I don’t know if you have this experience but every so often I’ll hear something different in something I’ve heard for years. That was the case when I heard this morning’s Gospel, John 20:1-9:
1Early on the first day of the week, while it was still dark, Mary Magdalene went to the tomb and saw that the stone had been removed from the entrance. 2So she came running to Simon Peter and the other disciple, the one Jesus loved, and said, “They have taken the Lord out of the tomb, and we don’t know where they have put him!”
3So Peter and the other disciple started for the tomb. 4Both were running, but the other disciple outran Peter and reached the tomb first. 5He bent over and looked in at the strips of linen lying there but did not go in. 6Then Simon Peter, who was behind him, arrived and went into the tomb. He saw the strips of linen lying there, 7as well as the burial cloth that had been around Jesus’ head. The cloth was folded up by itself, separate from the linen. 8Finally the other disciple, who had reached the tomb first, also went inside. He saw and believed. 9(They still did not understand from Scripture that Jesus had to rise from the dead.)
Note especially verses 4 through 8. Why were these details included? Why were they preserved? Remember that the only way that these texts were preserved was by laborious copying and, since they were copied, they were thought to be important.
I’ve read a number of explanations, mostly far-fetched. The first is that the cloths demonstrate that the grave hadn’t been robbed. Fair enough. Why is mentioning that the head cloth was separate from the linen shroud important?
Another explanation is that there was something in the way the head cloth was folded that made John believe. Frankly, I think that’s even more far-fetched.
I know that there was a Johannine tradition, distinct from the Petrine tradition and that those who followed the Petrine tradition were occasionally quite lined up in opposition to the Johannine tradition. There have also been speculations about Gnostic influences in the Gospel of John and even thoughts about a secret or hidden tradition of John. It seems to me that the idea of John arriving at the tomb before Peter and, possibly, seeing things that Peter didn’t see there adds fodder to that idea.
Any thoughts?
A. There are more details because this part of the story is more important.
B. The details debunk any number of alternative theories, such as the women had gone to the wrong tomb. Also, tombs at this time were family tombs, so some of the details might address contemporary questions about how one would know the body was gone.
C. The details indicate that Jesus was buried both according to Jewish tradition at the time (of theological importance) and not as a criminal.
D. The details further evidence a bodily resurrection, which the Gnostics denied. The Gnostics believed the body was corrupt or a prison for the divine essence and resurrection of the soul meant leaving the body behind. According to these passages, the body was not left behind, just the ceremonial linen.