Comments on John 20 John's telling of the events surrounding the tomb are seemingly quite different from the Synoptic Gospel accounts. Thomas Mumford in his _Horizontal Harmony of the Four Gospels in Parallel Columns_ (published by Deseret in 1976) offers the following solution (with clarifying insertions by myself in brackets): A casual reading of the events on the resurrection morning give the impression that John's account is quite different from that of the synoptic. In John, Mary Magdalene appears to visit the tomb alone and very early, and finding the stone rolled away she runs to tell Peter and John who run to see the tomb, and Mary returns with them. After Peter and John leave, the resurrected Jesus appears to Mary telling her to touch him not. Mary then runs to tell the Apostles. In the synoptic, many women including Mary Magdalene go to the tomb early in the morning. Finding the stone rolled away, they look inside. Angels tell them Christ is risen, the women run to tell the Apostles; the resurrected Jesus meets them on their way and they hold him by the feet and worship him. Three problems are raised by these two apparently different accounts. 1. Did Mary go to the tomb alone first, of was her visit with the other women? 2. If Mary went to the tomb alone and found it empty (John 20:1) she would not be returning with the other women to anoint Jesus' body with spices like the synoptics say she was. 3. If Mary's first visit to the tomb was with the other women, and Jesus appeared to the other women on their way to tell the Apostles (Matt. 28:9, 10), then the appearance to Mary alone at the tomb (John 20:1) would not be the first appearance of Jesus like Mark says (Mark 16:9). I believe these two accounts can be harmonized very smoothly in the following manner: Mary Magdalene's first visit to the tomb (John 20:1) is with the other women and is the same visit recorded by the synoptics (Matt. 28:1, Mark 16:2, Luke 24:1). If Mary had already been there alone and know the resurrection she would not be returning with spices to anoint the body and wondering "who shall roll away the stone." Upon seeing the stone rolled away, Mary [Magdelene] immediately left the other women and ran to tell Peter and John (John 20:2). Because she did not stay long enough to see of hear the angels, she believes the body has been taken away. In further support of her visit to the tomb in the company of the other women, notice how she says to Peter in John 20:2, "...and WE know not where they have laid him." [In the absence of Mary Magdalene] the other women now enter the empty tomb and see the angels who tell them Christ is risen. These women not go and tell the Apostles. When Peter and John hear that angels are in the tomb and that Jesus is alive they run to see the tomb. Notice that one of the synoptics (Luke 24:22) parallel John on this point after the return of all the women. Mary Magdalene follows Peter and John because she had not seen the angels or heard their message. Upon their arrival, Peter and John enter the tomb, find the linen clothes, but apparently no angels. Peter and John leave, but Mary [Magdalene] lingers at the tomb, still uncertain and wondering at what has happened. It is in this setting that the resurrected Jesus appears to Mary. She then goes and tells the disciples she has seen the Lord. Matthew 28:9 is the account of Jesus' appearance to the other women. If Mark is correct that Jesus first appeared to Mary Magdalene, then this appearance to the other women must be after his appearance to Mary and not on the return from the tomb early that morning. v1 John's account deliberately excludes the other women from the scene and focuses squarely on Mary Magdalene (we know it is Mary Magdalene from Mark 16:9). Luke positively identifies three women and states there were others as well, cf. Luke 24:9-11. Matthew's and Mark's account says there were women, plural, present. John's account wherein Jesus first appears to Mary has prompted Brigham Young to speculate that Jesus and Mary Magdalene were married, cf. Journal of Discourses (JofD) 2:81. He also speculated that Jesus was married to Mary and Martha, sisters of Lazarus, as well using the rationale that their behavior towards him would have been inappropriate otherwise, cf. JofD 4:259. There is nothing scriptural that requires such conclusions and he makes no suggestion of personal revelation. Rather, it is Brigham's rationale based upon his sense of appropriate relations between man and woman that motivated him to draw such a conclusion. Regardless, it is fairly common for the topic to be brought up in class, so it is probably best to acquaint yourself with these texts. The JofD is available online at: http://www.olwm.com/lds1/members.html http://www.concordance.com/jourdisc.htm The IV/JST on this verse also appends "and two angels sitting thereon" thereby harmonizing it with the synoptic accounts which indicate angels were present. v2 "They have taken away the Lord", in my original draft on this line of text I wrote: v2 "They have taken away the Lord", in the KJV the "They" is ambiguous. The IV/JST on the preceding verse says Mary saw two angels, and then runs to the disciples and says "they have taken...". Thus, Mary is probably referring to the angels when she says "they". She doesn't know where they have taken him because she apparently bolted before they started talking to the women, which account is captured in the Synoptic versions. But this doesn't make sense because in the subsequent exchange she says she doesn't know where the body was taken and she assumes the gardiner may have done it, cf. v. 11-15. Thus, Mary cannot be equating the "they" with the angels, because if she did then she would know where the body was taken and wouldn't be asking who she thought was the gardiner where the body was. It appears that while the other two women recognize that the angels are in fact heavenly messengers per Luke 24:23, Mary Magdalene doesn't. If she does then her lack of understanding concerning where the body is most puzzling indeed, so I would have to assume she doesn't realize they are angels. So, I would assume by "they" she means the Jews, or perhaps it is just an ambiguous pronoun she uses because she doesnt know who "they" are. v5-7 The abandonment of the graveclothes symbolically indicate that Jesus isn't dead. The graveclothes described are typical for that time. Lazarus wore similar linens, cp. 11:44. That the napkin was set aside and neatly folded shows deliberacy on the part of whoever removed him, indicating this wasn't a case of hasty grave robbery. Rather, it was the careful and reverent removal of a body that no longer had need of the graveclothes. v17 Here, Jesus prohibits Mary from touching him, yet in a relatively short while, but apparently that same day, he permits the other women to touch him (cf. Matt. 28:9-10) and then later breaks bread with the two disciples (cf. Luke 24:30). I would assume at this point Jesus isn't resurrected but is appearing to Mary only in his spirit. Jesus tells Mary not to touch him because he hasn't yet ascended to his Father. From the Scriptures we know that resurrection is the thing that brings the spirit back into the presence of the Father, cf. Alma 11:42-43, Alma 42:23, Hela 14:17, Mormon 9:13. Thus, we may safely assume at this point Jesus wasn't yet resurrected, but is shortly thereafter. The problem here is the Synoptic accounts have the angels saying "He is not here...he is risen" (cf. Matt. 28:6, Mark 16:6, Luke 24:6) prior to this meeting between Jesus and Mary Magdalene. We typically would take such a statement "he is risen" to be referring to the resurrection. But, if he is resurrected then why wouldn't he permit Mary Magdalene to touch him when he permits others just a few hours later to do so? Because he is "not yet ascended to [his] Father" (v. 17)? The IV/JST changes the "Touch me not" to "Hold me not". The "hold" might be taken to mean "detain" so Jesus might be saying "Don't detain me because I have to leave now and am only stopping briefly to talk to you on my way up." However, the word "hold" is more often used in the sense of holding on to something in such a context, therefore requiring physical contact. So, we are left to wonder if "he is risen" does refer to his resurrection, or are they referring to something else? And if it does refer to resurrection, why does Jesus have to ascend to his Father first before anyone can touch him? I would assume "he is risen" doesn't necessarily require resurrection, and when he appears to Mary he is a spirit. But, that's not necessarily the case. v18 Mark 16:11 and Luke 24:11 makes explicit what is otherwise implicit, they didn't believe the women. Mark 16:10 also sets the context a bit better by indicating they were mourning and weeping over the death of Jesus. Thus, they were all emotionally overwrought. Then comes in some of the women insisting they have seen angels who tell them Jesus is still alive and Mary Magdalene says she has seen him. Peter and John go and they see no angels and no body. The result is they just aren't believing something that sounds too good to be true and a little far fetched. Copyright © 2001 by S. Kurt Neumiller . All rights reserved. No part of this text may be reproduced in any form or by any means for commercial gain without the express written consent of the author. Digital or printed copies may be freely made and distributed for personal and public non-commercial use.