Verse 12. Then arose Peter] John went with him, and got to the tomb before him. See Joh 20:2-3.

The linen clothes laid by themselves] Or, The linen clothes only. This was the fine linen which Joseph of Arimathea bought, and wrapped the body in: Mr 15:46. Small as this circumstance may at first view appear, it is, nevertheless, no mean proof of the resurrection of our Lord. Had the body been stolen away, all that was wrapped about it would have been taken away with it; as the delay which must have been occasioned by stripping it might have led to the detection of the theft; nor would the disciples have run such a risk if they had stolen him, when stripping the body could have answered no end. This circumstance is related still more particularly by John, Joh 20:5-7. Peter seeth the linen clothes lie, and the napkin that was about his head not lying with the linen clothes, but WRAPPED together in a place by itself. All these circumstances prove that the thing was done leisurely; order and regularity being observed through the whole. Hurry and confusion necessarily mark every act of robbery.

Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible

12. Peter, &c.(See on Joh20:1-10).

Lu24:13-35. CHRISTAPPEARS TO THE TWOGOING TO EMMAUS.

Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible

Then arose Peter,…. Who, though he did not believe the report made, yet listened to it, and was alarmed and aroused by it, and was willing to know the truth of it:

and ran unto the sepulchre; not alone, but with John, being in haste to be satisfied, how things were:

and stooping down;

[See comments on Mr 16:5].

[See comments on Joh 20:5].

he beheld the linen clothes laid by themselves; in which the body of Jesus was wrapped; these lay by themselves, without the body, in one place; and the napkin about his head was wrapped together, and lay in another place by itself: so that it was a plain case, the body was not stolen, nor taken away; for neither friends, nor foes, would have taken the pains, or have lost so much time, as to have stripped the body, but would rather have carried off the clothes along with it. The Alexandrian copy leaves out the word , alone, or by themselves:

and departed; from the sepulchre to Jerusalem, to John’s house there:

wondering in himself at that which was come to pass; that the body should not be there, and yet the clothes should remain; he could not tell what to make of it. As for a resurrection, he had no notion of that, and yet could not account for the removal of the body, either by friends or foes, and the clothes left behind.

Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible

This entire verse is a Western non-interpolation. This incident is given in complete form in Joh 18:2-10 and most of the words in this verse are there also. It is of a piece with many items in this chapter about which it is not easy to reach a final conclusion.

Stooping and looking in (). First aorist active participle of , to stoop besides and peer into. Old verb used also in John 20:5; John 20:11; Jas 1:25; 1Pet 1:12.

By themselves (). Without the body.

To his home ( ). Literally, “to himself.”

Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament

Stooping down. See on looketh, Jas 1:25. The best texts omit this verse.

Clothes. Not garments, but the linen bandages in which the body had been rolled. So Rev., cloths.

Fuente: Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament

1)“Then arose Peter, and ran unto the sepulchre;” (ho de Petros anastas edramen epi to mnemeion) “Then Peter stood up and ran until he came upon the place where the sepulchre was,” with the apostle John who outran him, Joh 20:3-4. They ran in wonder, in haste, and in hope.

2) “And stooping down,” (kai parakupsas) “And he stooped down,” to look thru a small window, into the sepulchre proper, making careful examination.

3) “And beheld the linen clothes laid by themselves,” (blepei ta othonia keimena mona) “And he saw the linen clothes laid alone,” by themselves, Joh 20:5-8. They were laid in order, no hurry, and the napkin was folded, Joh 20:7. Thieves do not take such care to arrange things left behind.

4) “And departed,” (kai apelthe) “And he went off and away,” from the place, to his own residence or temporary home in Jerusalem, Joh 20:9-10.

5) “Wondering in himself at that which was come to pass.” (pros heauton thaumazon to gegonos) “Marveling to himself at what had occurred,” for as yet they did not understand the scripture, that He must rise again, Joh 20:10.

Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary

Luk 24:12

. And Peter arose, and ran to the tomb. I have no doubt that Luke here inverts the order of the narrative, as may be readily inferred from the words of John, (Joh 20:3😉 and, in my opinion, the word ran ( ἔδραμεν) might justly be rendered as a pluperfect tense, had run. All who possess a tolerable acquaintance with Scripture are aware that it is customary with Hebrew writers to relate afterwards those occurrences which had been omitted in their proper place. Luke mentions this circumstance for the purpose of showing more strongly the obstinacy of the apostles ill despising the words of the women, when Peter had already seen the empty grave, and had been compelled to wonder at an evident proof of the resurrection.

Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary

(12) Then arose Peter.See Notes on Joh. 20:3-10. The fact of Peters visit to the sepulchre is common to St. Luke and St. John, but the former does not mention the companionship of the beloved disciple. On the assumption of Joanna being St. Lukes informant, we can understand that she told what she remembered, Peters impetuous rush to the sepulchre, and did not notice that he was followed by his friend.

Stooping down.The word was sometimes used alone, as in Jas. 1:25, 1Pe. 1:12, for the act of stooping down to look.

Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)

146. PETER AND JOHN VISIT THE SEPULCHRE, Luk 24:12 .

Given more fully in Joh 20:3-10.

Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

‘But Peter arose, and ran to the tomb, and stooping and looking in, he sees the linen cloths by themselves, and he departed to his home, wondering at what had happened.’

Peter, however, (at some stage – the account is telescoped) ran to the tomb, and stooping and looking in saw the linen clothes that had covered Jesus lying by themselves, and departed for his own home (his lodgings in Jerusalem) wondering at all that was said to have happened. This is the same incident as we find in Joh 20:1-10, tacked on here without giving a full explanation of the background so as to parallel the women’s discovery in the tomb. Note how in Luk 24:24 Luke speaks of ‘they’, probably with this incident in mind, thus indicating that Peter thus had someone else with him (who, as we know, was John). Impulsive Peter, remembering what Jesus had said, just wondered whether there might be something in what he had been told (as it turns out from John by Mary Magdalene). And when he found that the tomb was empty, and that Jesus’ grave clothes were still there it made him wonder even more. But he was still not wholly convinced.

We note that here, as with those on the way to Emmaus there is a gradual building up from total scepticism to a feeling of uncertainty. They are not going to be convinced easily.

As the chiasmus reveals, Luke commenced this passage with the women looking into the empty tomb, and now it ends with Peter looking into the empty tomb, the former soon having been brought to belief by the angels, while the latter was left wondering whether there might be something in what they had said, having not yet come to belief. In typical Lucan fashion Luke thus makes clear how important the women are in the life of the people of God.

There is a slight question mark over whether Luk 24:12 should be omitted, but the evidence for inclusion is strong, including p75, Aleph, B, W, Theta, 0124, f1, f13 and most latin, syriac and coptic versions, a very powerful combination. It is omitted by the Greek/old latin MS D/d, and old latin versions a, b, e, l, r1 and Marcion. But we know that the Greek text of D was sometimes changed in order to agree with the old latin version d with which it was written in parallel and thus it may well be only the old latin versions that really exclude it. Its inclusion everywhere else makes the case for its inclusion almost certain, otherwise we would have expected some evidence of its absence elsewhere. Interpolating into the sources of every known MS but D would quite frankly have been impossible unless it the interpolation was so early that it was almost written at the same time as the original, the original then being sent to the area where the old latin versions were produced. But in the nature of the omissions that is unlikely

Furthermore in view of the important place of the verse in the chiasmus, and the fact that its omission is explicable in terms of its being seen as demeaning Peter in comparison with the women, and possibly also as contradicting Luk 24:34, (both of which might have been seen as good reason for omitting it), we should almost certainly include it, especially as Luk 24:24 cross references to it.

Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett

Luk 24:12. Then arose Peter, But Peter arose. On this transaction we shall enlarge, when we come to John 20.

Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke

12 Then arose Peter, and ran unto the sepulchre; and stooping down, he beheld the linen clothes laid by themselves, and departed, wondering in himself at that which was come to pass.

Ver. 12. And stooping down ] Obstipo capite et propenso collo. We need not doubt therefore about the certainty of this history of Christ’s resurrection.

Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)

12. ] This verse cannot well be interpolated from Joh 20 , for the only reason for the insertion would be, to tally with Luk 24:24 , and in that case it certainly would not mention Peter alone . That Cleopas says, Luk 24:24 , some of [ them that were with ] us went, &c. must not be pressed too much, although it does certainly look as if he knew of more than one (see note there). The similarity in diction to Joh 20:5 ; Joh 20:10 ( , and . ., being common to the two passages) indicates a common origin, and, if I mistake not, one distinct from the rest of the narrative in this chapter. The meaning of , as belonging to and not to , is fixed by the expression in John, l. c.

Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament

Luk 24:12 . Peter runs to the sepulchre . This verse, omitted in [202] and some copies of the old Latin version, is regarded by some as an interpolation. For Rohrbach’s theory vide notes on the appendix to Mark’s Gospel (Luk 16:9-20 ). , rising up, suggesting prompt action, like the man; as if after all he at last thought there might be something in the women’s story. may mean: stooping down so as to look in, but in many passages in which the verb is used the idea of stooping is not suggested, but rather that of taking a stolen hasty glance with outstretched neck. Kypke gives as its meaning in profane writers exserto capite prospicere (examples there). Field ( Ot. Nor. ) quotes with approval these words of Casaubon against Baronius (p. 693): “Male etiam probat humilitatem sepulchri ex eo quod dicitur Joannes se inclinasse ; nam Graeca veritas habet , quod sive de fenestra sumatur sive de janua, nullam inclinationem corporis designat, qualem sibi finxit B., sed protensionem colli potius cum modica corporis incurvatione”. , alone, without the body. (or ): most connect this with = went away to his home, as in Joh 20:10 ( , Euthy. Zig.). The Vulgate connects with = secum mirans , and is followed by not a few, including Theophyl. and Grotius; Wolf also, who lays stress on the fact that the ancient versions except the Coptic so render. , wondering; for, remarks Euthy., he knew that the body had not been carried off, for then the clothes would have been carried off also.

[202] Codex Bezae

Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson

and ran. Note the six things Peter did here, “arose”, “ran”, “stooped”, “beheld”, “departed”, “wondered,”; and the one thing he did not do, “believed”.

beheld. Greek blepo. App-133.

laid by themselves. Important evidence in view of Mat 28:12-15.

departed, &c. = went away to (Greek. pros. App-104.)his own [house] wondering.

Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics

12.] This verse cannot well be interpolated from John 20, for the only reason for the insertion would be, to tally with Luk 24:24, and in that case it certainly would not mention Peter alone. That Cleopas says, Luk 24:24, some of [them that were with] us went, &c. must not be pressed too much, although it does certainly look as if he knew of more than one (see note there). The similarity in diction to Joh 20:5; Joh 20:10 ( , and . ., being common to the two passages) indicates a common origin, and, if I mistake not, one distinct from the rest of the narrative in this chapter. The meaning of , as belonging to and not to , is fixed by the expression in John, l. c.

Fuente: The Greek Testament

Luk 24:12. , departed to his own home[270]) As to the matter of fact, comp. Luk 24:34; as to the phrase, comp. the note on Joh 20:10 [ , the disciples departed to their own homes].

[270] As the French chez lui. But Dab Euseb. Can. omit Luk 24:12, which may have come from Joh 20:4-6 : Tisch. omits it. However ABc Vulg;. Memph. Theb. retain the verse. B omits , and A and Vulg. MS. Amiat. omit. . Lachm. brackets the verse. Vulg. and Engl. Vers. connect not with , but with , wondering in (with) himself.-E. and T.

Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament

Joh 20:3-10

Reciprocal: Mat 28:6 – Come Luk 24:24 – went Joh 20:1 – cometh

Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge

2

This event will be commented upon at John twentieth chapter.

Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary

Luk 24:12. But Peter arose. Then is incorrect, for it is not implied that this happened after the women returned. The unbelief just mentioned is contrasted with the conduct of impulsive Peter. Luke does not mention John, but Luk 24:24 shows that he does not exclude him. The details agree so closely with Johns account (chap. Luk 20:2-10) that we must suppose the two Evangelists speak of the same visit, which took place before the return of the whole company of women. Luke does not mention the appearance to Peter at this point, but in Luk 24:34. It is his habit to go on with one line of thought, and afterwards to insert an omitted detail, in logical, rather than chronological, connection.

Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament

JOHN AND PETER RUN TO THE SEPULCHER

Luk 24:12. And Peter, rising, ran to the sepulcher, and sees the grave-clothes lying alone, and departed, wondering to himself over that which has taken place. Joh 20:3-10 : Then Peter and the other disciple went out, and were coming to the sepulcher. And the two were running together; and the other disciple was running before more rapidly than Peter, and came first to the sepulcher, and looking down, he sees the grave-clothes lying; indeed he did not go in. Then Simon Peter comes, following him, and went into the sepulcher, and sees the grave-clothes lying, and the napkin, which was upon His head, not lying with the grave- clothes, but rolled up separate in one place. Then when he went in, and the other disciple, the one having come first to the sepulcher, he both saw and believed; for they did not yet understand the Scripture, that it behooved Him to rise from the dead. Then they departed again to their lodging. When the women, who had gone at the early dawn to finish the embalmment of the body, came with the thrilling news of His resurrection, being literally wild with enthusiasm and excitement, the apostles signally recoiled from the reception of a message so wonderful and paradoxical, and at the same time so infinitely go, inspiring, and electrifying, that their faith swooned away into a delectable rhapsody, culminating in the impression that as it was too good to be true, it was certainly a dream, flitting by in their waking moments, the grasping of which would but prove like the fugitive vision of an ambrosial night. They were afraid to venture out and exercise appropriative faith. Peter and John, however, who seem as a rule to have been blessed with deeper spiritual insight than their comrades, credited the paradoxical report of the women enough to set out at once for the sepulcher, running with all their might, hopeful to arrive on the spot before the delectable scenes described by the women should all have evanesced. John, the youngest of the twelve, in perfect health, and naturally superlatively nimble and active, outran Peter, arriving some time before the senior apostle. Looking into the sepulcher, he sees it vacant, the grave-clothes lying, but does not venture in. Meanwhile, bold old Peter, two hundred yards behind, rushed on, arrived at the sepulcher, looked in, and, unhesitatingly entering it, searched everything diligently, and coming out, certified that He was not there. Consequently these two were constrained to credit the wonderful report of the women.

Fuente: William Godbey’s Commentary on the New Testament

24:12 {3} Then arose Peter, and ran unto the sepulchre; and {b} stooping down, he beheld the linen clothes laid by themselves, and departed, wondering in himself at that which was come to pass.

(3) Christ uses the incredulity of his disciples for the fuller setting forth of the truth of his resurrection, lest they should seem to have believed that too lightly which they preached afterward to all the world.

(b) As it were holding down his head, and bowing his neck, looked diligently in.

Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes

Some ancient manuscripts omit this verse, but the evidence is good that it was part of Luke’s original Gospel. Luke reported that Peter ran to the tomb to check out the women’s story. He did not mention the other disciple who accompanied Peter (Joh 20:6-7) probably because Luke regarded Peter as the leader of the disciples in His Gospel (cf. Luk 5:1-11). He, too, found it empty of Jesus’ body. Only the linen strips of cloth with which Joseph of Arimathea had wrapped Jesus’ corpse remained.

Peter’s reaction of returning to his home (i.e., lodging place) may indicate that he did not understand what had happened. If he had understood, he would have returned to the other disciples, assuming they were not all staying in the same house. Luke used the Greek word thaumazon ("marveling" or "wondering") to express his lack of comprehension. He neither believed nor disbelieved that Jesus had risen yet. Peter was Luke’s second witness to the resurrection following the women.

Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)