The Empty Tomb

In John’s narrative of the resurrection, it is remarkable in its sobriety, restraint, and indirectness. We do not receive an explanation of how or why the stone was removed. It is only implied, not explicitly stated, that the tomb was empty. There is no description of the resurrection itself. It was not witnessed by humans and is not obvious until Jesus addresses Mary (John 20:16); up to that point tomb robbery could conceivably account for everything.

But John’s account also pulsates with a vitality unmatched by any other NT resurrection narrative, illustrated by verses 3-4.

So let’s get into our text to discover that the tomb was empty; Jesus is not there.

1. The report of Mary Magdalene, 20:1-2.

John 20:1–2 NASB95

Now on the first day of the week Mary Magdalene came early to the tomb, while it was still dark, and saw the stone already taken away from the tomb. So she ran and came to Simon Peter and to the other disciple whom Jesus loved, and said to them, “They have taken away the Lord out of the tomb, and we do not know where they have laid Him.”

The synoptics tell us that there were other women besides Mary Magdalene that came to the tomb. The reasons given were to look at the grave (Matt. 28); and to bring more spices to anoint the body (Mark 16; Luke 24), following the speedy burial prior to the high Sabbath. John focuses on only Mary Magdalene alone.

The high Sabbath is over but the Feast of Unleavened Bread continues, lasting a week following Passover.

“on the first day of the week” = “on the third day” of Jesus’ prediction of His resurrection as Matthew 16:21

Matthew 16:21 NASB95

From that time Jesus began to show His disciples that He must go to Jerusalem, and suffer many things from the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and be raised up on the third day.

The time of Mary’s arrival at the tomb (along with the other women) is “early … while it was still dark.” She observed the stone already taken away from the tomb. She may have peered inside then took off to find Peter and the other disciple disciple (John) whom Jesus loved, while the other women experienced the angelic messenger’s report. This is suggested by the report she gives Peter and John:”

They have taken away the Lord out of the tomb; … we do not know where they have laid Him.” Mary could not understand what she saw. Then they phrase “they laid Him” implies that He is still dead, from her point of view.

Two observations: 1) Both disiples are described here as

Jesus had been predicting His resurrection but His followers could only see these events through natural eyes. What it would require is supernatural insight, a gift of the Holy Spirit.

2. The race to the tomb, 20:3-7.

John 20:3–5 NASB95

So Peter and the other disciple went forth, and they were going to the tomb. The two were running together; and the other disciple ran ahead faster than Peter and came to the tomb first; and stooping and looking in, he saw the linen wrappings lying there; but he did not go in.

In the first century, women were not respected as witnesses. However, I do not think this is why Peter and John went to check on the tomb — that they did not believe Mary. Rather, I believe it was out of concern for the body of their Rabbi and to ascertain for themselves what was going on. They responded quickly to the report of the empty tomb,initially taking off together but soon John “overtook/outstripped Peter” and arrived at the tomb first.

A. John’s initial assessment, verse 5.

John bent down to peer into the tomb (the Greek word suggests curiosity and great interest) and “saw” - observing the fact, quickly glancing [blepo] at what is in - or not in - the tomb. He observed the linen wrappings undisturbed. However, John apparently did not see the face-cloth and he did not enter the tomb at this time.

B. Peter’s observations, verses 6-7.

John 20:6–7 NASB95

And so Simon Peter also came, following him, and entered the tomb; and he saw the linen wrappings lying there, and the face-cloth which had been on His head, not lying with the linen wrappings, but rolled up in a place by itself.

Simon Peter followed hard on John’s heels. Even though John was first to arrive, Peter was first to enter the tomb.

Peter “saw” — [theorei] “careful observation,” “examined with the purpose of investigation” - the curious condition of the linen wrappings. Peter also observed the face-cloth “which had been on His head” - this would be the band of cloth, the size of a small towel, that had been over Jesus’ head and under His chin to hold His mouth closed. The descriptions here point to Jesus, in His resurrection, passing through His burial garments, leaving both the linen wrappings and the face-cloth collapsed in the shape they had at His burial, like a cocoon, and then He passed through the walls of the tomb (like He passed through the walls to be with His disciples in John 20:19, 26). Remember Lazarus? When he was reanimated, he emerged through the entrance to the tomb, “bound hand and foot with wrappings, and his face was wrapped around with a cloth” (John 11:44). It is possible that the 75+ pounds of resins and spices may have helped the linen wrapping hold the form of the body that had been in it — but not now!

The neatness and the placement of the linen wrappings and the face-cloth separate from the body wraps would indicate there were no grave robbers.

3. The response to the evidence, 20:8-10.

John 20:8–10 NASB95

So the other disciple who had first come to the tomb then also entered, and he saw and believed. For as yet they did not understand the Scripture, that He must rise again from the dead. So the disciples went away again to their own homes.

Now John enters into the tomb. He “saw” - [eidon] “perceived with understanding,” and came to belief that Jesus indeed had risen; this is his eyewitness accounting of these events. John’s understanding was based on what he saw, namely:

A robber would have either taken everything (since the linen wrapping was of costly quality), or unwrapped the linen wrappings and tossed them aside in a heap in their hurry to not get caught.

A friend did not do this; a friend would not have removed the graveclothes for reasons of dignity and cultural purity.

Jesus had risen from the dead.

John and Peter both believed that Jesus had risen. Yet verse 9 tells us that they did not comprehend yet what the bodily resurrection of Jesus would mean. If He is not here, where was He? Why was it necessary for Messiah to be resurrected?

One reason is because it was prophesied in the Scripture:

Psalm 16:10–11 NASB95

For You will not abandon my soul to Sheol; Nor will You allow Your Holy One to undergo decay. You will make known to me the path of life; In Your presence is fullness of joy; In Your right hand there are pleasures forever.

Hosea 6:2 NASB95

“He will revive us after two days; He will raise us up on the third day, That we may live before Him.

Matthew 12:39 NASB95

But He answered and said to them, “An evil and adulterous generation craves for a sign; and yet no sign will be given to it but the sign of Jonah the prophet;

Which is the prophet in the great fish three days then to come forth to do God’s will ...

Jonah 1:17 NASB95

And the Lord appointed a great fish to swallow Jonah, and Jonah was in the stomach of the fish three days and three nights.

The testimony of Scripture is an essential and irreplaceable piece of evidence for the resurrection

A second reason: it was logically necessary.

In the 1st century, Jewish scholars struggled to understand how Messiah could suffer and die for the sake of His nation, YET overcome their enemies, lead them into prosperity, and establish a world-wide empire. A theory was developed that the messianic prophecies pointed to the rise of two individuals — one who would sacrifice his life, and one who would reign in his place.

John, in recognizing the bodily, miraculous resurrection of the Messiah, resolves everything, in more ways than one.

So each of us must come to terms with the evidence of Jesus’s resurrection.