:7 and Mark 16:7. There Galilee is the place where Jesus would later meet with the disciples; here it is where Jesus had given his passion predictions. Luke obviously centers attention on Jesus’ appearances in the vicinity of Jerusalem, the city of destiny in Luke (e.g., 9:51; 13:32–35). His selective focus on Jerusalem is not, however, a major disagreement with the other Synoptics; nor does his different use of the word Galilee contradict theirs.
Luke’s frequent use of dei (“must,” v. 7) and other expressions of divine purpose have already been noted throughout this commentary (e.g., 2:49; 4:43; 19:5). It occurs in the first passion prediction (9:22), as it does in the other Synoptics, but then reappears only in Luke in 13:33; 17:25; 22:37. Chapter 24 contains two more references to the inevitable sequence of Jesus’ death and resurrection (vv. 25–27, 44–46). Luke’s stress on God’s plan and providence continues throughout Acts, often with dei, but also without it (Acts 2:23–24; see Bode, First Easter, pp. 65–67). The term “sinful men” (anthrōpōn hamartōlōn) occurs in Jesus’ saying at Gethsemane about his impending betrayal (Matt 26:45; Mark 14:41)—a saying Luke does not have. The idea appears again in Acts 2:23 in the term “wicked men” (anomōn). Luke often speaks of “sinners,” but usually he does so when referring to notorious people Jesus had compassion on. Here, in contrast, the “sinners” are those who opposed him and brought about his death. Only Luke has “on the third day.”
9–12
Luke postpones naming the women till this point (v. 10), whereas Matthew and Mark name them at the beginning of their resurrection narratives. Luke has already (8:1–3) told of the women who accompanied and supported Jesus in his ministry. (He also mentions the women at prayer with the apostles in Acts 1:14.) While the witness of women was not acceptable in those days nevertheless Luke records their testimony (v. 9). The apostles, in their incredulity were unable to comprehend the reality the women were trying to convey (v. 11). We see this incredulity again in Peter (v. 12) and in the disciples on the road to Emmaus (vv. 22–24). This reluctance to believe has an important relation to the evidences for the Resurrection. The disciples were not expecting that event (cf. v. 25). Thus they cannot be called fit subjects for hallucination as some would have them be.
Verse 12, though omitted by the Western text (cf. Notes), is probably authentic. It is similar, but not identical, to John 20:6–7. Luke does not mention the “other disciple” (John 20:3), probably focusing on Peter as he did in 5:1–11. The strips of linen used in the burial bear their silent but eloquent testimony to the absence of Jesus’ body. Peter leaves, “wondering” (thaumuzōn) to himself about this. In Luke people “wonder” about things that are hard to understand. The word does not in itself imply either belief or unbelief. We conclude that Peter is still incredulous at this point, not because the verb implies it, but because his visit to the empty tomb fails, in spite of the evidence, to evoke a statement of belief from him (cf. John 20:8).
Notes
3
The MSS representing the so-called Western text omit the following: (1) v. 3, τοῦ κυρίου Ἰησοῦ (tou kyriou Iēsou, “of the Lord Jesus”); (2) v. 6, οὐκ ἔστιν ὧδε ἀλλα ἠγέρθη (ouk estin hōde, alla ēgerthē, “he is not here; he has risen”); (3) all of v. 12; (4) v. 36, καὶ λέγει αὐτοῖς, Εἰρήνη ὑμῖν (kai legei autois, Eirēnē hymin, “and said to them, ‘Peace be with you’ ”); (5) all of v. 40; (6) v. 51, καὶ ἀνεφέρετο εἰς τὸν οὐρανόν (kai anephereto eis ton ouranon, “and was taken up into heaven”); and (7) v. 52, προσκυνήσαντες αὐτόν (proskynēsantes auton, “worshiped him”). Because Westcott and Hort concluded that the Western text tended to add words not in the original, they thought that in the opposite circumstance, i.e., when instead of interpolating words the Western text omitted words found in other MS traditions, such omissions (or “noninterpolations”) should be given much weight. In the instances mentioned here, there has been a reluctance on the part of some scholars to reject that reasoning. More recently, however, the tendency has been to examine each case on its own merits, using standard textual principles in making decisions. Verses 23 and 40 present special considerations because they are similar to John’s account of the Resurrection. But in these verses, as in the other instances just cited, there are sound reasons for considering each verse a part of Luke’s original text. (See Snodgrass, “Western NonInterpolations,” pp. 369–79; cf. Metzger, Textual Commentary, on each verse and on the issue of “Western Non-Interpolations,” pp. 191–93.)
4
Καὶ ἐγένετο (kai egeneto), a familiar expression, properly left untranslated in NIV, is a Semitic transitional term that generally contributes little to the meaning (cf. KJV, “and it came to pass”). Its significance relates to the reason for Luke’s frequent use of Semitic idioms, a matter of slight relevance to preachers and other Bible teachers and therefore not stressed in this commentary. But in this crucial resurrection passage, it cannot be overlooked. The question is the source of Luke’s information. Luke’s use of Semitisms may, at least in some places, show that he is following early traditions containing Aramaic idioms. On the other hand, he may, whether using such sources directly or adapting material from Mark or non-Semitic sources, introduce Semitic terminology naturally because of his familiarity with the LXX and his desire to represent the ambience of the events he is reporting. This passage contains a number of characteristically Lukan terms and themes, some of which we have already noted. These, along with Luke’s use of Semitisms, seem to indicate a mixture of Markan material, early traditions, and original touches of Luke’s own editorial skill.
Bock, Darrell L.. Luke : 2 Volumes (Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament): 3 (p. 2361,2363-2364,2385-2386). Baker Publishing Group. Kindle Edition.
1. Resurrection Discovered (24: 1– 12)
Five subunits compose the pericope dealing with the first report of the resurrection: setting (24: 1), empty tomb (24: 2– 3), report of the two angels (24: 4– 8), report of the women (24: 9– 11), and Peter’s response (24: 12). The stress is on the declaration of Jesus’ resurrection by the angels (24: 5– 6). Jesus’ promise of resurrection (9: 22) has come to pass. The divine necessity of events continues: God and Jesus are in control. The main feature of the passage is how the disciples ever so slowly come to see that God’s plan is not derailed. The description of them may not be flattering, but it is honest and real. The church would not have created an account about the resurrection that portrayed its leading figures this way. The account rings true.
The account is a resurrection report and a story about Jesus (Fitzmyer 1985: 1542). The outline of Luke 24: 1– 12 is as follows:
a. Setting (24: 1)
b. The empty tomb (24: 2– 3)
c. Report of the two angels (24: 4– 8)
i. Report of the angels (24: 4– 7)
ii. Response of the women (24: 8)
d. Report of the women (24: 9– 11)
e. Peter’s response (24: 12)
The resurrection is not expected by the disciples, but the empty tomb changes everything. The twofold angelic witness points to the resurrection as a fulfillment of Jesus’ teaching and the promise of Scripture. Women are the first witnesses, but their report is not believed. Confirmation begins with Peter’s discovery.
Summary
Luke 24: 1– 12 is the first account that hints of a reversal of the tragedy of Jesus’ death. An act of mourning and respect turns to perplexity for some devoted women. They appear at the tomb, only to find the stone moved, angels present, and the tomb empty. Jesus is brought to life, just as he predicted. The promise of God’s power has come to pass, but the whole story is rather unbelievable. Nonetheless, the women go back to the disciples to relate the story, where they are met with unbelief, probably because they thought that resurrection from the dead would come at the end-time. But Peter is not sure. He has learned that what Jesus says is not only surprising, but right. He runs to the tomb. It is empty, except for the grave clothes, which suggests that Jesus was there at one time. Surely if he had been taken, the clothes would not still be there. No one would steal the body and leave the impression of resurrection. Peter is left to marvel over events and the reminder of Jesus’ words. It is a moment for reflection, decision, and faith. Is resurrection the only adequate explanation for what Peter sees? Is not resurrection what Jesus promised? Has not God acted on behalf of Jesus? Is Jesus alive to carry out God’s plan after all? These are questions not only for Peter in the moment of his discovery, but for all who relive that moment through Luke’s retelling of the story. What else can explain these events? Can one really believe in resurrection hope? The story is not over. The apparent end has become a new beginning. Those who doubt will have their doubts laid to rest by the Lord who stands risen from his encounter with death.
Bock, Darrell L.. Luke : 2 Volumes (Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament): 3 (pp. 2357-2360). Baker Publishing Group. Kindle Edition.
E. Resurrection and Ascension of Jesus (24: 1– 53)
Luke’s final chapter shows God vindicating the Innocent One via resurrection. In three scenes, Jesus shows himself to be alive. First, he appears to the women (24: 1– 12). His discussion with two disciples on the Emmaus road contains wonder and discovery, reversing previous disappointment (24: 13– 35). In the final scene he appears to a group of disciples, bids them farewell, and gives final instructions (24: 36– 53), ending with the opening of Scripture, commission, promise, and ascension. What was promised has happened, so now the disciples are commissioned to take the message of God’s work in Jesus’ death and resurrection to every nation, calling them to repent. In the Spirit’s coming, God promises to give the disciples power for the task. Jesus ascends triumphantly to sit at God’s side to rule and to distribute the Father’s gifts (Acts 2: 22– 36).[ 1]
It makes little difference whether Luke’s resurrection narrative was originally part of the tradition linked to Jesus’ death or was a separate tradition. Either way this material contains the climactic events of Jesus’ first coming. It is clear, however, that the diversity found in the resurrection tradition is greater than that in the passion material. The resurrection accounts have a distinct and more complex history.
The main biblical accounts of Jesus’ resurrection are Matt. 28: 1– 20; Mark 16: 1– 8 (perhaps 16: 1– 20); John 20: 1– 29; 21: 1– 23; and 1 Cor. 15: 3– 11.[ 2] The resurrection tradition is primitive and was always a part of the church’s view of Jesus: Paul (Rom. 4: 24– 25; 10: 9; Phil. 2: 9– 11; 1 Thess. 1: 10), John (John 3: 14; 8: 28; 12: 32, 34), the Letter to the Hebrews (Heb. 9: 12– 24), and Peter (1 Pet. 1: 3; 3: 18).[ 3] The church clearly saw Jesus as bodily resurrected in glorified form (Fitzmyer 1985: 1538– 39), but the NT writers do more than affirm the reality of the resurrection (though they never give details about how the resurrection occurred, only that God did it).[ 4] They declare the meaning, consequence, and effects of the resurrection: Jesus is gloriously raised to rule. Exaltation is the major theme of Jesus’ new life, especially in Luke’s writings (Acts 2: 30– 36). Jesus’ exaltation signals reversal, installation into authority, and victory (Luke 22: 69).
Luke 24 makes clear the identity and call of the community, which gathers in the temple to await the coming of the Father’s promise, the Spirit. Just as Luke’s Gospel opens at the temple (1: 5), so it ends there. Another significant note in this chapter is the fulfillment of OT promise (24: 19– 21, 25– 27, 44– 47). God’s plan is coming to pass, and the disciples and the new community have a major role in that plan. Luke is clear that the disciples were not waiting for the resurrection: it comes to disciples who were disillusioned, and it produces a major reversal of emotion, transforming despair into hope and action. Luke’s account is unique in focusing on Jerusalem (he records no Galilean appearances by Jesus), a detail that fits his emphasis on Jerusalem as the mission’s beginning point (Acts 1: 8).
The most basic element shared by the various resurrection accounts is the empty tomb. While there are significant variations in the accounts (e.g., the wording of the angelic resurrection announcement [Matt. 28: 5– 6 = Mark 16: 6 = Luke 24: 5– 6] or John’s description of the role of Mary Magdalene [John 20: 1]), their differences are complementary, not contradictory.[ 5] There are at least eight points of general agreement (Plummer 1896: 546):
- The resurrection is not described.
- The resurrection occurs to disciples who do not expect it.
- Reports of the resurrection are doubted.
- The women’s visit is the first step in disclosure.
- The rolled-away stone is the first physical clue.
- Angels appear.
- Jesus appears to a variety of people, both individually and corporately, both male and female.
- The result is an unshakable conviction in Jesus’ resurrection.
We are dealing here with sacred events that are part of the essential content of Christian faith, as 1 Cor. 15 makes clear. Paul declares that if Jesus is not raised then he cannot save and one cannot invoke him for present aid and future hope. To be something other than a human ethical or philosophical system, the Christian faith must be inextricably tied to resurrection. Without resurrection, Christianity is just another human approach to reach God; it is emptied of transforming power and hope; it is a mere shell, not worth the energy one devotes to it. To hope in a resurrection that did not occur makes Christians the most pitied of people (1 Cor. 15: 19). It is to believe an illusion. Without a resurrected Jesus, Christianity has nothing special to offer the world, for a dead Savior is no Savior at all. The world is full of exemplary people, but a resurrected Savior who cares and who fulfills God’s promises is the unique hope that the Christian faith offers to the world. This does not mean that the fact of the resurrection is the ground of the Christian faith; rather, it is the one who emerged from this reality— the resurrected Christ— who is Christianity’s foundation. Only through a raised Christ, the Exalted One, is it possible to have a relationship to God. The resurrection is important, even essential, because it is the door to new life in Christ, the key to which is faith, but at the heart of Christianity is a relationship with God through Christ. Christ’s resurrection by the power of God makes that relationship possible and offers testimony to the reality of life before God beyond the grave. Jesus’ resurrection is not the end of his story; rather, it represents his transition to an expanded role in God’s plan, which becomes the focal starting point for our potential new life in him. To believe in Christ is to believe not merely in his example, but in the power of his resurrection to grant new life.