Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Mark 16:8
And they went out quickly, and fled from the sepulcher; for they trembled and were amazed: neither said they any thing to any [man]; for they were afraid.
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, “forsoe 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.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
8. And they went out quickly, andfled from the sepulchre: for they trembled and were amazed“fortremor and amazement seized them.”
neither said they anything toany man; for they were afraidHow intensely natural and simpleis this!
Appearances of Jesus after HisResurrection (Mr16:9-18).
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
And they went out quickly,…. Out of the sepulchre, into which they had been, to see where Christ lay, as invited by the angel, Mr 16:6. The word “quickly”, is not read in the Vulgate Latin, Syriac, Arabic, Persic, and Ethiopic versions: “which when they heard”; that is, when they heard the angel’s and instructions, immediately they went out:
and fled from the sepulchre; as surprised and affrighted:
for they trembled and were amazed; at what they saw and heard, and yet this dread and fear were mixed with joy at the news of Christ’s resurrection, as Matthew relates, Mt 28:8.
Neither said they any thing to any man; they met with by the way, till they came to the disciples; to whom they told all, otherwise they would not have acted according to the angel’s orders
for they were afraid; not only affrighted with what they had seen and heard, but the were afraid to tell any but the disciples of these things, for fear of the Jews; lest they should be thought to have stolen the body of Christ, and so be taken up on that account, and punished.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
Had come upon them ( ). Imperfect tense, more exactly,
held them, was holding them fast .
Trembling and astonishment ( , trembling and ecstasy), Mark has it, while Mt 28:8 has “with fear and great joy” which see for discussion. Clearly and naturally their emotions were mixed.
They said nothing to any one ( ). This excitement was too great for ordinary conversation. Mt 28:8 notes that they “ran to bring his disciples word.” Hushed to silence their feet had wings as they flew on.
For they were afraid ( ). Imperfect tense. The continued fear explains their continued silence. At this point Aleph and B, the two oldest and best Greek manuscripts of the New Testament, stop with this verse. Three Armenian MSS. also end here. Some documents (cursive 274 and Old Latin k) have a shorter ending than the usual long one. The great mass of the documents have the long ending seen in the English versions. Some have both the long and the short endings, like L, Psi, 0112, 099, 579, two Bohairic MSS; the Harklean Syriac (long one in the text, short one in the Greek margin). One Armenian MS. (at Edschmiadzin) gives the long ending and attributes it to Ariston (possibly the Aristion of Papias). W (the Washington Codex) has an additional verse in the long ending. So the facts are very complicated, but argue strongly against the genuineness of verses 9-20 of Mark 16. There is little in these verses not in Mt 28. It is difficult to believe that Mark ended his Gospel with verse 8 unless he was interrupted. A leaf or column may have been torn off at the end of the papyrus roll. The loss of the ending was treated in various ways. Some documents left it alone. Some added one ending, some another, some added both. A full discussion of the facts is found in the last chapter of my Studies in Mark’s Gospel and also in my Introduction to the Textual Criticism of the New Testament, pp. 214-16.
Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament
Quickly. Omitted by best texts.
Astonishment [] . See on Mr 5:42.
Afraid [] . 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.
Fuente: Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament
1) “And they went out quickly,” (kai ekselthousai) “And they went out of and away from the tomb,” or going out quickly, in haste, overwhelmed with fear, hope, and joy, as they had been instructed to do, Mat 28:7.
2) “And fled from the sepulchre; (ephugon apo tou mnemeiou) “They (simply) fled from the tomb area,” to tell the good news. The angel’s “fear not” had failed to calm them, Mat 27:5; Mat 27:8.
3) “For they trembled and were amazed:” (eichen gar autas tromos kat ekstasis) “Because they held (were gripped by) trembling and bewilderment,” caused by fear that left them in a stupor, almost out of their wits, both they and the “keepers” of the tomb, the Roman Guard, Mat 28:4; Luk 24:5.
4) “Neither said they any thing to any man;” (kai oudeni ouden eipan) “And they told no one any thing at all,” along the way, for it was to the disciples, not the wayside people, they were to bear the resurrection news first.
5) “For they were afraid,” (ephobounto gar) “For they were fearful,” filled with, or overcome with fear, and ran to do specifically what the angel of the Lord had charged them to do, Mat 28:7. And here abruptly ends the authentic Gospel of Mark according to the oldest manuscripts, and what appears to be the best of scholars. From Mar 16:9-20, is not-in either of the two oldest Greek manuscripts (Sinaiticus and Vaticanus), which are believed to have been added by some scribe as a matter of supplemental record.
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
(8) They trembled and were amazed.Literally, trembling and amazement seized them.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
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.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
‘And they went out and fled from the tomb. For trembling and astonishment had come on them. And they said nothing to anyone for they were awestruck.’
The effect on the women was predictable. They had been living with nerves stretched for some time. They were in a state of fear and uncertainty. And now this remarkable news from a stranger whom they did not know had taken them totally aback. It would only be afterwards that they would realise who and what he was.
So they panicked and fled, overwhelmed by what they had witnessed. And they were so awestruck that they did not even talk to each other, or anyone they met, as they hurried on their way. And as they hurried on, their minds would be in a whirl. He was not there. He was risen. Whatever could it mean? They must reach the disciples and tell them.
This idea of ‘fear’ or ‘awe’ at seeing what has happened has been a feature of the Gospel. See Mar 4:40-41 with regard to the stilling of the storm; Mar 6:50 with regard to His walking on the water; Mar 10:32 with regard to His determination to get to Jerusalem; and compare Mar 5:15; Mar 5:33; where others were afraid at what they saw. It is a sign of the unexpected, and of the truly awesome which they cannot understand.
It is Matthew who tells us the sequel, (his account follows a similar pattern to that of Mark), that as they hurried to tell the disciples Jesus Himself met with them, and as they worshipped Him, He told them to do what the angel had said and inform His disciples that they were to go to Galilee where they would see Him (Mat 28:8-10).
And it is Luk 24:11 which tells us that their words were to the disciples as idle tales so that they would not move from Jerusalem, with the result that the resurrection appearances had to begin in Jerusalem. This was Jesus’ gracious response to His disciples who did not believe right to the end until they were left with no choice. A gap between Luk 24:25-26 may be the period when they went to Galilee (Mat 28:16-20; John 21).
And with Mar 16:8 the Gospel suddenly ends. Perhaps Mark ended here and intended a sequel similar in intent to Acts but never had time to present it. Perhaps he was suddenly arrested and taken away to prison and to death. Perhaps he was struck down with illness and was never able to write another word. Perhaps he simply had a fatal accident. No one knows. But most accept that he did not intend it finally to end here without even one resurrection appearance, and this is confirmed by a comparison with Matthew’s Gospel where the similar account continues.
Whatever happened must have been outside his control. For the words ‘they said nothing to anyone’ could be true in the short term, but where else did the information about what had happened to them come from? And even speaking naturally no one can believe that a group of women would keep such a secret to themselves all their lives, even if we did not have the other Gospels to tell us otherwise. It would be against nature. And Mark knew from the traditions preserved in the churches that it was not so. Thus those words required a follow up. And this Mark did not give us. It was left to another to pen the final summary.
The Final Summary (Mar 16:9-20).
This final summary was not included at all in the important ancient manuscripts Aleph and B, and in various widespread versions. It was not accepted by either Eusebius or Jerome because it was not in the ancient Greek manuscripts they had available. But Irenaeus (late second century AD) quotes it as by Mark, and it was known to Tatian and probably to Justin Martyr (both mid second century AD). It was included in A, D, W, Theta, (also f1 and f13), as an attachment so that it is supported by strong and varied manuscript evidence. Another shorter ending was attached to some manuscripts together with the longer ending, and stood by itself in a few lesser manuscripts and in some versions. It probably once circulated widely.
No attempt was made to ensure continuity of the longer ending with Mar 16:8 although the shorter ending was clearly written for that purpose. The longer ending no doubt once stood by itself. It would seem mainly to be based on the tradition behind the other Gospels and Acts but with a further ancient piece of tradition also included. It presented what Mark lacked, descriptions of resurrection appearances. However the emphasis on the unbelief of the disciples suggests that it was based on very early tradition. And this is backed up by the fact that it is so like the Gospel material in contrast to later writings. It bears the mark of being primitive.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
Mar 16:8. Neither said they any thing to any man; If these words, agreeably to what we have observed on Mar 16:5 be construed to signify, that they did not tell, while their terror and amazement continued, what they had seen and heard to some whom they saw as they were flying from the sepulchre, it seems rational to conclude, that these were some of the disciples to whom they were ordered to deliver the message of the angel, and to whom they would probably have delivered it, had they not been under the greater perturbation of mind. For had the persons whom they saw, been any other than the disciples of Jesus, it is not likely that St. Mark would have taken any notice of their not saying any thing to any man; since it is reasonable to imagine that they would not, even though they had not been affrighted, have told the message of the angel to any but disciples. And as the time of Peter and John’s running to the sepulchre, upon the first report of Mary Magdalene, coincides with that of these women flying from it, it is no improbable conjecture, that these were the persons whom they saw in their way, at a distance perhaps, and coming by a different road to the sepulchre; especially if it be considered, that as the words of St. Mark, neither said they, &c. seem to carry with them an imputation of neglect upon these women,though he at the same time accounts for and excuses it, by adding, for they were afraid;so the same evangelist has before acquainted us, Mar 16:7 that they were ordered by the angel to deliver the message he gave, to Peter in particular. See for an explanation of the following verses, the passages referred to in the marginal references.
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke
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.
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
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.
[ 9 20. ] APPEARANCES OF JESUS AFTER HIS RESURRECTION: HIS ASCENSION. An addition to the narrative of a compendious and supplementary character, bearing traces of another hand from that which has shaped the diction and construction of the rest of the Gospel.
The reasons for and against this inference will be found in the var. readd. and the course of this note, and a general statement of them at the end of it.
Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament
Mar 16:8 . , going out of the sepulchre into which they had entered (Mar 16:5 ). , they fled , from the scene of such surprises. The angel’s words had failed to calm them; the event altogether too much for them. , trembling, caused by fear, and stupor, as of one out of his wits. = “tremor corporis”: = “stupor animi,” Bengel. : an unqualified statement as it stands here, no “on the way,” such as harmonists supply: “obvio scilicet,” Grotius. 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. , , 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 (sc. iv.), now at St. Petersburg, published in facsimile type by its discoverer, Tischendorf, in 1862.
[165] Codex Vaticanus (sc. iv.), published in photographic facsimile in 1889 under the care of the Abbate Cozza-Luzi.
[166] Sin. Sinaitic Syriac (recently discovered).
Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson
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.
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.
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.
Fuente: Expositions Of Holy Scripture by Alexander MacLaren
from = away from. Greek. apo. App-104.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
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 writers information respecting the other appearances of the Lord.
[9-20.] APPEARANCES OF JESUS AFTER HIS RESURRECTION: HIS ASCENSION. An addition to the narrative of a compendious and supplementary character, bearing traces of another hand from that which has shaped the diction and construction of the rest of the Gospel.
The reasons for and against this inference will be found in the var. readd. and the course of this note, and a general statement of them at the end of it.
Fuente: The Greek Testament
Mar 16:8. , trembling) of body. Comp. 1Co 2:3, note.-, stupor [amazement]) of mind.
Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament
they went: Mat 28:8, Luk 24:9-11, Luk 24:22-24
for they trembled: Mar 16:5, Mar 16:6, Luk 24:37
neither: 2Ki 4:29, Luk 10:4
Reciprocal: Dan 10:11 – I stood Mat 28:7 – go Joh 4:28 – General
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
8
The whole scene was so unusual and solemn that the women were virtually overcome, and were speechless for the time being.
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary
Mar 16:8. And fled from the tomb. In a tumult of excitement.
For trembling and astonishment possessed them. This was the reason of their fleeing.
And they said nothing to any one; for they were afraid. Matthew twice (Mat 28:8; Mat 28:11) speaks of their going to deliver the message, hence some explain this clause: they told no one by the way. But Marks words mean that they did not, immediately at least, deliver the message. The fear spoken of by Matthew is made prominent here; joined with the fright from what they had seen was a fear that their reports would be (as they actually were) deemed idle tales by the disciples (Luk 24:11). In this state of indecision, as they ran back, the Lord meets them (Mat 28:9-10), overcomes their fear (Be not afraid, He says), and they go on with the message, now coming from the Lord Himself. The remarkable events of that day produced mingled and indeed confused emotions. To that of fear and indecision, Mark gives prominence. Even these faithful women were full of doubt: a fact that upsets all theories resembling the Jewish falsehood, mentioned by Matthew. Strangest of all, however, would be the sudden ending of the Gospel at this point of indecision. See next section.
Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament
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 Lords 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 Marks 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 Matthews, 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 Marks 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 worlds 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.
Fuente: William Godbey’s Commentary on the New Testament
The women were so upset by what had happened that when they left the tomb they told no one what they had seen-at first. However, it was not long before they were spreading the news that Jesus was alive again (Mat 28:8; Luk 24:9).
"The ending of Mark . . . punctures any self-confident superiority the reader might feel, for the ending turns irony back upon the reader. Throughout the story when Jesus commanded people to be quiet they talked anyway. But at the end when the young man commands the women to go tell the message-the crucial message-in an ironic reversal they are silent. The fear of the women dominates the ending of the story. At this point fear forces the reader to face once again the fear in his or her own situation. No matter how much the reader ’knows’ or ’sees,’ he or she still must make the hard choice in the end-whether to be silent like the women or to proclaim the good news in the face of persecution and possible death." [Note: Ibid., pp. 61-62.]
"With his closing comment he [Mark] wished to say that ’the gospel of Jesus the Messiah’ (ch. Mar 1:1) is an event beyond human comprehension and therefore awesome and frightening. In this case, contrary to general opinion, ’for they were afraid’ is the phrase most appropriate to the conclusion of the Gospel. The abruptness with which Mark concluded his account corresponds to the preface of the Gospel where the evangelist begins by confronting the reader with the fact of revelation in the person of John and Jesus (Ch. Mar 1:1-13)." [Note: Lane, p. 592.]