Tag Archives: gospels

Karl Barth and the Gospels: Conference Live Stream from Princeton Seminary

Princeton Theological Seminary is holding their annual Karl Barth conference with this year’s topic being “Karl Barth and the Gospels.” Chris Tilling tweeted out that they have a live stream of the conference so I thought I’d also share on here.

If you have questions for the speaker use the hashtag: #KBC2015

Here is the link to the live stream: http://av.ptsem.edu/live/


6/23- 8:45 – 10:00 a.m.
Lecture, Bruce L. McCormack – “The Passion of God Himself: the Cry of Dereliction in Barth’s Theology” (Auditorium)

6/23- 10:30 – 11:45 a.m.
Lecture, Beverly Gaventa—“Reading Karl Barth’s Reading of the Road to Emmaus” (Auditorium)<

6/23- 10:30 – 11:45 a.m.
Lecture, Beverly Gaventa—“Reading Karl Barth’s Reading of the Road to Emmaus” (Auditorium)

6/23- 2:15 – 3:30 p.m.
Lecture, Richard Bauckham—“Karl Barth’s Interpretation of the Prologue to John’s Gospel” (Auditorium)

6/24- 8:45 – 10:00 a.m.
Lecture, Daniel L. Migliore —“Barth, Balthasar, and the Parable of the Lost Son” (Auditorium)

6/24- 10:45 – 12:00 p.m.
Closing Panel Discussion and Open Session of Questions/Comments (Auditorium)

Why Do We Need the Gospels?


Often times people think about the Gospels as Sunday School stories about Jesus. Rightly, many read them to find out about Jesus but when it comes to actual doctrine and theology people turn to the epistles.

As I’ve learned over the course of my academic career the Gospels are rich theological narrative that not only point one to the Messiah but also guide us how to live. They do this through both positive and negative examples. When you read, place yourself in the characters shoes, especially that of the disciples and Pharisees. The Gospels are inviting us to take part in the story of Jesus.

Jonathan Pennington, in his book Reading the Gospels Wisely, helpfully provides 9 reasons why we should read and study the Gospels. I’ve summarized them below:

  1. They have been central to the church throughout its history.
  2. Paul and the other NT writers presuppose and build on the story and teachings of Jesus.
  3. The traditions behind the Gospel writings are the earliest access we have to the life of Christ.
  4. We get a more direct sense of the Bible’s storyline.
  5. They offer a concentrated exposure to the biblical emphasis on the coming kingdom of God.
  6. They show different languages or discourses of truth.
  7. They are in many ways a more comprehensive and paradigmatic type of map. Story communicates truth most comprehensively and transformatively.
  8. Encountering Jesus in narrative helps us grow in experiential knowledge.
  9. In the Gospels alone we have a personal, up-front encounter with Jesus.

Taken from Reading the Gospels Wisely pp. 38–49.

QOTD: Gregory of Nazianzus on the Evangelist’s Audiences

Ματθαῖος μὲν ἔγραψεν Ἑβραίοις θαύματα Χριστοῦ·
Μάρκος δ’ Ἰταλίῃ,
Λουκᾶς Ἀχαϊάδι·
Πᾶσι δ’ Ἰωάννης, κήρυξ μέγας, οὐρανοφοίτης.

Matthew wrote the marvels of Christ for the Hebrews
Mark for Italy
Luke for Achaia
But John, the great herald, the heaven-wanderer, wrote for all

Gregory of Nazianzus Carmina dogmatica 1.12.6–9[1]

  1. Quoted in Mitchell, Margaret. “Patristic Counter-Evidence to the Claim That ‘The Gospels Were Written for All Christians.’” New Testament Studies 51, no. 01 (January 2005): 36–79.  ↩

QOTD: William Tyndale on the Gospel

Euagelio (that we cal gospel) is a greke worde, 
and signyfyth good, mery, glad and joyfull tydings, 
that maketh a mannes hert glad, 
and maketh him synge, duance and leepe for ioye.

– William Tyndale in his “Prologue to the New Testament”

~ Quoted in Michael Bird’s The Gospel of the Lord: How the Early Church Wrote the Story of Jesus (p. 1)

Book Review: Reading Backwards by Richard Hays


Richard Hays, Dean of Duke Divinity School, changed the landscape of understanding Paul’s use of the Old Testament with his Echoes of Scripture in the Letters of Paul and now seeks to write a “Gospel-focused sequel” to this work (ix). Reading Backwards: Figural Christology and the Fourfold Gospel Witness (Baylor University Press) is the product of the Hulsean Lectures in the Faculty of Divinity at Cambridge University and with minor changes made for this publication. Thus, this book feels like a primer for understanding the Gospel writers use of the Old Testament primarily focused on their figural Christology. I look forward to a full-fledged “Echoes of Scripture in the Gospels” type work that examines the fourfold witness in more detail. Nevertheless, this work is a helpful starting point in understanding the Gospel writers figural interpretation.

The thesis of the book argues that “the Gospels teach us how to read the OT, and at the same time—the OT teaches us how to read the Gospels (5).” Hays works this out by primarily focusing on how this effects the Christology of each of the Gospel writers. He does this through six short chapters (lectures):

  1. “The Manger in Which Christ Lies”: Figural Readings of Israel’s Scripture
  2. Figuring the Mystery: Reading Scripture with Mark
  3. Torah Transfigured: Reading Scripture with Matthew
  4. The One Who Redeems Israel: Reading Scripture with Luke
  5. The Temple Transfigured: Reading Scripture with John
  6. Retrospective Reading: The Challenges of Gospel-Shaped Hermeneutics

At the outset Hays lays out his methodology building on the work of Erich Auerbach and his definition of “figural interpretation.” According Auerbach,

Figural interpretation establishes a connection between two events or persons in such a way that the first signifies not only itself but also the second, while the second involves or fulfills the first. The two poles of a figure are separated in time, but both, being real events or persons, are within temporality. They are both contained in the flowing stream which is historical life, and only the comprehension, the intellectus spiritualis, of their interdependence is a spritual act (2)[1].

Thus, figural interpretation can only occur after both events have happened, which changes the significance of each event. Hays argues that this form of interpretation is not necessarily dependent upon the authorial intent of the original writer but respects the historical reference of the text being used (15). When the Gospel writers employ this type of hermeneutic they are not twisting the Old Testament scriptures but are reading backwards in light of the revelation of Jesus Christ. Only after his life, death, resurrection, and ascension can we go back and reread the Torah, Writings, and the Prophets.

Hays then argues that each Gospel writer has a distinct voice and purpose for their figural reading of the Old Testament. The Gospel of Mark is shrouded in mystery and the figural exegesis is “evocative” shedding light into this mystery. For example, Hays argues that Mark 1:2–3 is subtely showing that the Lord of the Old Testament is Jesus, which is spoken about in Isaiah 40:3. This example alone is just one of the many places Mark quietly shows that Jesus is the Lord of the Old Testament (21). Mark’s Christology is a narrative that can only be understood by putting together the pieces of the whole story. Each figural reading builds upon one another to give us a robust but mysterious portrait of Jesus.

Unlike the mysterious Mark, the Gospel of Matthew is bold, clear, and didactically explains Jesus’ divine identity. Beginning and ending with the “Emmanuel” theme Matthew shows how Jesus is God incarnate explicitly through Old Testament fulfillments and figural rereadings of the Scriptures. One interesting figural rereading that Hays examines is a possible subtle allusion to Genesis 28:12–17 in Matthew 28:20. Hays argues that Jesus is playing the same role as God when he says in Genesis 28 “Behold I am with you…” and Jesus tells his disciples, “Behold I am with you…” in Matthew 28:20 (48). Along with the explicit high Christological statements through Matthew this subtle allusion shows a figural rereading of the Genesis story showing Jesus’ “embodiment of Israel’s God (52).”

“And beginning with Moses and all the Prophets, he interpreted to them in all the Scriptures the things concerning himself (Luke 24:27).” This passage, Hays argues, “is to bring us up short and send us back to the beginning of the Gospel to reread it, in hopes of discerning more clearly how the identity and mission of Jesus might be prefigured in Israel’s Scripture (56).” This rereading will show how Luke shows Jesus’ divine identiy narratively. Hays explains that Luke presents this narrative divine identity in two ways (58): 1) mouths of characters in the story (see Luke 4:16–21) and 2) implicit correspondences (allusion and echo). These allusions and echoes manifest themselves in several ways:

  1. Jesus as the awaited Lord of the new exodus (62)
  2. Jesus as Kyrios (64)
  3. Receptin and rejection of the divine visitation (68)
  4. Jesus as object of worship (69)
  5. Jesus desires to gather Jerusalem under his wings (69)

Hays concludes by arguing that the modern assumption of Luke’s “low” Christology does not take account of his many allusions and echoes that show Jesus is divine and the one who will redeem Israel (72).

The Gospel of John is the most “figural” of the Gospels but also contains the least amount of explicit Old Testament citations and allusions. Hays argues that John 1:45 gives us the clue to understanding and seeking out the figural rereading of John. Hays argues, “If Luke is the master of the deft, fleeting allusion, John is the master of the carefully framed, luminous image that shines brilliantly against a dark canvas and lingers in the imagination (78).” When Jesus references Numbers 21:8–9 in John 3:14 Hays argues that this allusion is more “visual” rather than “auditory” (78). The allusion to the serpent is only given by a couple words: Moses and serpent. Hays then suggests that John may also be alluding to the “lifting up” of the suffering servant in Isa 52:13 (LXX).

The conclusion is worth the price of the book alone. Not arguing against modern critical readings but arguing that we need to broaden our hemerneutical lense lest we miss what the Gospel writers are saying. Hays asks, “what if we learned to read Israel’s Scripture not only through the lenses of modern critical methods but also through the eyes of John and the other authors of the canonical Gospels (93)?” This book aptly gives us a taste of the imagery and figural readings the Gospels present us.

The final chapter gives a helpful overview of the strengths and weaknesses of each Gospel writers figural rereading. For example, the strength of John’s gospel is the “poetic reading of the texts (101).” This allows us to Jesus as the divine Word that “underlies and sustains all of creation (101).” John’s weakness is that it can lend its hand to “anti-Jewish and/or high-handedly supersessionist thoelogies (102).” This opens the door for some readers of the Gospel for “ahistorical quasi-gnostic spirituality (102).” But as stated at the beginning a figural rereading of the Old Testament does not “deny the literal sense but completes it by linking it typologically with the narrative of Jesus and disclosing a deeper prefigurative truth within the literal historical sense (102).” Hays then examines 10 ways the Gospels teach us to read the Old Testament.

So, what can be said about this provocative argument that we should be engaged in a figural rereading of the Old Testament scriptures? I think that Hays’ overal argument is valid and that the Gospel writers do present us with a model of how to read the Old Testament in light of Christ. Many ways which the Gospel writers reference the Old Testament are only valid because of the resurrected Jesus. To say that Moses lifting up to the serpent speaks of Christ being lifted up on the cross can only happen after the subsequent event. This involves a “rereading” of the story in Numbers.

One area of critique that I would have of Hays’ own rereading of the Gospels and his rerereading(?) of their interpretation of the Old Testament is that he sometimes seems to stretch the ways in which the Gospel writers allude to Old Testament passages. Is John really symbollically alluding to both the serpent being lifted up and the suffering servant being lifted up? Personally, it seems better to possibly argue for our own rereading of both the Gospels and the Old Testament. Is it possible for us to say that this John’s allusion to the lifting up of the serpent can also be reread figuratively (to use Hays’ language) to that of the suffering servant in Isaiah? That is, do we need to discern some type of authorial intent of John alluding to Numbers and Isaiah or can this be our own rereading of the text?

With this critique aside, the overall argument of this book is one which New Testament interpreters need to wrestle with. Indeed, the Old Testament teaches us how to read the Gospels and likewise the Gospels teach us how to read the Old Testament.

You can purchase the book here.

  1. Erich Auerbach, Mimesis (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1968), 73.  ↩

How the Gospels Teach Us to Read the Old Testament (Hays)


I’ve begun reading Richard Hays’ new book Reading Backwards: Figural Christology and the Fourfold Witness and with all of Hays’ content it is provacative, engaging, and thought provoking. As you can probably gather from the title of the book, his thesis is, “the Gospels teach us how to read the OT, and—at the same time—the OT teaches us how to read the Gospels.”[1] This retrospective hermeneutic argues that we cannot fully understand the writings of the Old Testament without the life, death, resurrection, and ascension of Jesus.

In the first chapter, after explaining how the Old Testament teaches us how to read the Gospels, Hays examines how Luke 24 teaches us how to read the Old Testament. He concludes with three observations.[2]

  1. The Gospels teach us to read the OT for figuration. The literal historical sense of the OT is not denied or negated; rather, it becomes the vehicle for latent figural meanings unsuspected by the original author and readers. It points forward typologically to the gospel story. And, precisely because figural readings affirms the original historical reference of the text, it leaves open the possibility of respectful dialogue with other interpretations, other patterns of intertextual reception. This is a point of potentially greater significance for conversation between Jews and Christians about the interpretation of Israel’s Scripture.”

  2. “The story of Israel builds to a narrative climax in the story of Jesus.”

  3. “The figural disclosive reading that the Gospels teach occurs rightly in a community of discipleship and table fellowship.”

  1. Reading Backwards, p. 5  ↩

  2. Reading Backwards, p. 15–16  ↩

Richard Hays and the Canonical Matrix of the Gospel of John



In his essay, “The Canonical Matrix of the Gospels”, Richard Hays explains that in order to read the Gospels rightly one must understand their “original scriptural environment”, namely the story of Israel. By reading the story of Jesus through the lens of Israel’s story the Gospel authors are able to write distinctively in their own Gospel narrative. Each writer is able to pick up on themes, allusions, and events in different ways showing that Jesus is the culmination of Israel’s story. 

One of the focuses of John’s Gospel is the temple motif of Jesus’ body. After John explains for his readers what Jesus meant when he stated that the temple will be raised up after three days Hays gives three reasons that John’s explanation is important for readers today:

1. We are informed that right interpretation of scripture and of the traditions about Jesus could be done only retrospectively after the resurrection.
2. John instructs his readers to read figuratively
3. The link between the temple and Jesus’ body is made explicit, providing a key for much that follows.

He goes on to say,

“In light of this sort of figurative hermeneutic, the entirety of the Old Testament becomes allegorically available to illumine the identify of Jesus. It is not a matter of locating a few proof-texts that predict events in Jesus’ life. Rather, John sees Israel’s scripture as allegorically transparent to the one who became incarnate in Jesus. For example, the manna in the wilderness prefigures Jesus, who is the true ‘bread from heave’ (Jn 6:31-3). This reading strategy allows John to articulate his extraordinary (and polemical) claim that all of scripture actually bears witness to Jesus.

You study the Scriptures diligently because you think that in them you have eternal life. These are the very Scriptures that testify about me, yet you refuse to come to me to have life… But do not think I will accuse you before the Father. Your accuser is Moses, on whom your hopes are set. If you believed Moses, you would believe me, for he wrote about me. But since you do not believe what he wrote, how are you going to believe what I say? (Jn. 5:45–47, NIV)

Thus even more comprehensively than the other gospels, John understands the Old Testament as a vast matrix of symbols pointing to Jesus. In contrast to Luke’s reading of scripture as a plotted script showing the outworking of God’s promises in time, John understands scripture as a huge web of signifiers generated by the pretemporal eternal Logos as intimations of his truth and glory.”

Richard Hays, “The Canonical Matrix of the Gospels”, in The Cambridge Companion of the Gospels ed. Stephen Barton

QOTD: Francis Watson on Gaining Canonical Status

No religious, philosophical, or literary text enters the world with the label “canonical”already attached. Canonical status is a matter not for authors but for readers; it arises not from composition but from usage. As a rule, it is only after the death of the author that a work either consolidates its initial impact by establishing a quasi-permanent position within a particular reading community, or, more commonly, fails to do so and consequently fades from view. Many texts are produced and consumed, but few are selected for classic or canonical status. Selection is sequent to production: authors and editors produce, but it is later readers who select by continuing to engage with a limited number of texts while allowing other to fall by the wayside.

Francis Watson, Gospel Writing, p. 3

Four Gospels One Resurrection: A Greek Reader of the Four Gospel Accounts of the Resurrection

In honor of Easter I created a Greek reader for the resurrection stories in the Gospels.

  • Matthew 28:1-15
  • Mark 16:1-8
  • Luke 24:1-12
  • John 20:1-18 

The text used:

Michael W. Holmes, The Greek New Testament: SBL Edition (Lexham Press, 2010).

For easy navigation, the table of contents is clickable, so you can go directly to the passage you one to read.


All words occurring less than 31 time in the Greek New Testament are contextual glosses.

Verbs are given with the lexical form and parsed in the following way: Tense, Voice, Mood, Person, Number (i.e. A.A.I 3s = Aorist Active Indicative Third Singular). Participles follow the pattern: Tense, Voice, Case, Case, Gender, Number. Nouns and Adjectives are given the lexical form with the article for easier parsing.

Contextual glosses are determined from:

Arndt, William, Frederick W. Danker, and Walter Bauer. A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000.

The frequency is determined from Accordance Bible Software.

If you have any questions or comments contact me via Twitter (@renshaw330) or Email (brenshaw833@gmail.com)


You can download the PDF here.

Why was Mary betrothed?

Origen poses this question in hist sixth homily on Luke[1],

Again I turn the matter over in my mind and ask why, when God had decided that the Savior should be born of a virgin, he chose not a girl who was not betrothed, but precisely one who was already betrothed.

I find his response and reasoning interesting on a number of fronts. First, he poses a new question on the text that I have not thought of (or read?). Second, his reasoning as we will see is highly theological. Third, it reveals some of his thoughts on Satan in relation to Jesus’ ministry.

The main reason that Origen supposes that Mary was betrothed is so that the birth could be concealed from the “ruler of this age.” This idea is rooted in Ignatius who says in his letter to the Ephesians,

Now the virginity of Mary and her giving birth were hidden from the ruler of this age, as was also the death of the Lord — three mysteries to be loudly proclaimed, yet which were accomplished in the silence of God.[2]

Origen argues that if she had not been betrothed then her virginity and the birth could never have been concealed from the “ruler of this age.” In his thinking if Mary had not been betrothed then there would have been a bigger uproar on the pregnancy of Mary and it would have come out that she was a virgin and conceived by the Holy Spirit. By being betrothed this could be concealed. He goes on to say, “But the Savior had so arranged his plan that the devil did not know that he had taken on a body. When he was conceived, he escaped the devil’s notice.”

He notes that Jesus did not actual reveal himself to be the Son of God in the temptation narrative. To Origen, he interprets this even to mean that the devil knew that Jesus was someone special but couldn’t quite figure out who he was so this part of the temptation is a genuine inquiry in who Jesus is. Jesus’ response does not confirm or deny that he is the Son of God but only that he should not turn stone into bread.

So why does Origen go to length to explain why the devil does not know who Jesus is? His grounding for this is found in 1 Corinthians 2:6–8 which says,

Yet among the mature we do impart wisdom, although it is not a wisdom of this age or of the rulers of this age, who are doomed to pass away. But we impart a secret and hidden wisdom of God, which God decreed before the ages for our glory. None of the rulers of this age understood this, for if they had, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory.

He then brings up an objection that could be stated. He notes that in Matthew 8 the demons show that they know that he is the Son of God. So how does this fit in with his theory? Origen stresses that the demon is “less evil” than Satan and knew who Jesus was. He says,

The fact that his wickedness is greater prevents him from knowing the Son of God. We ourselves can advance to virtue more easily if we are less sinful. But, if we are more sinful, then we need sweat and hard labor to be freed from our greater evil. This is my explanation of why Mary was betrothed.

I claim to be no expert on Origen but here are some thoughts that I had after reading this homily.

First, Origen is asking questions that I would have never thought to ask. If I would have thought of this question today I would have probably dismissed by saying we just don’t know. Origen poses the question and then answers it theologically. This is the opposite direction that most would have taken this question. Most would have tried to ground it in some historical reasoning that Mary had to be betrothed but Origen addresses this theologically. Here we see the cohesive view of Holy Scripture. He naturally connects Paul saying the wisdom of God has been hidden from the rulers of this age to the idea that the devil did not realize that God had come down from heaven to this earth.

Overall I found his interpretation enlightening and edifying. Even if I may not completely adopt his interpretation it has forced me to think of the text in a new light and who knows one day this may spark further thought on the birth narrative of Jesus.

  1. All quotes are from Origen. Homilies on Luke. Translated by Joseph T Lienhard. Fathers of the Church. Washington, D.C.: Catholic University of America Press, 1996.  ↩

  2. Ignatius Letter to the Ephesians 19:1 in Holmes, Michael W. The Apostolic Fathers: Greek texts and English translations. Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Academic, 2007.  ↩

Origen on the Four-Fold Gospel and other gospels

In Origen’s first homily on Luke he says

…You should know that not only four Gospels, but very many, were composed. the Gospels we have were chosen from among these gospels and passed on to the churches. We can know this from Luke’s own prologue, which begins this way: ‘Because many have tried to compose an account.’ The words ‘have tried’ imply an accusation against those who rushed into writing gospels without the grace of the Holy Spirit. Matthew, Mark, John, and Luke did not “try” to write; they wrote their Gospels when they were filled with the Holy Spirit. Hence, ‘Many have tried to compose an account of the events that are clearly known among us.’

The Church has four Gospels. Heretics have very many. One of them is entitled According to the Egyptians, another According to the Twelve Apostles. Basilides, too, dared to write a gospel and give it his own name. ‘Many have tried’ to write, but only four Gospels have been approved. Our doctrines about the Person of our Lord and Savior should be drawn from these approved Gospels. I know one gospel called According to Thomas, and another According to Matthias. We have read many others, too, lest we appear ignorant of anything, because of those people who think they know something if they have examined these gospels. But in all these questions we approve of nothing but what the Church approves of, namely only four canonical Gospels.

We have said all this because the beginning of the Gospel reads, ‘Many have tried to compose an account of the evens that have been accomplished among us.’ Those other authors have attempted and “have tried” to write about these events, but for us they are clearly established

Origen most likely gave his homilies on Luke around 233 AD (xxiv)

Origen in Homily 1 (p. 5) of Homilies on Luke translated by Joseph T. Lienhard in The Fathers of the Church series. 1996.

Book Review: Jesus is the Christ by Michael Bird

Many thanks to IVP Academic for this free review copy

Jesus is the Christ: The Messianic Testimony of the Gospels is the follow-up volume to Bird’s earlier work Are You the One Who Is to Come?: The Historical Jesus and the Messianic Question, which explores the the historical question whether Jesus knew and claimed to be the Messiah. He concludes in that work that indeed Jesus saw himself as the Messiah outlined in the Scriptures. Jesus is the Christ builds on this conclusion and shows how the primary purpose of the four Gospels is to show that Jesus is indeed the Messiah.

If you have not read his previous book then you are in luck. The introduction to the book provides a basic analysis of the claim that Jesus knew and claimed that he was the Messiah. Bird is clear and concise in this introduction and gives the new reader sufficient background to this topic. This leads into his thesis:

“a significant purpose of the Gospels is to convince readers — Jewish readers in particular — that Jesus is the Messiah. THe Gospels consciously set out to answer Jewish objections to the messiahship of Jesus, they perceive in Jesus the climax of the Jewish hope, and they proclaim Jesus as the savior of Israel (33).”

Bird has a special knack for taking the major themes of the Gospels and weaving them together in such a way that is coherent and enjoyable to read. Starting with the Gospel of Mark he combines a narrative, linguistic, rhetorical, social-scientific, and Christological analysis on the Gospel. I especially found the social-scientific analysis enlightening. Bird shows how the shameful act of crucifixion is actually “honorable” because Mark presents the cross as the “vindication, honor, and glory” of Christ (44–45). Somehow Bird then weaves together the theological masterpiece of Matthew into a narrative showing the Matthean focus of Jesus as the Davidic messiah coming to bring deliverance to both the Jews and Gentiles. Bird then combines the Luke-Acts narrative showing that Luke’s main purposes are showing that Jesus is the messiah and that "those who express faith in Jesus and join ‘the Way’ are constituted as the people of God in the messianic age. Finally, the Gospel of John is summed up beautifully in his final paragraph:

“The confession that Jesus is the Messiah, and the mode of sonship that it claimed for him, make it clear that Jesus is from, of, with, and even is God. Jesus fulfills the scriptural hopes in such a way as to eclipse the place of the law and Moses from the centre of Jewish belief, and Jesus stands in an unparalleled unity with the Father — that is what it means to call him the Messiah (140).”

I found Bird’s approach to the Gospels both compelling and engaging. Reading through each chapter the reader is hit with a whirlwind of ideas and themes related to the Gospel writers portrayal that Jesus is indeed the long awaited Messiah. I especially enjoyed his emphasis that the Messianic titles in the Gospel of Mark, while important individually, come together as a whole to “form a mutually interpretive christological spiral where one defines the meaning of the other (45).” Bird is able to fly above the Gospels and provide narrative overview while swooping down to show how the individual parts make up the whole.

Many people reading this will already have in their mind that the Gospels present Jesus as the Messiah but this book still has much merit for those readers. The insights into the themes and theology of the Gospels are worthy to be read for anyone being introduced to the Gospels. After reading this book students will be able to read the Gospels individually and understand how each story stands in relation to the whole. If one is not convinced that the Gospels present Jesus as the Christ they too should also pick up this book because one would be hard pressed to argue against this notion after reading Bird’s analysis.

I am a footnote snob so I was disappointed when I opened the book to find that it had endnotes. This makes for a slower read for someone who is interested in the “extras” with each endnote. The introduction alone has 92 endnotes in 30 pages of writing, which makes for slow reading. I ended up just noting particular endnotes that I wanted to look at later and found this a more fruitful enterprise and to just read Bird’s analysis without stopping to check out each one. With that being said, this minor negative point should not detract someone interested in the Gospels from reading this book.

To conclude, I would highly recommend this book to any student of the Bible. The Gospels, as Pennington puts it, are the “archways of the Canon[1]”. Understanding the themes and theology of them in relation to how they present Jesus as the Messiah will not only enrich the students understanding of the Gospel themselves but also the rest of the writings of the New Testament. With Birds engaging writing style and way of turning a phrase (such as "Mk. 14:61–62 looks like a bit of a christological blender…(51)) will leave the student with both an enlightening and enjoyable read. Highly recommended.

Also check out my other reviews of IVP Academic books:

Also check out his upcoming book, Evangelical Theology: A Biblical and Systematic Introduction.

  1. Pennington, Jonathan T. Reading the Gospels Wisely: A Narrative and Theological Introduction. Baker Books, 2012, 229.  ↩

Chrysostom and the reason for the four-fold Gospel

What then? Was not one evangelist sufficient to tell all? One indeed was sufficient; but if there be four that write, not at the same times, nor in the same places, neither after having met together, and conversed one with another, and then they speak all things as it were out of one mouth, this becomes a very great demonstration of the truth.

He goes on to say…

But if there be anything touching times or places, which they have related differently, this does not injure the truth of what they have said. And these thing too, so far as God shall enable us, we will endeavor, as we proceed, to point out; requiring you, together with what we have mentioned, to observe, that in the chief heads, those which constitute our life and furnish our doctrine, nowhere is any of them found to have disagreed, no not ever so little.

He then gives a list of doctrines that they agree on:

  1. God became man
  2. He did miracles
  3. He was crucified, buried, rose again, and ascended
  4. He will judge
  5. He has given commandments pertaining to salvation
  6. He brought in a law not contrary to the Old Testament
  7. He is a Son
  8. He is only-begotten
  9. He is a true Son
  10. He is of the same substance with the Father

in Homilies on Matthew: Homily 1

Read the Gospel Resurrection Narratives in Greek (with vocab)

Read the resurrection narratives in Greek today in celebration of the resurrection of Jesus Christ. I have made a reader that has words that occur less than 30x in the GNT. Happy reading! (The Greek text is from Holmes, Michael W. The Greek New Testament: SBL Edition. Logos Bible Software, 2010). The vocabulary glosses were compiled using Accordance Bible Software.

Download the PDF here 


  • Matthew 28:1-10
  • Mark 16:1-8
  • Luke 24:1-49
  • John 20:1-23

Gospel of Matthew

The Resurrection (28:1–10)

1 Ὀψὲ δὲ σαββάτων, τῇ ἐπιφωσκούσῃ εἰς μίαν σαββάτων, ἦλθεν Μαριὰμ ἡ Μαγδαληνὴ καὶ ἡ ἄλλη Μαρία θεωρῆσαι τὸν τάφον. 2 καὶ ἰδοὺ σεισμὸς ἐγένετο μέγας ἄγγελος γὰρ κυρίου καταβὰς ἐξ οὐρανοῦ καὶ προσελθὼν ἀπεκύλισε τὸν λίθον καὶ ἐκάθητο ἐπάνω αὐτοῦ. 3 ἦν δὲ ἡ εἰδέα αὐτοῦ ὡς ἀστραπὴ καὶ τὸ ἔνδυμα αὐτοῦ λευκὸν ὡς χιών. 4 ἀπὸ δὲ τοῦ φόβου αὐτοῦ ἐσείσθησαν οἱ τηροῦντες καὶ ἐγενήθησαν ὡς νεκροί. 5 ἀποκριθεὶς δὲ ὁ ἄγγελος εἶπεν ταῖς γυναιξίν Μὴ φοβεῖσθε ὑμεῖς, οἶδα γὰρ ὅτι Ἰησοῦν τὸν ἐσταυρωμένον ζητεῖτε 6 οὐκ ἔστιν ὧδε, ἠγέρθη γὰρ καθὼς εἶπεν δεῦτε ἴδετε τὸν τόπον ὅπου ἔκειτο 7 καὶ ταχὺ πορευθεῖσαι εἴπατε τοῖς μαθηταῖς αὐτοῦ ὅτι Ἠγέρθη ἀπὸ τῶν νεκρῶν, καὶ ἰδοὺ προάγει ὑμᾶς εἰς τὴν Γαλιλαίαν, ἐκεῖ αὐτὸν ὄψεσθε ἰδοὺ εἶπον ὑμῖν. 8 καὶ ἀπελθοῦσαι ταχὺ ἀπὸ τοῦ μνημείου μετὰ φόβου καὶ χαρᾶς μεγάλης ἔδραμον ἀπαγγεῖλαι τοῖς μαθηταῖς αὐτοῦ. 9 καὶ ἰδοὺ Ἰησοῦς ὑπήντησεν αὐταῖς λέγων Χαίρετε αἱ δὲ προσελθοῦσαι ἐκράτησαν αὐτοῦ τοὺς πόδας καὶ προσεκύνησαν αὐτῷ. 10 τότε λέγει αὐταῖς ὁ Ἰησοῦς Μὴ φοβεῖσθε ὑπάγετε ἀπαγγείλατε τοῖς ἀδελφοῖς μου ἵνα ἀπέλθωσιν εἰς τὴν Γαλιλαίαν, κἀκεῖ με ὄψονται.


ἀποκυλίω to roll away;
ἀστραπή lightning;
δεῦτε come! come, now!;
εἰδέα appearance;
ἔνδυμα clothing;
ἐπάνω (+gen) over, above, upon, on;
ἐπιφώσκω to dawn;
κεῖμαι to lie down; to be valid for;
λευκός white;
Μαγδαληνή Magdalene;
Μαρία Mary;
Μαριάμ Miriam; Mary;
ὀψέ (+gen) after (prep.); evening (adv.);
προάγω to go before; to elevate;
σεισμός shake, earthquake; shakedown (extortion);
σείω to shake;
τάφος grave;
τάφος swift, quickly, soon;
τρέχω to run;
ὑπαντάω to meet;
χιών snow;

Gospel of Mark

The Resurrection (16:1–8)

1 Καὶ διαγενομένου τοῦ σαββάτου Μαρία ἡ Μαγδαληνὴ καὶ Μαρία ἡ τοῦ Ἰακώβου καὶ Σαλώμη ἠγόρασαν ἀρώματα ἵνα ἐλθοῦσαι ἀλείψωσιν αὐτόν. 2 καὶ λίαν πρωῒ τῇ μιᾷ τῶν σαββάτων ἔρχονται ἐπὶ τὸ μνημεῖον ἀνατείλαντος τοῦ ἡλίου. 3 καὶ ἔλεγον πρὸς ἑαυτάς Τίς ἀποκυλίσει ἡμῖν τὸν λίθον ἐκ τῆς θύρας τοῦ μνημείου; 4 καὶ ἀναβλέψασαι θεωροῦσιν ὅτι ἀποκεκύλισται ὁ λίθος, ἦν γὰρ μέγας σφόδρα. 5 καὶ εἰσελθοῦσαι εἰς τὸ μνημεῖον εἶδον νεανίσκον καθήμενον ἐν τοῖς δεξιοῖς περιβεβλημένον στολὴν λευκήν, καὶ ἐξεθαμβήθησαν. 6 ὁ δὲ λέγει αὐταῖς Μὴ ἐκθαμβεῖσθε Ἰησοῦν ζητεῖτε τὸν Ναζαρηνὸν τὸν ἐσταυρωμένον ἠγέρθη, οὐκ ἔστιν ὧδε ἴδε ὁ τόπος ὅπου ἔθηκαν αὐτόν 7 ἀλλὰ ὑπάγετε εἴπατε τοῖς μαθηταῖς αὐτοῦ καὶ τῷ Πέτρῳ ὅτι Προάγει ὑμᾶς εἰς τὴν Γαλιλαίαν ἐκεῖ αὐτὸν ὄψεσθε, καθὼς εἶπεν ὑμῖν. 8 καὶ ἐξελθοῦσαι ἔφυγον ἀπὸ τοῦ μνημείου, εἶχεν γὰρ αὐτὰς τρόμος καὶ ἔκστασις καὶ οὐδενὶ οὐδὲν εἶπαν, ἐφοβοῦντο γάρ.


ἀγοράζω to buy;
ἀλείφω to anoint;
ἀναβλέπω to receive sight;
ἀνατέλλω to rise, cause to rise, to grow, spring up;
ἀποκυλίω to roll away;
ἄρωμα spices;
διαγίνομαι to live; to pass time;
ἐκθαμβέω to be alarmed;
ἔκστασις trance, vision; amazement;
ἴδε look! pay attention!;
λευκός white;
λίαν exceedingly;
Μαγδαληνή Magdalene;
Μαρία Mary;
Ναζαρηνός Nazarene;
νεανίσκος young man;
περιβάλλω to put on, clothe;
προάγω to go before; to elevate;
πρωΐ in the morning;
Σαλώμη Salome;
στολή clothing; robe;
σφόδρα very much;
τρόμος trembling;
φεύγω to flee;

Gospel of Luke

The Resurrection (24:1–12)

1 τῇ δὲ μιᾷ τῶν σαββάτων ὄρθρου βαθέως ἐπὶ τὸ μνῆμα ἦλθον φέρουσαι ἃ ἡτοίμασαν ἀρώματα. 2 εὗρον δὲ τὸν λίθον ἀποκεκυλισμένον ἀπὸ τοῦ μνημείου, 3 εἰσελθοῦσαι δὲ οὐχ εὗρον τὸ σῶμα. 4 καὶ ἐγένετο ἐν τῷ ἀπορεῖσθαι αὐτὰς περὶ τούτου καὶ ἰδοὺ ἄνδρες δύο ἐπέστησαν αὐταῖς ἐν ἐσθῆτι ἀστραπτούσῃ. 5 ἐμφόβων δὲ γενομένων αὐτῶν καὶ κλινουσῶν τὰ πρόσωπα εἰς τὴν γῆν εἶπαν πρὸς αὐτάς Τί ζητεῖτε τὸν ζῶντα μετὰ τῶν νεκρῶν; 6 οὐκ ἔστιν ὧδε, ἀλλὰ ἠγέρθη. μνήσθητε ὡς ἐλάλησεν ὑμῖν ἔτι ὢν ἐν τῇ Γαλιλαίᾳ, 7 λέγων τὸν υἱὸν τοῦ ἀνθρώπου ὅτι δεῖ παραδοθῆναι εἰς χεῖρας ἀνθρώπων ἁμαρτωλῶν καὶ σταυρωθῆναι καὶ τῇ τρίτῃ ἡμέρᾳ ἀναστῆναι. 8 καὶ ἐμνήσθησαν τῶν ῥημάτων αὐτοῦ, 9 καὶ ὑποστρέψασαι ἀπὸ τοῦ μνημείου ἀπήγγειλαν ταῦτα πάντα τοῖς ἕνδεκα καὶ πᾶσιν τοῖς λοιποῖς. 10 ἦσαν δὲ ἡ Μαγδαληνὴ Μαρία καὶ Ἰωάννα καὶ Μαρία ἡ Ἰακώβου καὶ αἱ λοιπαὶ σὺν αὐταῖς ἔλεγον πρὸς τοὺς ἀποστόλους ταῦτα. 11 καὶ ἐφάνησαν ἐνώπιον αὐτῶν ὡσεὶ λῆρος τὰ ῥήματα ταῦτα, καὶ ἠπίστουν αὐταῖς. 12 Ὁ δὲ Πέτρος ἀναστὰς ἔδραμεν ἐπὶ τὸ μνημεῖον καὶ παρακύψας βλέπει τὰ ὀθόνια μόνα καὶ ἀπῆλθεν πρὸς αὑτὸν θαυμάζων τὸ γεγονός.


ἀπιστέω to disbelieve, distrust;
ἀποκυλίω to roll away;
ἀπορέω to be at a loss;
ἄρωμα spices;
ἀστράπτω to flash;
βαθύς deep;
ἔμφοβος afraid;
ἕνδεκα eleven;
ἐσθής clothing;
ἐφίστημι to set, set over, establish; to come upon;
Ἰωάννα Joanna;
κλίνω to lay, tip over;
λῆρος empty talk, nonsense;
Μαγδαληνή Magdalene;
Μαρία Mary;
μιμνῄσκομαι to remember; remind;
μνῆμα tomb;
ὀθόνιον linen cloth, wrapping;
ὄρθρος dawn; early in the morning;
παρακύπτω to look through; to lean in; to stoop down;
τρέχω to run;
ὡσεί like, as, about;

The Road to Emmaus (24:13–35)

13 Καὶ ἰδοὺ δύο ἐξ αὐτῶν ἐν αὐτῇ τῇ ἡμέρᾳ ἦσαν πορευόμενοι εἰς κώμην ἀπέχουσαν σταδίους ἑξήκοντα ἀπὸ Ἰερουσαλήμ, ᾗ ὄνομα Ἐμμαοῦς, 14 καὶ αὐτοὶ ὡμίλουν πρὸς ἀλλήλους περὶ πάντων τῶν συμβεβηκότων τούτων. 15 καὶ ἐγένετο ἐν τῷ ὁμιλεῖν αὐτοὺς καὶ συζητεῖν καὶ αὐτὸς Ἰησοῦς ἐγγίσας συνεπορεύετο αὐτοῖς, 16 οἱ δὲ ὀφθαλμοὶ αὐτῶν ἐκρατοῦντο τοῦ μὴ ἐπιγνῶναι αὐτόν. 17 εἶπεν δὲ πρὸς αὐτούς Τίνες οἱ λόγοι οὗτοι οὓς ἀντιβάλλετε πρὸς ἀλλήλους περιπατοῦντες; καὶ ἐστάθησαν σκυθρωποί. 18 ἀποκριθεὶς δὲ εἷς ὀνόματι Κλεοπᾶς εἶπεν πρὸς αὐτόν Σὺ μόνος παροικεῖς Ἰερουσαλὴμ καὶ οὐκ ἔγνως τὰ γενόμενα ἐν αὐτῇ ἐν ταῖς ἡμέραις ταύταις; 19 καὶ εἶπεν αὐτοῖς Ποῖα; οἱ δὲ εἶπαν αὐτῷ Τὰ περὶ Ἰησοῦ τοῦ Ναζαρηνοῦ, ὃς ἐγένετο ἀνὴρ προφήτης δυνατὸς ἐν ἔργῳ καὶ λόγῳ ἐναντίον τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ παντὸς τοῦ λαοῦ, 20 ὅπως τε παρέδωκαν αὐτὸν οἱ ἀρχιερεῖς καὶ οἱ ἄρχοντες ἡμῶν εἰς κρίμα θανάτου καὶ ἐσταύρωσαν αὐτόν. 21 ἡμεῖς δὲ ἠλπίζομεν ὅτι αὐτός ἐστιν ὁ μέλλων λυτροῦσθαι τὸν Ἰσραήλ ἀλλά γε καὶ σὺν πᾶσιν τούτοις τρίτην ταύτην ἡμέραν ἄγει ἀφʼ οὗ ταῦτα ἐγένετο. 22 ἀλλὰ καὶ γυναῖκές τινες ἐξ ἡμῶν ἐξέστησαν ἡμᾶς, γενόμεναι ὀρθριναὶ ἐπὶ τὸ μνημεῖον 23 καὶ μὴ εὑροῦσαι τὸ σῶμα αὐτοῦ ἦλθον λέγουσαι καὶ ὀπτασίαν ἀγγέλων ἑωρακέναι, οἳ λέγουσιν αὐτὸν ζῆν. 24 καὶ ἀπῆλθόν τινες τῶν σὺν ἡμῖν ἐπὶ τὸ μνημεῖον, καὶ εὗρον οὕτως καθὼς καὶ αἱ γυναῖκες εἶπον, αὐτὸν δὲ οὐκ εἶδον. 25 καὶ αὐτὸς εἶπεν πρὸς αὐτούς Ὦ ἀνόητοι καὶ βραδεῖς τῇ καρδίᾳ τοῦ πιστεύειν ἐπὶ πᾶσιν οἷς ἐλάλησαν οἱ προφῆται 26 οὐχὶ ταῦτα ἔδει παθεῖν τὸν χριστὸν καὶ εἰσελθεῖν εἰς τὴν δόξαν αὐτοῦ; 27 καὶ ἀρξάμενος ἀπὸ Μωϋσέως καὶ ἀπὸ πάντων τῶν προφητῶν διερμήνευσεν αὐτοῖς ἐν πάσαις ταῖς γραφαῖς τὰ περὶ ἑαυτοῦ. 28 Καὶ ἤγγισαν εἰς τὴν κώμην οὗ ἐπορεύοντο, καὶ αὐτὸς προσεποιήσατο πορρώτερον πορεύεσθαι. 29 καὶ παρεβιάσαντο αὐτὸν λέγοντες Μεῖνον μεθʼ ἡμῶν, ὅτι πρὸς ἑσπέραν ἐστὶν καὶ κέκλικεν ἤδη ἡ ἡμέρα. καὶ εἰσῆλθεν τοῦ μεῖναι σὺν αὐτοῖς. 30 καὶ ἐγένετο ἐν τῷ κατακλιθῆναι αὐτὸν μετʼ αὐτῶν λαβὼν τὸν ἄρτον εὐλόγησεν καὶ κλάσας ἐπεδίδου αὐτοῖς 31 αὐτῶν δὲ διηνοίχθησαν οἱ ὀφθαλμοὶ καὶ ἐπέγνωσαν αὐτόν καὶ αὐτὸς ἄφαντος ἐγένετο ἀπʼ αὐτῶν. 32 καὶ εἶπαν πρὸς ἀλλήλους Οὐχὶ ἡ καρδία ἡμῶν καιομένη ἦν ἐν ἡμῖν ὡς ἐλάλει ἡμῖν ἐν τῇ ὁδῷ, ὡς διήνοιγεν ἡμῖν τὰς γραφάς; 33 καὶ ἀναστάντες αὐτῇ τῇ ὥρᾳ ὑπέστρεψαν εἰς Ἰερουσαλήμ, καὶ εὗρον ἠθροισμένους τοὺς ἕνδεκα καὶ τοὺς σὺν αὐτοῖς, 34 λέγοντας ὅτι ὄντως ἠγέρθη ὁ κύριος καὶ ὤφθη Σίμωνι. 35 καὶ αὐτοὶ ἐξηγοῦντο τὰ ἐν τῇ ὁδῷ καὶ ὡς ἐγνώσθη αὐτοῖς ἐν τῇ κλάσει τοῦ ἄρτου.


ἀθροίζω to gather together;
ἀνόητος foolish;
ἀντιβάλλω to exchange;
ἀπέχω to receive, obtain, get, be far off;
ἄφαντος vanish out of sight;
βραδύς slow;
γέ yet, indeed, surely;
διανοίγω to open up, reveal;
διερμηνεύω to explain, interpret;
Ἐμμαοῦς Emmaus;
ἐναντίον (+gen) before;
ἕνδεκα eleven;
ἐξηγέομαι to explain, order; interpret, exposite;
ἑξήκοντα sixty;
ἐξίστημι to amaze, confuse;
ἐπιδίδωμι to give;
ἑσπέρα evening;
καίω to burn, kindle, light;
κατακλίνω to sit down, cause to sit down;
κλάσις breaking;
κλάω to break;
Κλεοπᾶς Cleopas;
κλίνω to lay, tip over;
κρίμα judgment, decree, decision;
κώμη village;
λυτρόω to ransom, redeem;
Ναζαρηνός Nazarene;
ὁμιλέω to associate with; to talk; to have intercourse;
ὄντως really, indeed;
ὀπτασία vision;
ὀρθρινός morning;
οὗ where, to where;
παραβιάζομαι to defy; to press; to persuade;
παροικέω to live in as a stranger;
πόρρω far away;
προσποιέω to add on; to act as if;
σκυθρωπός gloomy;
στάδιον stade (length); stadium; walkway;
συζητέω to argue, question;
συμβαίνω to happen, befall;
συμπορεύομαι to come with, go with;
omega; O (address), or Oh!; alas;

Jesus Appears to His Disciples (24:36–49)

36 Ταῦτα δὲ αὐτῶν λαλούντων αὐτὸς ἔστη ἐν μέσῳ αὐτῶν. 37 πτοηθέντες δὲ καὶ ἔμφοβοι γενόμενοι ἐδόκουν πνεῦμα θεωρεῖν. 38 καὶ εἶπεν αὐτοῖς Τί τεταραγμένοι ἐστέ, καὶ διὰ τί διαλογισμοὶ ἀναβαίνουσιν ἐν τῇ καρδίᾳ ὑμῶν; 39 ἴδετε τὰς χεῖράς μου καὶ τοὺς πόδας μου ὅτι ἐγώ εἰμι αὐτός ψηλαφήσατέ με καὶ ἴδετε, ὅτι πνεῦμα σάρκα καὶ ὀστέα οὐκ ἔχει καθὼς ἐμὲ θεωρεῖτε ἔχοντα. 40 [καὶ τοῦτο εἰπὼν ἔδειξεν αὐτοῖς τὰς χεῖρας καὶ τοὺς πόδας.] 41 ἔτι δὲ ἀπιστούντων αὐτῶν ἀπὸ τῆς χαρᾶς καὶ θαυμαζόντων εἶπεν αὐτοῖς Ἔχετέ τι βρώσιμον ἐνθάδε; 42 οἱ δὲ ἐπέδωκαν αὐτῷ ἰχθύος ὀπτοῦ μέρος 43 καὶ λαβὼν ἐνώπιον αὐτῶν ἔφαγεν. 44 Εἶπεν δὲ πρὸς αὐτούς Οὗτοι οἱ λόγοι μου οὓς ἐλάλησα πρὸς ὑμᾶς ἔτι ὢν σὺν ὑμῖν, ὅτι δεῖ πληρωθῆναι πάντα τὰ γεγραμμένα ἐν τῷ νόμῳ Μωϋσέως καὶ προφήταις καὶ ψαλμοῖς περὶ ἐμοῦ. 45 τότε διήνοιξεν αὐτῶν τὸν νοῦν τοῦ συνιέναι τὰς γραφάς, 46 καὶ εἶπεν αὐτοῖς ὅτι οὕτως γέγραπται παθεῖν τὸν χριστὸν καὶ ἀναστῆναι ἐκ νεκρῶν τῇ τρίτῃ ἡμέρᾳ, 47 καὶ κηρυχθῆναι ἐπὶ τῷ ὀνόματι αὐτοῦ μετάνοιαν καὶ ἄφεσιν ἁμαρτιῶν εἰς πάντα τὰ ἔθνη— ἀρξάμενοι ἀπὸ Ἰερουσαλήμ 48 ὑμεῖς ἐστε μάρτυρες τούτων. 49 καὶ ἰδοὺ ἐγὼ ἐξαποστέλλω τὴν ἐπαγγελίαν τοῦ πατρός μου ἐφʼ ὑμᾶς ὑμεῖς δὲ καθίσατε ἐν τῇ πόλει ἕως οὗ ἐνδύσησθε ἐξ ὕψους δύναμιν.


ἀπιστέω to disbelieve, distrust;
ἄφεσις forgiveness, release, remission;
βρώσιμος edible; food;
δείκνυμι to show;
διαλογισμός thought, opinion, discussion;
διανοίγω to open up, reveal;
ἔμφοβος afraid;
ἐνδύω to wear, put on;
ἐνθάδε here, to this place;
ἐπιδίδωμι to give;
ἰχθύς fish;
μετάνοια repentance;
νοῦς mind, thought;
νοῦς broiled, roasted;
ὀστέον bone;
πτοέω to terrify;
συνίημι to understand, to think about;
ταράσσω to trouble;
ὕψος height;
ψαλμός psalm;
ψηλαφάω to touch, feel

Gospel of John

The Resurrection (20:1–10)

1 Τῇ δὲ μιᾷ τῶν σαββάτων Μαρία ἡ Μαγδαληνὴ ἔρχεται πρωῒ σκοτίας ἔτι οὔσης εἰς τὸ μνημεῖον, καὶ βλέπει τὸν λίθον ἠρμένον ἐκ τοῦ μνημείου. 2 τρέχει οὖν καὶ ἔρχεται πρὸς Σίμωνα Πέτρον καὶ πρὸς τὸν ἄλλον μαθητὴν ὃν ἐφίλει ὁ Ἰησοῦς, καὶ λέγει αὐτοῖς Ἦραν τὸν κύριον ἐκ τοῦ μνημείου, καὶ οὐκ οἴδαμεν ποῦ ἔθηκαν αὐτόν. 3 ἐξῆλθεν οὖν ὁ Πέτρος καὶ ὁ ἄλλος μαθητής, καὶ ἤρχοντο εἰς τὸ μνημεῖον. 4 ἔτρεχον δὲ οἱ δύο ὁμοῦ καὶ ὁ ἄλλος μαθητὴς προέδραμεν τάχιον τοῦ Πέτρου καὶ ἦλθεν πρῶτος εἰς τὸ μνημεῖον, 5 καὶ παρακύψας βλέπει κείμενα τὰ ὀθόνια, οὐ μέντοι εἰσῆλθεν. 6 ἔρχεται οὖν καὶ Σίμων Πέτρος ἀκολουθῶν αὐτῷ, καὶ εἰσῆλθεν εἰς τὸ μνημεῖον καὶ θεωρεῖ τὰ ὀθόνια κείμενα, 7 καὶ τὸ σουδάριον, ὃ ἦν ἐπὶ τῆς κεφαλῆς αὐτοῦ, οὐ μετὰ τῶν ὀθονίων κείμενον ἀλλὰ χωρὶς ἐντετυλιγμένον εἰς ἕνα τόπον 8 τότε οὖν εἰσῆλθεν καὶ ὁ ἄλλος μαθητὴς ὁ ἐλθὼν πρῶτος εἰς τὸ μνημεῖον, καὶ εἶδεν καὶ ἐπίστευσεν 9 οὐδέπω γὰρ ᾔδεισαν τὴν γραφὴν ὅτι δεῖ αὐτὸν ἐκ νεκρῶν ἀναστῆναι. 10 ἀπῆλθον οὖν πάλιν πρὸς αὑτοὺς οἱ μαθηταί.


ἐντυλίσσω to wrap in;
κεῖμαι to lie down; to be valid for;
Μαγδαληνή Magdalene;
Μαρία Mary;
μέντοι but, nevertheless;
ὀθόνιον linen cloth, wrapping;
ὁμοῦ together;
οὐδέπω not yet;
παρακύπτω to look through; to lean in; to stoop down;
προτρέχω to run ahead;
πρωΐ in the morning;
σκοτία darkness;
σουδάριον handkerchief;
ταχέως quickly, soon;
τρέχω to run;
φιλέω to love, have affection for; kiss;

Jesus Appears to Mary Magdalene (20:11–18)

11 Μαρία δὲ εἱστήκει πρὸς τῷ μνημείῳ ἔξω κλαίουσα. ὡς οὖν ἔκλαιεν παρέκυψεν εἰς τὸ μνημεῖον, 12 καὶ θεωρεῖ δύο ἀγγέλους ἐν λευκοῖς καθεζομένους, ἕνα πρὸς τῇ κεφαλῇ καὶ ἕνα πρὸς τοῖς ποσίν, ὅπου ἔκειτο τὸ σῶμα τοῦ Ἰησοῦ. 13 καὶ λέγουσιν αὐτῇ ἐκεῖνοι Γύναι, τί κλαίεις; λέγει αὐτοῖς ὅτι Ἦραν τὸν κύριόν μου, καὶ οὐκ οἶδα ποῦ ἔθηκαν αὐτόν. 14 ταῦτα εἰποῦσα ἐστράφη εἰς τὰ ὀπίσω, καὶ θεωρεῖ τὸν Ἰησοῦν ἑστῶτα, καὶ οὐκ ᾔδει ὅτι Ἰησοῦς ἐστιν. 15 λέγει αὐτῇ Ἰησοῦς Γύναι, τί κλαίεις; τίνα ζητεῖς; ἐκείνη δοκοῦσα ὅτι ὁ κηπουρός ἐστιν λέγει αὐτῷ Κύριε, εἰ σὺ ἐβάστασας αὐτόν, εἰπέ μοι ποῦ ἔθηκας αὐτόν, κἀγὼ αὐτὸν ἀρῶ. 16 λέγει αὐτῇ Ἰησοῦς Μαριάμ. στραφεῖσα ἐκείνη λέγει αὐτῷ Ἑβραϊστί Ραββουνι (ὃ λέγεται Διδάσκαλε). 17 λέγει αὐτῇ Ἰησοῦς Μή μου ἅπτου, οὔπω γὰρ ἀναβέβηκα πρὸς τὸν πατέρα πορεύου δὲ πρὸς τοὺς ἀδελφούς μου καὶ εἰπὲ αὐτοῖς Ἀναβαίνω πρὸς τὸν πατέρα μου καὶ πατέρα ὑμῶν καὶ θεόν μου καὶ θεὸν ὑμῶν. 18 ἔρχεται Μαριὰμ ἡ Μαγδαληνὴ ἀγγέλλουσα τοῖς μαθηταῖς ὅτι Ἑώρακα τὸν κύριον καὶ ταῦτα εἶπεν αὐτῇ.


ἀγγέλλω to announce;
βαστάζω to bear;
Ἑβραϊστί in the Hebrew/Aramaic language;
καθέζομαι to sit;
κεῖμαι to lie down; to be valid for;
κηπουρός gardener;
λευκός white;
Μαγδαληνή Magdalene;
Μαρία Mary;
Μαριάμ Miriam; Mary;
οὔπω not yet;
παρακύπτω to look through; to lean in; to stoop down;
ῥαββουνί Rabbi (Aram. my teacher);
στρέφω to turn

Jesus Appears to the Disciples (20:19–23)

19 Οὔσης οὖν ὀψίας τῇ ἡμέρᾳ ἐκείνῃ τῇ μιᾷ σαββάτων, καὶ τῶν θυρῶν κεκλεισμένων ὅπου ἦσαν οἱ μαθηταὶ διὰ τὸν φόβον τῶν Ἰουδαίων, ἦλθεν ὁ Ἰησοῦς καὶ ἔστη εἰς τὸ μέσον, καὶ λέγει αὐτοῖς Εἰρήνη ὑμῖν. 20 καὶ τοῦτο εἰπὼν ἔδειξεν τὰς χεῖρας καὶ τὴν πλευρὰν αὐτοῖς. ἐχάρησαν οὖν οἱ μαθηταὶ ἰδόντες τὸν κύριον. 21 εἶπεν οὖν αὐτοῖς ὁ Ἰησοῦς πάλιν Εἰρήνη ὑμῖν καθὼς ἀπέσταλκέν με ὁ πατήρ, κἀγὼ πέμπω ὑμᾶς. 22 καὶ τοῦτο εἰπὼν ἐνεφύσησεν καὶ λέγει αὐτοῖς Λάβετε πνεῦμα ἅγιον 23 ἄν τινων ἀφῆτε τὰς ἁμαρτίας ἀφέωνται αὐτοῖς ἄν τινων κρατῆτε κεκράτηνται.


ἄν if;
δείκνυμι to show;
ἐμφυσάω to breath in, upon;
κλείω to close, shut;
ὀψία evening;
πλευρά side; rib