Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of John 20:3
Peter therefore went forth, and that other disciple, and came to the sepulcher.
3. and that sepulcher ] Better, and the other disciple, and they were coming towards the sepulcher.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
Luke, Luk 24:12, mentions Peters going only, upon Mary Magdalenes report; but he must be expounded by this evangelist, who expressly saith, that Peter and John went together, and that John outran Peter, and got first to the sepulchre.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
3-10. Peter therefore went forth,and that other disciple, and came first to the sepulchreTheseparticulars have a singular air of artless truth about them. Mary, inher grief, runs to the two apostles who were soon to be so closelyassociated in proclaiming the Saviour’s resurrection, and they,followed by Mary, hasten to see with their own eyes. The youngerdisciple outruns the older; love haply supplying swifter wings. Hestoops, he gazes in, but enters not the open sepulchre, held backprobably by a reverential fear. The bolder Peter, coming up, goes inat once, and is rewarded with bright evidence of what had happened.
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
Peter therefore went forth,…. Out of the house where he was, upon hearing the account Mary gave:
and that other disciple; John, the Evangelist and Apostle; the rest of the disciples staying at home and continuing together, waiting to hear what account these two would bring:
and came to the sepulchre; to see with their own eyes what was done, and whether things were as Mary had related; and to make a more particular inquiry into, and examination of them.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
They went (). Imperfect middle picturing the scene, “they were going.” The two started instantly (, aorist active indicative).
Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament
Came to [ ] . Wrong. The tense is the imperfect; they were coming. Rev., they went toward.
Fuente: Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament
1) “Peter therefore went forth, and that other disciple,” (ekselthen oun ho Petros kai ho allos mathetes) “Then Peter and the other disciple (John the modest writer of this gospel) went out from where Mary had run to them,” Joh 13:23; Joh 2:1-7.
2) “And came to the sepulchre.” (kai erchonto eis to mnemeion) “And they came toward the tomb,” together, in haste, and in wonder. Luke mentions Peter only, Luk 24:12. But John was also an eyewitness, 1Jn 1:1-3.
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
3. Peter therefore went forth. There being so little faith, or rather almost no faith, both in the disciples and in the women, it is astonishing that they had so great zeal; and, indeed, it is not possible that religious feelings led them to seek Christ. Some seed of faith, therefore, remained in their hearts, but quenched for a time, so that they were not aware of having what they had. Thus the Spirit of God often works in the elect in a secret manner. In short, we must believe that there was some concealed root, from which we see fruit produced. Though this feeling of piety, which they possessed, was confused, and was accompanied by much superstition, still I give to it — though inaccurately — the name of faith, because it was only by the doctrine of the Gospel that it was produced, and it had no tendency but towards Christ. From this seed there at length sprang a true and sincere faith, which, leaving the sepulcher, ascended to the heavenly glory of Christ.
When Scripture speaks of the feeble beginnings of faith, it says that Christ is born in us, and that we, on the other hand, are born in him; but the disciples must be placed almost below infancy, for they are ignorant of the resurrection of Christ, but yet the Lord nourishes them as a mother nourishes the child that is contained in her womb. Formerly they resembled children, and had made a little progress, but the death of Christ had rendered them so weak, that they must be again begotten and formed, as Paul says of the Galatians,
My little children, of whom I Travail In Birth again until Christ Be Formed in you, (Gal 4:19.)
When we find that Peter, though he made less haste, is the first to enter into the sepulcher, let us learn from it that many persons have more given to them in the end than appears at the beginning. And, indeed, we sometimes see many, who were full of fervour at the commencement, give way when they come to the conflict; while others, who appeared to be slow and indolent, assume new courage when danger is at hand.
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
(3) The details of the visit of Peter and John (Joh. 20:3-10) are peculiar to this Gospel. St. Luke mentions the visit of Peter only (24:12, but comp. Joh. 20:23); but here we have the whole scene pictured with all the vividness and exactness of one who stated what he himself saw and took part in.
Peter therefore went forth, and . . . came to the sepulchre.In the original there is a change of tense here; the latter verb expressing the continuance of the journey towards the sepulchre.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
3. That other disciple John himself, as appears from a variety of passages.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
‘Peter therefore went forth, and the other disciple, and they went towards the tomb, and they both ran together, and the other disciple outran Peter and came first to the tomb, and stooping and looking in he sees the linen cloths lying, yet he did not go in.’
Mary’s news shook Peter and John and they immediately set out for the tomb to find out what had happened. They ran, and the running was the running of deeply perturbed men. What could this possibly mean? They were simply anxious to get there as quickly as possible. The writer vividly remembers the race to the tomb, and how he outran Peter, and yet on coming to the tomb and looking in, how he had been too awed to enter the tomb. Or it may be that he was too conscious that it would incur ritual defilement during the Passover (something instilled from birth in a family with high religious connections) if he entered the tomb. He remembers, however, how he caught a glimpse of the linen cloths which should have been on Jesus’ body. This is the vivid memory of an eyewitness who remembered every detail.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
Peter and John at the grave:
v. 3. Peter therefore went forth, and that other disciple, and came to the sepulcher.
v. 4. So they ran both together; and the other disciple did outrun Peter, and came first to the sepulcher.
v. 5. And he, stooping down and looking in, saw the linen clothes lying; yet went he not in.
v. 6. Then cometh Simon Peter, following him, and went into the sepulcher, and seeth the linen clothes lie,
v. 7. and the napkin that was about His head, not lying with the linen clothes, but wrapped together in a place by itself.
v. 8. Then went in also that other disciple, which came first to the sepulcher; and he saw and believed.
v. 9. For as yet they knew not the scripture, that He must rise again from the dead.
v. 10. Then the disciples went away again unto their own home. The message of Mary Magdalene stirred both Peter and John to quick action. They immediately made up their minds to find out the truth of this most astounding matter. At first the two disciples ran together, side by side. Soon, however, the younger and nimbler John outran Peter and arrived at the tomb first. But here he hesitated. He may have had some presentiment of the miracles which the disciples were soon to witness. He could not quite make up his mind to investigate more closely. He merely stooped down and peered into the semidarkness or the tomb. He could make out the linen grave-cloths with which the body had been wound, but nothing more; and he could not make up his mind to enter. But when impulsive Peter came along, there was not a moment’s hesitation. He went into the tomb; he viewed closely the grave cloths, assuring himself of their identity; he noted also the sudary, or napkin, which had been wrapped about the head of the Master. It struck him that this cloth was lying apart from the other linen wrappings, in a place by itself, and that it was folded or rolled together. All these significant discoveries he undoubtedly communicated to John, until the latter finally was induced also to enter and to see the evidence presented in the tomb with his own eyes. It was certainly surprising enough to find all the cloths laid aside with such apparent care, with no sign of haste, as would have been the case had the sepulcher been violated and the body stolen. What John saw drove him to one conclusion: Jesus Himself had laid aside these wrappings; He had risen; He had returned to life. And this conviction forced itself upon John, although he, with the other apostles, at that time did not have the proper understanding of the Scriptures concerning the resurrection of the Master, namely, that it was a necessary part of the scheme of redemption, that it must happen to complete the work for the salvation of mankind. And the same facts, as related by these faithful witnesses, without the slightest indication of having connived to cheat the world: the empty tomb, the careful order in the grave, the absence of any and every indication of robbery, should convince any reasonable critic of the resurrection of Jesus. That is the faith of the Christians; upon the miracle of Christ’s resurrection they place their own hope of salvation. The grave had to give up its prey. The victory of the grave is turned into defeat; the sting of death is taken away. Ours is the victory through Jesus Christ, our Lord. For the time being, at least, John was satisfied in his own mind that his Master had returned to life. And the time was coming when the last remnant of spiritual darkness was to be removed from his mind. Meanwhile the two disciples went away more slowly and thoughtfully from the grave than they had come. They returned home or to their place of lodging in Jerusalem. Note: Reasonable proofs of the resurrection of Christ can never give the heart the firm faith which is necessary for salvation. Under circumstances it is a good thing to be able to stop the mouths of the gainsayers by showing them the foolishness of their position; but the most convincing arguments are the statements of Scriptures themselves.
Fuente: The Popular Commentary on the Bible by Kretzmann
Joh 20:3. Peter therefore went forth, Peter and John only are mentioned in this relation; but the circumstances taken notice of by the other evangelists shew, that the apostles lodged all together in one house, as they used to do while their Master was alive: if so, it is reasonable to believe, that they all heard Mary Magdalene’s report, and were anxious to know the truth of it. But in their present situation, they would judge it imprudentto go out in a body to examine the matter, and would rather depute two of their number for that purpose. Accordingly we suppose that Peter and John went to the sepulchre by the advice and appointment of the rest. Instead of came to the sepulchre, the Greek should rather be rendered went. The fact mentioned by St. Luke (Luk 24:12.) has been commonly taken to be the same with this related by St. John; from which, however, Mr. West observes, it differs, among other things, in this material circumstance, viz. that whereas St. John expresslysays, that Peter went into the sepulchre, while he [John], who got thither first, contented himself with barely stooping down and looking into it, St. Luke tells us, that Peter stooping down and looking in, beheld the linen clothes laid by themselves, and departed. The original word , stooping down and looking in, used by both evangelists, and in the latter applied only to St. Peter, in the former only to St. John, is in St. John’s gospel plainly distinguished from the word , entered in, and set in direct opposition to it; and that not bythe force of etymology and construction only, but by some particulars resulting from the actions signified by those two words, which prove them to be distinct and different from each other. He who went into the sepulchre, saw more than he who, standing without, only stooped down and looked in. Thus Peter and John, when they entered into the sepulchre, saw not only the linen clothes lie, but the napkin that was about his head, not lying with the linen clothes, but wrapped together in a place by itself: but when they only stooped down and looked in, they could see only the linen clothes, as is evident from the words of St. John, Joh 20:3-8. Now these two actions being by these marks as clearly distinguished from each other in St. John, as the different places where they were performed can be by the terms entrance and inside of the sepulchre, and, as so distinguished, having been separately performed by that apostle, they must also necessarily be taken for separate and distinct actions, when related of St. Peter. And if it be reasonable to conclude from St. John’s account, that Peter, when he came with him to the sepulchre, did not stop at the entrance, stoop down and look in, but that he entered into it; it is no less reasonable to conclude from St. Luke’s narration, that when he came at the time mentioned by him, he did not enter in, but stooping down, beheld the linen clothes and departed; especially if the force of the Greek word (rendered by themselves) be considered, and the whole passage rendered, as it ought to have been, “Beheld the linen clothes only lying.” From all which it appears, that the fact related of St. Peter by St. Luke, and that here related by St. John, are separate and distinct facts, and not one and the same, as has been imagined. And as the facts were different, so did they take their rise from two different occasions; or in other words, as it is evident from all that has been just now said, that Peter went twice to the sepulchre, so there are two distinct reasons for his so doing, assigned in the gospels of Luke and John, viz. the report of Mary Magdalene, and that of Joanna and the other women. By the former having been told that the body of Jesus was taken out of the sepulchre, he ran in great haste to examine into the truth of that account; and in pursuance of this intent entered into the sepulchre, that hemight receive a thorough satisfaction upon that point. In the latter were two additional circumstances of importance, sufficient toawaken the curiosity of a less zealous disciple than St. Peter, whose affection for his Lord was like his natural temper, fervent and impetuous. When he heard therefore from Joanna and the other women of a vision of angels, who had appeared to them at the sepulchre, and informed them that Christ was risen, can we wonder at his running thither a second time, in hopes of receiving some confirmation of the truth of that report, which, though treated by the rest as an idle tale, he certainly then gave credit to, as the whole tenor of this passage implies? We say a second time, because had he gone for the first time upon the report of Joanna, he could have had no inducement to have gone to the sepulchre a second time from any thing he could learn from the first report made by Mary Magdalene, whose account contained nothing but what was implied in that given by Joanna and the other women. His behaviour also upon this occasion, when he only stooped down and looked into the sepulchre, so different from the former, when he entered into it, is very consonant with the purpose of this second visit, which was, to see if the angels who had appeared to the women at the sepulchre, were still there: this could as well be discovered by looking, as by going into the sepulchre, as is plain from the account given by Mary Magdalene, who, stooping down and looking in, saw two angels sitting, the one at the head, and the other at the feet, where the body of Jesus had lain. Having now proved that the visit of St. Peter to the sepulchre, mentioned by St. Luke, must have been his second visit, this passage is cleared from two objections which lay against it; one, that it did not agree with the relation given by St. John; and the other, that it disturbed and confounded the whole order of St. Luke’s narration. This point being settled, the reader will permit a few inferences in order to explain some passages in the preceding part of that chapter of St. Luke’s gospel. First then, it is plain from Joh 20:9 that St. Peter, after he had been with St. John and Mary Magdalene at the sepulchre, was now got among the other apostles and disciples, whom, in all probability, he and John had assembled upon the occasion of Mary Magdalene’s report. Peter, we say, and John had, in all probability, assembled the other apostles and disciples, to inform them of what they had heard from Mary Magdalene, and of their having been themselves at the sepulchre to examine into the truth of her report. For it is not to be imagined, that these apostles would not have immediately communicated to the rest an event of so much consequence to them all, as that of the Lord’s body being missing from the sepulchre. And as we now find them gathered together, and Peter with them, it is no unnatural supposition, that they had been summoned thither by Peter and John; at least their meeting together so early in the morning, is this way accounted for. Here then we see the reason of St. Luke’s naming Mary Magdalene, and the other Mary, among those who told these things to the apostles, Joh 20:10. For although these two women were with Joanna and her party, and, consequently, could not have joined them in relating to the apostles the vision of the two angels, &c. yet, as the account of their having found the stone rolled away, and the body of Jesus missing, had been reported from them by Peter and John to the other apostles before the return of Joanna from the sepulchre, St. Luke thought fit to set them down as evidences of some of the facts related by him; and indeed it was proper to produce the testimony of the two Mary’s concerning these facts, because they first went to the sepulchre, and first gave an account of those two particulars to the apostles. Secondly, It may hence be inferred, that the reports of the women were made separately and at different times. For if St. Peter went twice to the sepulchre, there must have been two distinct reasons for his so doing, the distinct reports of Mary Magdalene and of Joanna: and as there was a considerable interval between his first and second visit, a proportionable space must have intervened between the two reports. After Mary Magdalene’s report, he had been at the sepulchre, had returned thence to his own home, and was now got with the other apostles and disciples, whom, as we have said, he and St. John had in all probability called together, before Joanna, and the women with her, came to make theirs. Thirdly, as the reports were made at different times, and by different women; as the facts reported were different, and said to have happened all in the same place, viz. at the sepulchre, and as these facts must of consequence have happened at different times; it follows, that the women who reported those facts as happening in their presence, must have been at the sepulchre at different times. For had they been all present at each of these events, no reason can be assigned for their differing so widely in their relations; and pretty difficult will it be to account for their varying so much as to the time of their making their reports. Here then is a strong argument in favour of the women’s coming at different times to the sepulchre. Their different motives for going, some intending only to view the sepulchre, and others to embalm the body, is still another argument; and as this gave occasion to two appearances of Christ, and as many of the angels, it consequently multiplied the proofs and witnesses of the resurrection, and established this important truth upon stronger evidence.
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke
Joh 20:3-4 . Note the change of the aorists and pictorial imperfects; comp. Joh 4:30 .
Luk 24:12 mentions only Peter; but comp. also Luk 24:23 . See in loc. The more rapid running of John, and then, again, the greater boldness of Peter, Joh 20:5-6 , are individual traits so characteristically original, that here (comp. on Joh 18:15 ) it is highly inappropriate to charge the writer with an intention to place John before Peter (Strauss), or with the endeavour not to allow John, as opposed to Peter, to stand at least in the background (Baur). [260]
.] Love impelled both, and gave wings to their steps; but the youthful John ran more quickly forwards ( ., comp. Xen. Anab . iv. 7. 10) than Peter , whose consciousness of guilt (Lampe, Luthardt), especially after his bitter repentance, hardly restrained his running, as little as it withheld him, Joh 20:6 , from stepping before John. Euth. Zigabenus is simply correct: .
[260] This also in answer to Spth in Hilgenfeld, ZeitsChr. 1868, p. 189 f.
Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary
3 Peter therefore went forth, and that other disciple, and came to the sepulchre.
Ver. 3. Peter therefore went forth ] He despaired not though he had grievously fallen. The saints cannot fall so far, but that God’s supporting hand is ever under them. They may be doused over head and ears in the waters of iniquity, yea, sink twice to the bottom, yet shall rise again and recover; for the Lord puts under his hand; yea, as he that stumbleth, and yet falleth not, gets ground by his stumbling, so it is here.
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
3. ] Luk 24:12 , speaks only of Peter’s going. Meyer directs attention to the interchange of aorists and graphic imperfects in this and the following verse.
Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament
Joh 20:3 . At once the two men , singular and plural as frequently, aorist and imperfect, the one referring to the passing beyond the city wall, the other to the whole course from the house to the tomb.
Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson
comes = were coming.
to = unto. Greek. eis. App-104.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
3.] Luk 24:12, speaks only of Peters going. Meyer directs attention to the interchange of aorists and graphic imperfects in this and the following verse.
Fuente: The Greek Testament
Joh 20:3. , went forth) from the city.
Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament
Joh 20:3
Joh 20:3
Peter therefore went forth and the other disciple, and they went toward the tomb.-Peter seems to have led in the start with his characteristic promptness. John first reached the tomb, but went not in. His timidity likely caused him to pause at the entrance, but he looked in and saw the cloths lying.
Fuente: Old and New Testaments Restoration Commentary
Luk 24:12
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
3
The other disciple was the one whom Jesus loved (chapter 21:20, 24), who was John. The two disciples started running toward the sepulchre.
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary
Joh 20:3. Peter therefore went forth, and the other disciple, and they came towards the sepulchre. The word rendered went forth is so often used in this Gospel in regard to the most solemn events in the life of Jesus, as implying a Divine mission, the accomplishment of a Divine purpose, that we may well doubt whether the Evangelist does not here employ the word in the same pregnant sense. It is possible also that there is design in the manner in which the names of the two apostles are introduced: not Peter and the other disciple went forth, but Peter went forth, and the other disciple. The other examples of this construction in the Fourth Gospel tend to show that here John intends to set forth Peter as the main person in the narrative: thus the whole ground is cut away from those who hold that the design of this section is to bring the other disciple into peculiar prominence.
Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament
Here observe, 1. How Peter and John, moved with Mary Magdalene’s words, They have taken away the Lord, &c. do run to the sepulchre to satisfy themselves in the truth of it. Such as sincerely love Christ upon the least intimation that he is missing, bestir themselves with great activity and diligence, that they may see him, or hear of him: Peter and John run to the sepulchre, to see what was become of their holy Master.
Observe, 2. That there was such a clear evidence about Christ’s grave, as made it apparent that he was indeed risen from the dead, and not conveyed away either by friends or foes; it cannot be supposed that any of his friends (could they have come at it) would have so handled his holy body, as to carry it away naked; and as for his foes, had they stole away the body, they would never have left the fine linen behind them.
Observe, 3. That when Christ arose from the grave, he left his grave-clothes behind him; whereas when Lazarus arose, he came forth with his grave-clothes about him.
It teaches us, that Christ rose never to die more, but to live and reign for ever; therefore he left his grave-clothes in the grave, as never to make use of them more. But Lazarus was to die again, death once more was to have dominion over him; he therefore came forth with his grave-clothes about him.
Observe lastly, how ignorant the apostles were of the doctrine of Christ’s resurrection and of the holy scriptures, which declared he was to rise again from the dead: They knew not the scriptures: that is, they did not heed and regard them, ponder them in their hearts, and feed upon them by faith.
Fuente: Expository Notes with Practical Observations on the New Testament
Verse 3
And came to the sepulchre; after the party mentioned by Luke had gone away.
Fuente: Abbott’s Illustrated New Testament
The detail of John outrunning Peter to the tomb was probably just confirmation of an eyewitness report. It also shows that these disciples had not removed Jesus’ body. There is no basis in the text for allegorizing these men and making them stand for the Gentile church and the Jewish church, as some theologians have done. [Note: E.g., Bultmann, p. 685.]