The Empty Tomb


#1

What did John believe?


#2

I don’t understand the difference between the two poll questions.
Mary’s report was that Jesus had risen so you are asking if he believed Jesus had risen or Jesus had risen.
If I am missing some nuance here please elaborate.


#3

Mary first came to the disciples and told them the body was stolen.


#4

None of the disciples knew what to make of Mary’s first report which is why Peter and John ran to the tomb.
Even when they saw inside they (and that includes John) did not believe Jesus was risen.

St Augustine’s words:

Ver. 8. He saw and believed. He did not yet believe that Jesus was risen from the dead, because he was still ignorant that he was to rise from the dead. For although the apostles had so often heard their divine Master speak in the most plain terms of his resurrection, still being so much accustomed to parables, they did not understand, and imagined something else was meant by these words. (St. Augustine, tract. 120. in Joan.)


#5

Not necessarily. The sight of the grave clothing would be enough proof. If the body was stolen, then the clothing wouldn’t be at the tomb


#6

You asked if we thought John believed Jesus was risen when he went into the tomb. My answer is no he did not believe that in the tomb.

I agree with what St Augustine said.

I don’t agree with your view that because the clothing was there that that proved to those in the tomb Jesus was risen. Saying the clothing was there is not proof of anything.


#7

Mary’s report was that Our Lord’s body had been** taken from the tomb**, not that He had risen.

John 20:2 says:
“…They have taken the Lord out of the tomb, and we do not know where they have laid Him.”

So when John entered the tomb, the penny must finally have dropped: that Our Lord had indeed risen. That was the only thing left to believe following Mary’s mistaken report.

It’s not until verse 16 that Mary realises the truth, when Jesus calls her by her name.


#8

Scripture does not support that opinion. I think St Augustine was pretty clued up on Scripture and he said that in the tomb John did not yet believe Jesus had risen.
If you are saying St Augustine was wrong then I think you need more than speculation to prove he was wrong.


#9

I agree! :thumbsup:

No one seems to care what the following verse (9) says:

“Then went in also that other disciple, which came first to the sepulchre, and he saw, and believed. 9 For as yet they knew not the scripture, that he must rise again from the dead.”

IOW, verse 9 EXPLICITLY STATES that “they” (Peter and John) “knew not the scripture, that he must rise again from the dead”

It is verse 9 which causes St. Augustine to say that they still did not believe Jesus had risen. It is NOT some conjecture on St. Augustine’s part. It is SELF-EVIDENT from the very words of Scripture… :rolleyes:

Today people have lost the ability to read with comprehension, even things like message board posts. Do you think they have any better skills when reading Sacred Scripture? :confused:


#10

i was quite aware of the following verse, and it was problematical.

It is verse 9 which causes St. Augustine to say that they still did not believe Jesus had risen. It is NOT some conjecture on St. Augustine’s part. It is SELF-EVIDENT from the very words of Scripture… :rolleyes:

As below.

Today people have lost the ability to read with comprehension, even things like message board posts. Do you think they have any better skills when reading Sacred Scripture? :confused:

It might pay you to lay off the condescension. No one likes being mocked! So, beware of glass houses! The confused smiley could boomerang.

The Navarre Bible Commentary would disagree with you.

It’s** 3:00AM** here, so later, if ever…except: what did John mean when he said he believed? “…and he saw and believed.” Believed in what?
It’s not quite as “SELF-EVIDENT” as you suggest.


#11

Also, if the Shroud of Turin is the burial cloth of Christ, the blood stains would have been further proof.


#12

re: “What did John believe once he saw the empty tomb?”

I don’t see where John is mentioned. I wonder what the OP has in mind?


#13

John’s the beloved disciple.


#14

Janes248,
re: “John’s the beloved disciple.”

I’m not aware of any scripture that says that. What do you have in mind?


#15

John identifies himself as the “beloved disciple” when he closes his Gospel. Jn 21:20-24.


#16

To be fair, someone writes at the end of the Gospel that the Beloved Disciple is the one whose testimony appears in the work, and we commonly call the book the Gospel of John, but I don’t believe even the closing of the book definitively identifies the Beloved as John.

I say “someone” because the very end seems to have been written by someone else who mentions the Beloved Disciple in the third person. Indeed, part of their goal is to dispel the rumor that the Beloved Disciple was immortal, so it’s not unlikely that the bit at the end was written after the disciple’s death.

John is the most common candidate for the Beloved Disciple (and I agree with that), but it’s not 100% certain from the book itself. I have seen a decent argument that the title should go to Lazarus, and of course there’s the conspiracy theory that it’s Mary Magdalene (though that one has little actual support).


#17

re: “John is the most common candidate for the Beloved Disciple (and I agree with that), but it’s not 100% certain from the book itself.”

And for that matter nothing in the 4th gospel identifies who it’s author even is. Everything is just guess work.


#18

The Beloved Disciple is John for 4 reasons:

  1. Jesus ate the Last Supper with the Twelve
  2. John, James, and Peter were our Lord’s closest disciples
  3. Peter is mentioned in this book by name as a distinct person from the beloved disciple, so that eliminates him.
  4. The beloved disciple wrote the Gospel, and there was a controversy over a saying of Jesus that this disciple would not die. James was killed by the sword so he’s eliminated.
    The beloved disciple is John.

#19

I agree and I think another pointer is that whereas the other gospels refer to ‘John the Baptist’, in John’s gospel he is referred to as John.

If John was writing then there wouldn’t be the necessity in distinguishing between the two. John looks to have used ‘the beloved disciple’ when referring to himself and simply ‘John’ when referring to the Baptist.

I also agree with an earlier poster (dje14338) that if the shroud of Turin is valid then John would have believed having seen the marks and I read the Scripture in the way that up until that point the disciples hadn’t understood the idea of Jesus rising from the dead, but at that point they did.


#20

[quote=Fiasco]The Navarre Bible Commentary would disagree with you.
[/quote]

In the Ignatius Study Bible, the note at this point says “it is corroborating evidence of the resurrection” concerning the neatly rolled up linens, “[because] no thief would have taken the time [to do this].”

The Note seems to be addressed to the Faithful of today, and not that this was the thought of St. John, as it would belie the rest of that sentence (although the next verse) “For as yet they did not know the Scripture, that he must rise from the dead.” These are St. John’s words. IOW, he feels it is necessary to mention this to further clarify to his early Christian readers, who already firmly believe in the Resurrection, that this was not yet understood. It also further clarifies, that what he believed, was what Mary Magdalene had told him and Peter; i.e. that someone had moved the body of the Lord.

It is also very likely, that St. John, seeing the linens carefully laid up, thought it was some disciple that had carefully moved the Body of Jesus.

The Navarre Study Bible’s note by the faculty of the University of Navarre is a little more troubling in this place. They reach some conclusions not actually evidenced by the text of Scripture. For example it says the reason John “saw” and “believed” was because the state of the linen cloths “shows that no human hands could have been responsible.” Even though Scripture says the Holy Women were coming to the tomb for that very purpose! IOW, it would have been possible for human hands to have carefully laid the linens aside, just as WOULD have been done, had the body of Jesus still been there, when the women arrived. The faculty further surmise that St. John realized (by this evidence) that Jesus had not risen in the way Lazarus did. I have much difficulty in following their logic here. It is strange that, with the opinion they hold, they don’t try to reconcile it with the statement by St. John in the text itself, “for as yet they did not know the Scripture, that he must rise from the dead.” At least they might explain why this was said, if St. John “saw” and “believed” in the resurrection.


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.