Mark 16:8

RETURN OF THE WOMEN

Mat 28:8-10; Mar 16:8; Luk 24:9-11; Joh 20:2. “Then she runs, and comes to Simon Peter, and to the other disciple, whom Jesus loved, and says to them, They have taken away the Lord from the sepulcher, and we know not where they have placed Him.” This is spoken of Mary Magdalene, the most prominent of our Lord’s female disciples, and the only woman John mentions in this early visit to the sepulcher. This is not out of harmony with the other three, from the simple fact that she was the leader of the heroic sisterhood who lingered last at the cross, and hastened first to greet the risen Lord and look into the empty sepulcher.

I must here observe, in reference to Mark’s Gospel, that this eighth verse, which you see in the above reference, winds it up, the following twelve verses having been added by an unknown hand after Mark had laid down his pen. This fact of these last twelve verses not appearing in the old and authoritative manuscripts, does not necessarily invalidate their claims to inspiration, the author might have been inspired for ought we know, though we can have no idea as to his name. As it is believed that Peter dictated this Gospel to Mark, his faithful amanuensis and gospel helper, while in Rome, about A. D. 63, some suppose his martyrdom stopped the work, and consequently some one took it on himself to finish it out somewhat after the order of Matthew’s, which had been written A. D. 48. From the simple fact that in all of this writing I have used the Greek Testament by Tischendorf, on the basis of the Sinaitic manuscript which he discovered in the Convent of St. Catherine, on Mt. Sinai, A. D. 1859, and has thrown a flood of light on the New Testament, being the oldest manuscript and the only one entire, and as it closes Mark’s Gospel with this eighth verse of the sixteenth chapter, I shall neither quote nor expound the ensuing twelve verses; for, like Joh 8:1-11, and not a few other isolated passages, they are not in my book.

Matthew: “Having quickly come out from the sepulcher, with fear and great joy, they were running to tell His disciples.” You see how these women take the report of the angels, and run with all expedition to render obedience. “And while they were going to tell His disciples, behold, Jesus met them, saying, Hail! And they having come, embraced His feet, and worshipped Him. Then Jesus says to them, Fear not; go, tell My brethren, that they may depart into Galilee, and there they shall see Me.” Luke: “And returning from the sepulcher, they proclaimed these things to the eleven, and all the rest, And they were Mary Magdalene, Joanna, Mary the mother of James, and the other women along with them, who continued to tell these things to the apostles. And their words appeared unto them like a dream, and they believed them not.” Though Jesus had three different times distinctly prophesied to them His crucifixion and resurrection, they had never understood it; but were all settled in the common conviction that the Christ would never die, but abide and reign forever. Luke says that these prophecies were withheld from them, so they understood them not. That was all right. It was absolutely necessary that these most salient facts of redeeming mercy should be prominent in the prophetical curriculum, which, along with miracles, constitutes the basis of all faith in the Christhood.

Then why withhold it from their understanding until after it was all over? Good reason! If the disciples had understood it, they would have fought, bled, and died in His defense. Thousands would have helped them, and a bloody civil war broken out at the time of His arrest. Through fear of the people, His enemies were often restrained from laying hands on Him, finally attacking Him at midnight, doing their best to kill Him before day; and despite the tardiness of Pilate and Herod, actually had Him nailed to the cross at the early hour of 9 A.M., Pilate finally signing His death-warrant as a sheer peace measure, as he saw the crowd gathering rapidly, and knew they were going to fight for Him, and thus involve the whole country in a terrible civil war. In the good providence of God, the prophecies revealing His crucifixion and resurrection were withheld from the understanding of His disciples till after the momentous tragedy of the world’s redemption was consummated. When they saw Him expire on the cross, they gave up all hope of His Messiahship, settling down in the conclusion that He was the greatest prophet the world ever saw and no more, so that when those women came and told them that He was absent from the sepulcher, and the angels had said He was risen, and that they had actually seen Him, their words seemed like a dream — the news was too good to be believed.

William B. Godbey, Commentary on the New Testament (1896–1900) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

16:8 The account ends with the women fleeing the tomb in bewilderment. • said nothing to anyone: This can be understood positively (they were not distracted from their commission to tell the disciples, 16:7; cp. Luke 10:4; 2 Kgs 4:29) or negatively (they failed to deliver the message). Cp. Luke 24:5-11; John 20:1-2, 18.

Tyndale Open Study Notes — © Tyndale Open Resources, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

Mar 16:8. Τρόμος, trembling) of body. Comp. 1Co 2:3, note.—ἔκστασις, stupor [amazement]) of mind.

Bengel's Gnomon of the New Testament — English translation (T&T Clark, Edinburgh, 1860) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Mar 16:8 . ἐξελθοῦσαι , going out of the sepulchre into which they had entered (Mar 16:5 ). ἔφυγον , they fled , from the scene of such surprises. The angel’s words had failed to calm them; the event altogether too much for them. τρόμος καὶ ἔκστασις , trembling, caused by fear, and stupor, as of one out of his wits. τρόμος = “tremor corporis”: ἔκστασις = “stupor animi,” Bengel. οὐδενὶ οὐδὲν εἶπον : an unqualified statement as it stands here, no “on the way,” such as harmonists supply: “obvio scilicet,” Grotius. ἐφοβοῦντο γὰρ gives the reason of this reticence so unnatural in women: they were in a state of fear. When the fear went off, or events happened which made the disciples independent of their testimony, their mouths would doubtless be opened.

So ends the authentic Gospel of Mark, without any account of appearances of the risen Jesus in Galilee or anywhere else. The one thing it records is the empty grave, and an undelivered message sent through three women to the disciples, promising a reunion in Galilee. Strange that a story of such thrilling interest should terminate so abruptly and unsatisfactorily. Was there originally a continuation, unhappily lost, containing, e.g. , an account of a meeting of the Risen One in Galilee with His followers? Or was the evangelist prevented by some unknown circumstances from carrying into effect an intention to bring his story to a suitable close? We cannot tell. All we know (for the light thrown on the question by criticism, represented, e.g. , by Tischendorf, Nov. Test., G. Ed., viii., vol. i., pp. 403 407; Hahn, Gesch. des. N. Kanons, ii., p. 910 ff.; Westcott and Hort, Introduction , Appendix, pp. 29 51, approaches certainty) is that Mar 16:9-20 of Mar 16 in our N. T. are not to be taken as the fulfilment of any such intention by the author of the second Gospel. The external evidence strongly points this way. The section is wanting in [164] [165] and in Syr. Sin [166] Jerome states (Ep. cxx., quaest. 3) that it was wanting in nearly all Greek copies (“omnibus Graecis libris pene”), and the testimony of Eusebius is to the same effect. The internal evidence of style confirms the impression made by the external: characteristic words of Mk. wanting, words not elsewhere found in the Gospel occurring ( e.g. , ἐθεάθη , Mar 16:11 ), the narrative a meagre, colourless summary, a composition based on the narratives of the other Gospels, signs ascribed to believers, some of which wear an apocryphal aspect ( vide Mar 16:18 ). Some, in spite of such considerations, still regard these verses as an integral part of Mk.’s work, but for many the question of present interest is: what account is to be given of them, viewed as an indubitable addendum by another hand? Who wrote this conclusion, when, and with what end in view? We wait for the final answers to these questions, but important contributions have recently been made towards a solution of the problem. In an Armenian codex of the Gospels, written in 986 A.D., the close of Mk. (Mar 16:9-20 ), separated by a space from what goes before to show that it is distinct, has written above it: “Of the Presbyter Aristion,” as if to suggest that he is the author of what follows. ( vide Expositor , October, 1893. Aristion, the Author of the last Twelve Verses of Mark , by F. C. Conybeare, M.A.) More recently Dr. Rohrbach has taken up this fact into his interesting discussion on the subject already referred to ( vide on Mat 28:9-10 ), and appreciated its significance in connection with the preparation of a four-gospel Canon by certain Presbyters of Asia Minor in the early part of the second century. His hypothesis is that in preparing this Canon the Presbyters felt it necessary to bring the Gospels into accord, especially in reference to the resurrection, that in their preaching all might say the same thing on that vital topic. In performing this delicate task, the fourth Gospel was taken as the standard, and all the other Gospels were to a certain extent altered in their resurrection sections to bring them into line with its account. In Mt. and Lk. the change made was slight, simply the insertion in the former of two verses (Mat 28:9-10 ), and in the latter of one (Luk 24:12 ). In Mk., on the other hand, it amounted to the removal of the original ending, and the substitution for it of a piece taken from a writing by Aristion the Presbyter, mentioned by Papias. The effect of the changes, if not their aim, was to take from Peter the honour of being the first to see the risen Lord, and from Galilee that of being the exclusive theatre of the Christophanies. It is supposed that the original ending of Mk. altogether ignored the Jerusalem appearances, and represented Jesus, in accordance with the statement of St. Paul (1Co 15:5 ), as showing Himself (in Galilee) first to Peter, then to the Twelve. The inference is based partly on Mar 16:7 , and partly on the relative section of the Gospel of Peter, which, following pretty closely Mk.’s account as far as Mar 16:8 , goes on to tell how the Twelve found their way sad of heart to their old homes, and resumed their old occupations. In all this Rohrbach, a pupil of Harnack’s, is simply working out a hint thrown out by his master in his Dogmengeschichte , vol. i., p. 346, 3 Ausg. It would be premature to accept the theory as proved, but it is certainly entitled to careful consideration, as tending to throw some light on an obscure chapter in the early history of the Gospels, and on the ending of the canonical Gospel of Mark in particular.

[164] Codex Sinaiticus (sæc. iv.), now at St. Petersburg, published in facsimile type by its discoverer, Tischendorf, in 1862.

[165] Codex Vaticanus (sæc. iv.), published in photographic facsimile in 1889 under the care of the Abbate Cozza-Luzi.

[166] Sin. Sinaitic Syriac (recently discovered).

The Expositor's Greek Testament, edited by W. Robertson Nicoll (1897–1910) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

8. [3567][3568][3569][3570][3571] omit ταχύ.

[3567] Codex Sinaiticus. 4th cent. Discovered by Tischendorf in 1859 at the Monastery of St Katharine on Mount Sinai. Now at St Petersburg. The whole Gospel, ending at Mar 16:8. Photographic facsimile, 1911.

[3568] Codex Alexandrinus. 5th cent. Brought by Cyril Lucar, Patriarch of Constantinople, from Alexandria, and afterwards presented by him to King Charles I. in 1628. In the British Museum. The whole Gospel. Photographic facsimile, 1879.

[3569] Codex Vaticanus. 4th cent., but perhaps a little later than א. In the Vatican Library almost since its foundation by Pope Nicolas V., and one of its greatest treasures. The whole Gospel, ending at Mar 16:8. Photographic facsimile, 1889.

[3570] Codex Ephraemi. 5th cent. A palimpsest: the original writing has been partially rubbed out, and the works of Ephraem the Syrian have been written over it; but a great deal of the original writing has been recovered; of Mark we have Mar 1:17 to Mar 6:31, Mar 8:5 to Mar 12:29, Mar 13:19 to Mar 16:20. In the National Library at Paris.

[3571] Codex Bezae. 6th cent. Has a Latin translation (d) side by side with the Greek text, and the two do not quite always agree. Presented by Beza to the University Library of Cambridge in 1581. Remarkable for its frequent divergences from other texts. Contains Mark, except Mar 16:15-20, which has been added by a later hand. Photographic facsimile, 1899.

8. ἐξελθοῦσαι ἔφυγον … εἶχεν. The change from aor. to imperf. is impressive. Their flight from the tomb was instantaneous; the trembling and astonishment were lasting. Terror at the supernatural utterance had held them fast for a few moments. As soon as the utterance ceased, their first impulse was to get away from the scene of such awful experiences and from the cause of such unwelcome emotions. It is clear from what follows that it was not eagerness to deliver the Angel’s message which made them fly in such haste.

εἶχεν γὰρ αὐτὰς τρόμος καὶ ἔκστασις. This use of ἔχω of the grip of fear and pain is common; ἔχουσιν δέ μου τὰς σάρκας ὀδύναι (Job 21:6), ὠδῖνες αὐτοὺς ἕξουσιν (Isa 13:8). Cf. Job 31:23; also Hom. Il. iv. 79. Elsewhere in N.T. τρόμος is always connected with φόβος (1Co 2:3; 2Co 7:15; Eph 6:5; Php 2:12). Mk seems to wish to show that fear was not the only emotion. See on Mar 5:42.

οὐδενὶ οὐδὲν εἶπον. The double negative again; cf. Mar 14:60-61, Mar 15:4-5, etc. At first their tremor was so great that they were unable to think of the gracious and joyous contents of the Angel’s utterance, and they quite forgot to communicate the glad tidings to others. They were too frightened to think of anything but escape; all which is true to nature. Mt. records the later stage, when “great joy” was mingled with their fear, and then they ran to tell the disciples. Lk., with his fondness for πᾶς, says that they told “all these things to the Eleven and to all the rest.” We may reasonably suppose that, if we had the conclusion of this Gospel, we should have some account of the transition from a terrified silence to a joyous eagerness to communicate the good news, and also perhaps some report of the delivery of the special message to Peter.

ἐφοβοῦντο γάρ. It is difficult to believe that Mk intended to end his Gospel at this point and in this exceedingly abrupt way. It is possible that ἐφοβοῦντο γάρ is not even a finished sentence, but that the words introduce a statement as to what it was that they feared when for a time they told no one what they had seen and heard. Still, as Mar 9:6 shows, this need not be so; but Mar 9:6 does not support the theory that ἐφοβοῦντο γάρ is meant to close even the section about the visit to the tomb. The words give us the impression of a ragged edge to an imperfect document.

Cambridge Greek Testament for Schools and Colleges (Cambridge University Press, 1896; 21 vols, various authors incl. Carr, Maclear, Plummer, Farrar, Lumby, Moule, M. R. James, Simcox) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

(8) They trembled and were amazed.—Literally, trembling and amazement seized them.

A Bible Commentary for English Readers, edited by Charles John Ellicott (1878–1897) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

8. they went out quickly] At present the holy women were over-whelmed with alarm at the sight they had witnessed and the words they had heard.

they trembled] Literally, for trembling and amazement possessed them, or as Wyclif renders it, “forsoþe drede and quakynge hadde assaylid hem.” The original word = “amazement,” has been already the subject of comment above, ch. Mar_5:42. The word rendered “trembling” occurs nowhere else in the Four Gospels.

neither said they any thing to any man] That is, on their way to the Holy City they did not open their lips to any passers by they chanced to meet. Joy opened them freely enough afterwards to the Apostles (Mat_28:8).

for they were afraid] In a tumult of rapture and alarm they fled back from the tomb towards the Holy City. The occurrence of the morning was so new to them, great, and unheard of, that they ventured not as yet to publish it.

The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges (gen. ed. J. J. S. Perowne; Cambridge University Press, 1878–1918) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Now when Jesus was risen early the first day of the week,.... Though the word "Jesus" is not in the text, it is rightly supplied; for of the rising of no other, can the words be understood; and so the Persic version supplies "Messiah", or "Christ"; that Jesus rose from the dead on the first day of the week, agrees with the accounts of all the evangelists, and is here expressly affirmed; the phrase, "the first day of the week", is so indeed placed, as that it may be thought to connected with the following words; as it is by some; fancying there would otherwise be a disagreement with Mat 28:1, whereas there is none; See Gill on Mat 28:1 though it is true also, that he did appear on that day to Mary Magdalene, it being the same day he rose from the dead. But the true reading and pointing are as here placed; and the phrase belongs to, and points out the day of Christ's rising from the dead; and which ambiguity is removed in the Syriac version, which renders it, "now early on the first day of the week he rose"; and so the Persic version, "the Messiah", or "Christ, therefore on the morning of the, first day, rose from the dead": and that he rose early on that day, is clear from the women, who set out at the end of the sabbath, when that was past and over; and got to the sepulchre by the time the day dawned; and one of them, while it was dark, and all of them by break of day, at least by sunrising, and he was then risen:

he appeared first to Mary Magdalene; in the habit of a gardener, for whom she took him at first; and this was at the sepulchre, where she staid after the disciples were gone. That she was the very first person that Christ showed himself to, after his resurrection, may be concluded from hence, and from the account the Evangelist John has given, Joh 20:14, nor is there any reason to think, that before this, he appeared to his mother, of which the evangelists are entirely silent. This was a very great favour, and an high honour that was bestowed upon her; and who had received large favours from him before:

out of whom he had cast seven devils, see Luk 8:2. And if she had been a very wicked person, as she is commonly thought to be, and very likely she had been, since Satan had such a power over her, as to lodge seven devils in her, it is an instance of abounding grace, that Christ should heap up favours on such an one; and she should be the first that he should appear to and converse with after his resurrection.

John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible (1746–1763) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

8 And they went out quickly, and fled from the sepulchre; for they trembled and were amazed: neither said they any thing to any man; for they were afraid.

Ver. 8. Anything to any man] Whom they met with, but hastened to the disciples.

John Trapp, A Commentary or Exposition upon All the Books of the Old and New Testament (1647–1656) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

8. Fled from the sepulchre — We may suppose that most probably the women did glance at the spot vacated by the risen Lord. The vacuity and the consciousness of an angel’s presence filled them with awe. In Oriental manner they bowed to the earth; they escaped from the sepulchre as men flee from a supernatural apparition. Neither said they anything to any man — That is, on their way they addressed no bystander, but hastened to fulfil the message of the angel to the disciples.

Daniel D. Whedon (gen. ed.), Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1874–1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

And they went out the word (tacu) "quickly" is omittedand fled from the tomb; for trembling and astonishment had come upon them (tromov kai ekstasiv)agitation and ecstasy; they were in a state of the utmost excitement. And they said nothing to any one; for they were afraid. The vision of angels had terrified them. They were probably afraid to say anything to any one, on account of the Jews, lest it should be said that they had stolen the body of Jesus. It has been well remarked that independent accounts of events occurring a time of supreme excitement, and related by trustworthy witnesses, but from different points of view, naturally present difficulties which cannot be cleared up without a full knowledge of all the particulars. (See "Speaker"s Commentary" in Mat_28:9)

The Pulpit Commentary (1880–1919), ed. H.D.M. Spence-Jones & Joseph S. Exell — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Mark

THE INCREDULOUS DISCIPLES

Mar 16:1 - Mar 16:13.

It is not my business here to discuss questions of harmonising or of criticism. I have only to deal with the narrative as it stands. Its peculiar character is very plain. The manner in which the first disciples learned the fact of the Resurrection, and the disbelief with which they received it, much rather than the Resurrection itself, come into view in this section. The disciples, and not the risen Lord, are shown us. There is nothing here of the earthquake, or of the descending angel, or of the terrified guard, or of our Lord’s appearance to the women. The two appearances to Mary Magdalene and to the travellers to Emmaus, which, in the hands of John and Luke, are so pathetic and rich, are here mentioned with the utmost brevity, for the sake chiefly of insisting on the disbelief of the disciples who heard of them. Mark’s theme is mainly what they thought of the testimony to the Resurrection.

I. He shows us, first, bewildered love and sorrow.

We leave the question whether this group of women is the same as that of which Luke records that Joanna was one, as well as the other puzzle as to harmonising the notes of time in the Evangelists. May not the difference between the time of starting and that of arrival solve some of the difficulty? When all the notes are more or less vague, and refer to the time of transition from dark to day, when every moment partakes of both and may be differently described as belonging to either, is precision to be expected? In the whirl of agitation of that morning, would any one be at leisure to take much note of the exact minute? Are not these ‘discrepancies’ much more valuable as confirmation of the story than precise accord would have been? It is better to try to understand the feelings of that little band than to carp at such trifles.

Sorrow wakes early, and love is impatient to bring its tribute. So we can see these three women, leaving their abode as soon as the doleful grey of morning permitted, stealing through the silent streets, and reaching the rock-cut tomb while the sun was rising over Olivet. Where were Salome’s ambitious hopes for her two sons now? Dead, and buried in the Master’s grave. The completeness of the women’s despair, as well as the faithfulness of their love, is witnessed by their purpose. They had come to anoint the body of Him to whom in life they had ministered. They had no thought of a resurrection, plainly as they had been told of it. The waves of sorrow had washed the remembrance of His assurances on that subject clean out of their minds. Truth that is only half understood, however plainly spoken, is always forgotten when the time to apply it comes. We are told that the disbelief of the disciples in the Resurrection, after Christ’s plain predictions of it, is ‘psychologically impossible.’ Such big words are imposing, but the objection is shallow. These disciples are not the only people who forgot in the hour of need the thing which it most concerned them to remember, and let the clouds of sorrow hide starry promises which would have turned mourning into dancing, and night into day. Christ’s sayings about His resurrection were not understood in their, as it appears to us, obvious meaning when spoken. No wonder, then, that they were not expected to be fulfilled in their obvious meaning when He was dead. We shall have a word to say presently about the value of the fact that there was no anticipation of resurrection on the part of the disciples. For the present it is enough to note how these three loving souls confess their hopelessness by their errand. Did they not know, too, that Joseph and Nicodemus had been beforehand with them in their labour of love? Apparently not. It might easily happen, in the confusion and dispersion, that no knowledge of this had reached them; or perhaps sorrow and agitation had driven it out of their memories; or perhaps they felt that, whether others had done the same before or no, they must do it too, not because the loved form needed it, but because their hearts needed to do it. It was the love which must serve, not calculation of necessity, which loaded their hands with costly spices. The living Christ was pleased with the ‘odour of a sweet smell,’ from the needless spices, meant to re-anoint the dead Christ, and accepted the purpose, though it came from ignorance and was never carried out, since its deepest root was love, genuine, though bewildered.

The same absence of ‘calm practical common sense’ is seen in the too late consideration, which never occurred to the three women till they were getting near the tomb, as to how to get into it. They do not seem to have heard of the guard; but they know that the stone is too heavy for them to move, and none of the men among the disciples had been taken into their confidence. ‘Why did they not think of that before? what a want of foresight!’ says the cool observer. ‘How beautifully true to nature!’ says a wiser judgment. To obey the impulse of love and sorrow without thinking, and then to be arrested on their road by a difficulty, which they might have thought of at first, but did not till they were close to it, is surely just what might have been expected of such mourners. Mark gives a graphic picture in that one word ‘looking up,’ and follows it with picturesque present tenses. They had been looking down or at each other in perplexity, when they lifted their eyes to the tomb, which was possibly on an eminence. What a flash of wonder would pass through their minds when they saw it open! What that might signify they would be eager to hurry to find out; but, at all events, their difficulty was at an end. When love to Christ is brought to a stand in its venturous enterprises by difficulties occurring for the first time to the mind, it is well to go close up to them; and it often happens that when we do, and look steadily at them, we see that they are rolled away, and the passage cleared which we feared was hopelessly barred.

II. The calm herald of the Resurrection and the amazed hearers.

Apparently Mary Magdalene had turned back as soon as she saw the opened tomb, and hurried to tell that the body had been carried off, as she supposed. The guard had also probably fled before this; and so the other two women enter the vestibule, and there find the angel. Sometimes one angel, sometimes two, sometimes none, were visible there. The variation in their numbers in the various narratives is not to be regarded as an instance of ‘discrepancy.’ Many angels hovered round the spot where the greatest wonder of the universe was to be seen, ‘eagerly desiring to look into’ that grave. The beholder’s eye may have determined their visibility. Their number may have fluctuated. Mark does not use the word ‘angel’ at all, but leaves us to infer what manner of being he was who first proclaimed the Resurrection.

He tells of his youth, his attitude, and his attire. The angelic life is vigorous, progressive, buoyant, and alien from decay. Immortal youth belongs to them who ‘excel in strength’ because they ‘do his commandments.’ That waiting minister shows us what the children of the Resurrection shall be, and so his presence as well as his speech expounds the blessed mystery of our life in the risen Lord. His serene attitude of sitting ‘on the right side’ is not only a vivid touch of description, but is significant of restfulness and fixed contemplation, as well as of the calmness of a higher life. That still watcher knows too much to be agitated; but the less he is moved, the more he adores. His quiet contrasts with and heightens the impression of the storm of conflicting feelings in the women’s tremulous natures. His garments symbolise purity and repose. How sharply the difference between heaven and earth is given in the last words of Mar 16:5! They were ‘amazed,’ swept out of themselves in an ecstasy of bewilderment in which hope had no place. Terror, surprise, curiosity, wonder, blank incapacity to know what all this meant, made chaos in them.

The angel’s words are a succession of short sentences, which have a certain dignity, and break up the astounding revelation he has to make into small pieces, which the women’s bewildered minds can grasp. He calms their tumult of spirit. He shows them that he knows their errand. He adoringly names his Lord and theirs by the names recalling His manhood, His lowly home, and His ignominious death. He lingers on the thought, to him covering so profound a mystery of divine love, that his Lord had been born, had lived in the obscure village, and died on the Cross. Then, in one word, he proclaims the stupendous fact of His resurrection as His own act-’He is risen.’ This crown of all miracles, which brings life and immortality to light, and changes the whole outlook of humanity, which changes the Cross into victory, and without which Christianity is a dream and a ruin, is announced in a single word-the mightiest ever spoken save by Christ’s own lips. It was fitting that angel lips should proclaim the Resurrection, as they did the Nativity, though in either ‘He taketh not hold of angels,’ and they had but a secondary share in the blessings. Yet that empty grave opened to ‘principalities and powers in heavenly places’ a new unfolding of the manifold wisdom and love of God.

The angel-a true evangelist-does not linger on the wondrous intimation, but points to the vacant place, which would have been so drear but for his previous words, and bids them approach to verify his assurance, and with reverent wonder to gaze on the hallowed and now happy spot. A moment is granted for feeling to overflow, and certainty to be attained, and then the women are sent on their errand. Even the joy of that gaze is not to be selfishly prolonged, while others are sitting in sorrow for want of what they know. That is the law for all the Christian life. First make sure work of one’s own possession of the truth, and then hasten to tell it to those who need it.

‘And Peter’-Mark alone gives us this. The other Evangelists might pass it by; but how could Peter ever forget the balm which that message of pardon and restoration brought to him, and how could Peter’s mouthpiece leave it out? Is there anything in the Gospels more beautiful, or fuller of long-suffering and thoughtful love, than that message from the risen Saviour to the denier? And how delicate the love which, by calling him Peter, not Simon, reinstates him in his official position by anticipation, even though in the subsequent full restoration scene by the lake he is thrice called Simon, before the complete effacement of the triple denial by the triple confession! Galilee is named as the rendezvous, and the word employed, ‘goeth before you,’ is appropriate to the Shepherd in front of His flock. They had been ‘scattered,’ but are to be drawn together again. He is to ‘precede’ them there, thus lightly indicating the new form of their relations to Him, marked during the forty days by a distance which prepared for his final withdrawal. Galilee was the home of most of them, and had been the field of His most continuous labours. There would be many disciples there, who would gather to see their risen Lord {‘five hundred at once’}; and there, rather than in Jerusalem which had slain Him, was it fitting that He should show Himself to His friends. The appearances in Jerusalem were all within a week {if we except the Ascension}, and the connection in which Mark introduces them {if Mar 16:14 be his} seems to treat them as forced on Christ by the disciples’ unbelief, rather than as His original intention. It looks as if He meant to show Himself in the city only to one or two, such as Mary, Peter, and some others, but to reserve His more public appearance for Galilee.

How did the women receive the message? Mark represents them as trembling in body and in an ecstasy in mind, and as hurrying away silent with terror. Matthew says that they were full of ‘fear and great joy,’ and went in haste to tell the disciples. In the whirl of feeling, there were opposites blended or succeeding one another; and the one Evangelist lays hold of one set, and the other of the other. It is as impossible to catalogue the swift emotions of such a moment as to separate and tabulate the hues of sunrise. The silence which Mark tells of can only refer to their demeanour as they ‘fled.’ His object is to bring out the very imperfect credence which, at the best, was given to the testimony that Christ was risen, and to paint the tumult of feeling in the breasts of its first recipients. His picture is taken from a different angle from Matthew’s; but Matthew’s contains the same elements, for he speaks of ‘fear,’ though he completes it by ‘joy.’

III. The incredulity of the disciples.

The two appearances to Mary Magdalene and the travellers to Emmaus are introduced mainly to record the unbelief of the disciples. A strange choice that was, of the woman who had been rescued from so low a debasement, to be first to see Him! But her former degradation was the measure of her love. Longing eyes, that have been washed clean by many a tear of penitent gratitude, are purged to see Jesus; and a yearning heart ever brings Him near. The unbelief of the story of the two from Emmaus seems to conflict with Luke’s account, which tells that they were met by the news of Christ’s appearance to Simon. But the two statements are not contradictory. If we remember the excitement and confusion of mind in which they were, we shall not wonder if belief and unbelief followed each other, like the flow and recoil of the waves. One moment they were on the crest of the billows, and saw land ahead; the next they were down in the trough, and saw only the melancholy surge. The very fact that Peter was believed, might make them disbelieve the travellers; for how could Jesus have been in Jerusalem and Emmaus at so nearly the same time? However the two narratives be reconciled, it remains obvious that the first disciples did not believe the first witnesses of the Resurrection, and that their unbelief is an important fact. It bears very distinctly on the worth of their subsequent conviction. It has special bearing on the most modern form of disbelief in the Resurrection, which accounts for the belief of the first disciples on the ground that they expected Christ to rise, and that they then persuaded themselves, in all good faith, that He had risen. That monstrous theory is vulnerable at all points, but one sufficient answer is-the disciples did not expect Christ to rise again, and were so far from it that they did not believe that He had risen when they were told it. Their original unbelief is a strong argument for the reliableness of their final faith. What raised them from the stupor of despair and incredulity? Only one answer is ‘psychologically’ reasonable: they at last believed because they saw. It is incredible that they were conscious deceivers; for such lives as they lived, and such a gospel as they preached, never came from liars. It is as incredible that they were unconsciously mistaken; for they were wholly unprepared for the Resurrection, and sturdily disbelieved all witnesses for it, till they saw with their own eyes, and had ‘many infallible proofs.’ Let us be thankful for their unbelief and its record, and let us seek to possess the blessing of those ‘that have not seen, and yet have believed!’

Alexander MacLaren, Expositions of Holy Scripture (1904–1910) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

8. Neither said they anything to any man; i. e., on their way to tell the disciples. “For,” says Dr. Wells, “they were afraid to stay, and not to hasten all they could to the apostles.” They were in a tumult of commotion, and could not pause by the way to speak to any.

B. W. Johnson's The People's New Testament with Notes (1889–1891) — public domain. Electronic text from the Christian Classics Ethereal Library (CCEL) ThML edition.

translationWords

grave

amazed

unfoldingWord translationNotes — © Distant Shores Media and the Door43 World Missions Community, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Source: git.door43.org/Door43/en_tn.

8.] The idea of our narrative here is, that the women fled in terror from the sepulchre, and did not deliver the message at the time,—for they were afraid. All attempts to reconcile this with the other Gospels are futile. It is a manifest evidence that our narrative is here suddenly broken off, and (perhaps?) that no more information about the women was in the possession of its author. The subsequent verses are quite disconnected from this; and contain the substance of their writer’s information respecting the other appearances of the Lord.

[

Henry Alford, The Greek Testament (1849–1861) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

8. καὶ ἐξελθοῦσαι ἔφυγον ἀπὸ τοῦ μνημείου· εἶχε γὰρ αὐτὰς τρόμος κ. ἔκστασις—and having gone out, they fled from the tomb; for trembling and amazement possessed them. ἔκστασις is a transport of wonder, and amazement that carries men out of themselves, makes them beside themselves. ἐφοβοῦντο—for they were afraid. This shows the state of mind that produced the τρόμος καὶ ἔκστα-σις. Mt. says that great joy, as well as fear, entered into their feelings.1 Here probably our Gospel ends. What follows comes evidently from a later hand, and is intended to remove the abruptness of the ending of the original. All that Mk. tells us therefore of the resurrection is the announcement of it by the angel, and the promise that Jesus would appear to his disciples in Galilee, showing that this appearance is included in the scheme of this book, though not narrated by it. The appendix contains no account of this appearance in Galilee, but only of appearances in Jerusalem and its vicinity. This confinement of the appearances of Jesus to Galilee is common to this Gospel with Mat_2 Lk., on the other hand, records only appearances in Jerusalem and its neighborhood, and while his narrative does not so definitely exclude appearances in Galilee, as Mt. and Mk. do appearances in Judæa, it certainly leaves that impression.

Omit ταχὺ, quickly, before ἔφυγον, Tisch. Treg. WH. RV. and most sources. γὰρ, for, instead of δὲ, and, after εἶχε, Tisch. Treg. WH. RV. א BD, mss. Lat. Vet. Vulg. Memph. Pesh.

THE APPENDIX

Verses 9-20 are omitted by Tisch., double-bracketed by WH., inserted in the Revisers’ Text, but with a space between it and the preceding passage, and Treg. inserts in the same space κατὰ Μάρκον. WH., in their Notes on Special Passages, pronounce against the genuineness. This is done primarily on the authority of א B, one ms. Lat. Vet. and mss. of the Arm. and Æth. versions. L, 274 marg., the ms. of Lat. Vet. mentioned above, Harcl. marg. and Æth.mss. m and a give what is known as the Shorter Conclusion, as follows: Πάντα δὲ τὰ παρηγγελμένα τοῖς περὶ τὸν Πέτρον συντομῶς ἐξήγγειλαν· μετὰ δὲ ταῦτα καὶ αὐτὸς ὁ Ἰησοῦς ἀπὸ ἀνατολῆς καὶ ἄχρι δύσεως ἐξαπέστειλεν διʼ αὐτῶν τὸ ἱερὸν καὶ ἄφθαρτον κήρυγμα τῆς αἰωνίου σωτηρίας—And they reported briefly to Peter and those in his company all the things commanded. And after these things Jesus himself also sent forth through them from the east even to the west the holy and incorruptible message of eternal salvation. L virtually closes the Gospel with v. 8, and gives this shorter ending as current in some places, and then the longer ending as also current. The testimony of Eusebius, Victor, and Jerome is that these verses were to be found in some mss., but not in the oldest or best. They are not recognized in the Ammonian sections nor the Eusebian canons. And there is an ominous lack of reference to them in those passages of the Fathers which treat, for instance, of baptism, the resurrection, and the ascension. It is very true that this external evidence is not enough by itself, though it is always to be remembered that א B are the most important witnesses to the text.

But the internal evidence for the omission is much stronger than the external, proving conclusively that these verses could not have been written by Mk. The linguistic differences alone are enough to settle this,—enough to show, even if we had Mk.’s autograph, that they were not original with him, but copied directly from another source. ἐκεῖνος is used in the passage five times in a way quite unknown to the Synoptics, but common to the fourth Gospel. πορεύομαι is used three times, but does not occur elsewhere in the Gospel. This is the more remarkable, as it is in itself so common a word, and the occasions for its use occur on every page. In this section, it is the favorite word for going. τοῖς μετʼ αὐτοῦ γενομένοις, as a designation of the disciples, is another unfamiliar expression. θεάομαι, as a verb of seeing, does not occur elsewhere in Mk., and is infrequent elsewhere, but is used twice in this passage. In fact, it is the only verb for seeing in the passage. ἀπιστέω also occurs twice in this passage, but not elsewhere in this Gospel. Μετὰ (δὲ) ταῦτα is a phrase not found in Mt. or Mk. It occurs a few times in Lk., and constantly in Jn. Ὕστερον is another expression used to denote succession of events, not found elsewhere in Mk. θανάσιμον occurs only here in the N.T. βλάπτω occurs elsewhere in the N.T. only in Luk 4:35. συνεργοῦντος is a good Pauline word, and is found once in Jas., but only here in the Gospels. βεβαιοῦν is found in Paul’s epistles and in Heb., but not elsewhere in the Gospels. ἐπακολουθεῖν occurs twice in 1 Tim., and once in 1 Pet., but not elsewhere in the Gospels. To sum up, there are in all 163 words in this passage, and of these, 19 words and 2 phrases are peculiar, not occurring elsewhere in this Gospel. There are 109 different words, and of these, 11 words and 2 phrases do not occur elsewhere in this Gospel. Of these, the use of πορεύομαι, ἐκεῖνος, and θεάομαι, would of themselves constitute a case, being, from the frequency of their use, characteristic and distinctive in this vocabulary, while the entire disuse of these common words is a peculiarity of the rest of the Gospel.

But the argument from the general character of the section is stronger still. In the first place, it is a mere summarizing of the appearances of our Lord, a manner of narration entirely foreign to this Gospel. Mark is the most vivid and picturesque of the evangelists, abbreviating discourse, but amplifying narration. But this is a mere enumeration. The first part of the chapter, relating the appearance of the angels to the women, is a good example of his style, and is in marked contrast to this section.

But a graver objection arises from the character of the σημεῖα that are promised here to follow believers. The casting out of demons, and the cure of the sick, belong strictly to the class of miracles performed by our Lord. They are miracles of beneficence performed on others. And in the speaking with tongues, possibly we do not get outside of that sphere. But we do have an anticipation of the new conditions of the apostolic era and of the charismata which distinguish its activity from our Lord’s, that is, to say the least, unexampled in the teaching of Jesus. Moreover, this refers either to the speaking with foreign tongues of the day of Pentecost, or to the ecstatic speech which St. Paul calls speaking with tongues in 1 Cor. If the former, then it is not repeated. And if the latter, then St. Paul depreciates it, and for good reasons. Either would be against our Lord’s selection of it here as a representative miracle. But the taking up serpents, and the drinking of deadly things without harm, belong strictly to the category of mere thaumaturgy ruled out by Jesus. Our Lord does not exempt himself nor his disciples from the natural consequences of their acts. The very principle of his kingdom is, that he and they shall take their place in the ordinary conditions of human life, and shall there be exposed, not only to the ordinary dangers of that life, but to the extraordinary perils incident to an uncompromising righteousness in an evil world, and without any miraculous safeguards. But here, that miraculous safeguarding is promised as the condition distinctly supplanting the ordinary.

But the most serious difficulty with this passage is, that it is inconsistent with the preceding part of the chapter in regard to the place and time of the appearances to the disciples, following Lk.’s account, whereas the first part accords with Mt.’s very different scheme. The angels tell the women that Jesus precedes them into Galilee, and will be seen by his disciples there. But the appearance to Mary Magdalene was on the day of the resurrection, and near the tomb. The appearance to the two on their way into the country was evidently that to the disciples going to Emmaus, also on the day of the resurrection. And that to the eleven as they were reclining at table, was evidently also identical with that recorded in Luk 24:36 sq., and was therefore in Jerusalem, and on the evening of the resurrection. Immediately after this, in both accounts, comes the ascension, and leaves no time for appearances in Galilee. In St. Matthew, on the other hand, there are no appearances in Judæa, except that to the women on their way from the sepulchre. They have received from the angels the same message as in Mar 16:7, that Jesus precedes them into Galilee, and in accordance with this, the disciples go there, and Jesus appears to them on the mountain. Plainly, then, the first verses of our chapter are framed on Mt.’s scheme of the Galilean appearances, and v. 9-20 on Lk.’s scheme of appearances in Judæa. And the two are mutually exclusive. On the other hand, the ending of the Gospel, with these verses omitted, is abrupt. But if this abruptness were foreign to Mk.’s manner, it would not show that this ending is genuine, only that the difficulty was felt by copyists, one of whom supplied this ending, and another the shorter ending. The existence of the two is presumptive proof of the original omission. But really, the brevity of this ending is quite parallel to the beginning of the Gospel, the beginning and ending being both alike outside the main purpose of the evangelist. It is not strange therefore, but rather consonant with Mk.’s manner.1

VARIOUS APPEARANCES TO THE DISCIPLES

International Critical Commentary — older volumes (1896–1929), various authors — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Quickly. Omitted by best texts.

Astonishment [εκστασις] . See on Mr 5:42.

Afraid [εφοβουντο] . The wonder merges into fear.

By a large number of the ablest modern critics the remainder of this chapter is held to be from some other hand than Mark's. It is omitted from the two oldest manuscripts.

Marvin R. Vincent, Word Studies in the New Testament (1887–1900) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.