Matthew 28.1 How should this be translated?

                                                                                                                Graeme McChesney    12/09

 

 

 

The Greek Text of Matthew 28.1 contains two words which affect the way translators understand this verse.

Not only does the understanding of these two words affect how the verse should read, but this in turn has a profound effect on another couple of issues.

1) When does the Biblical day begin?

2) What time of day did the resurrection of Christ occur?

So, what we want to do in this paper is look at the problem these two words cause and then create the likely scenario which would apply according to the traditional Friday/Sunday Easter understanding most take from this.  A) Can we fit all the events which the four Gospel writers mention, into a coherent time frame if Matt. 28.1 says that the women came to the tomb in the hour just before the sun rose on Sunday morning? B) Does this scenario harmonize with the other three writers?  In the process we should also discover when the Biblical day began in the NT era.

Here is the Greek text of the verse in question from the ISA program located at www.scripture4all.org

Before we look at these two words, here are several translations of this verse.

The KJV is to the right of this text. You can see that these are translated according to two opinions.

1)      That the two women came to the tomb after the Sabbath had ended and towards sunrise on Sunday morning.

2)      That they came before the Sabbath had ended and concluded their visit before sunset.

Now after the Sabbath, near dawn on the first day of the week , Mary of Magdala and the other Mary went to take a look at the tomb.(Amplified NT)

Early on Sunday morning, as the new day was dawning, Mary Magdalene and the other Mary went out to the tomb (Living NT)

Now after the Sabbath,  toward the dawn of the first day of the week.....(RSV)

Now late on the Sabbath, as it began to dawn towards the first day of the week.....(NASB)

Now it is the evening of the sabbaths. At the lighting up into one of the sabbaths came Mary *Magdalene and the other Mary to behold the sepulcher. (Concordant Literal Version)

 

But late of [the] Sabbaths, at the drawing on towards one of [the] Sabbaths ....( Marshalls Interlinear)

 

The two words we want to look at are 1) opse which is variously translated as “late on”, “after”, “evening”, “even”  and  2) epiphosko where epi means “upon” and phos means “light”. This word is translated ‘dawn’, ‘dawning’ from the idea of light shining upon – hence sunrise. But also as ”drawing on”.

Opse

Opse is an adverb and is used three times in the NT. Here in Matt.28.1, also in Mark 11.19 and 13.35.

Strongs G3796

 from the same as G3694 (through the idea of backwardness);

 

(adverbially) late in the day; by extension, after the close of the day:--(at)

even, in the end.

 

Notice Strongs has a bob each way here.

 

AV Mk 11:19 And when even [opse] was come, he went out of the city.

AV Mk 13:35 Watch ye therefore: for ye know not when the master of the house cometh, at even,[opse]  or at midnight, or at the cockcrowing, or in the morning:

 

But Mark tells us in this last verse that “even” [opse] is a time well before midnight.  Notice that this verse divides the night portion of a twentyfour hour day into four sections – even, midnight, cockcrowing, morning.

Here is a section taken from the Blue Letter Bible web site – www.blueletterbible.org  on this subject.

           

Watches:

the periods into which the time between sunset and sunrise was divided. They are so called because watchmen relieved each other at each of these periods. There are frequent references in Scripture to the duties of watchmen who were appointed to give notice of the approach of an enemy (2Sa 18:24-27; 2Ki 9:17-20; Isa 21:5-9). They were sometimes placed for this purpose on watch-towers (2Ki 17:9; 18:8). Ministers or teachers are also spoken of under this title (Jer 6:17; Eze 33:2-9; Hbr 13:17).

The watches of the night were originally three in number, (1) "the beginning of the watches" (Lam 2:19); (2) "the middle watch" (Jdg 7:19); and (3) "the morning watch" (Exd 14:24; 1Sa 11:11), which extended from two o'clock to sunrise. But in the New Testament we read of four watches, a division probably introduced by the Romans (Mat 14:25; Mar 6:48; Luk 12:38). (See DAY.)

These three verses in red show these four ‘watches’ in NT times. So what period of time did “even” cover? Matt. 16.2 tells us this is the time when the sky can be red. Therefore this is around sunset. Mark 1.32 confirms this. “Even” [opse] is a period around sunset. It is definitely well before midnight, because that is the next watch.

.

Most people do not have any trouble understanding these two verses in Mark and nor do the translators. The word in Mark’s two verses clearly means ‘evening’. But people do have trouble when it comes to Matt. 28.1 because although the same word opse is used there, it is variously given different meanings – ‘after’, ‘Sunday morning’ ‘late on’ etc. The reason for this is because of this second word we want to study – epiphosko.

 

Epiphosko

 

This word strongly influences how opse has been interpreted. While we have a fairly precise definition given to us in Mark 13.35 – evening [opse]  being definitely before midnight - when it comes to Matt. 28.1 there are many who claim that it can also mean the whole night portion of the 24 hour day from sunset through to dawn. So, we have various translators who claim this word opse must mean “after the Sabbath”. Why? Because epi – upon and phos – light,  strongly suggest the dawning rays of the sun on a new day.

The dilemma then is this: How can opse mean “evening” on the previous day when epiphosko means “dawn”? This is not a problem I have concocted but is readily admitted by many scholars.

Matt 28:1

         

Matthew begins his account of the resurrection with two temporal markers, after the sabbath and toward the dawn of the first day of the week. The first of these temporal markers is sufficiently clear: the sabbath had come to an end. But the second marker is not altogether clear. The Jewish day actually began at sunset; it was the Roman day which began with sunrise. Nevertheless the vast majority of translations apparently accept the meaning as represented in RSV and TEV (" as Sunday morning was dawning"). But the same verb is used here as in Luke 23:54 ("and the sabbath was beginning"; RSV footnote "... was dawning"), and so Matthew may well mean "late on the sabbath, at the beginning of the first day of the week." If this interpretation is accepted, then the events took place in the evening following the sabbath day, and the scene is that of two women traveling in the darkness to visit the tomb. Thus Matthew's account would contrast with Mark's, according to which the three women purchased spices at the end of the sabbath day, but did not actually take them to the tomb until early the next morning. This suggests that in this part of his narrative Matthew represents the earliest tradition, which was later succeeded by the more popular account of the early Sunday morning visit.

(from the UBS Handbook Series.  Copyright (c) 1961-1997, by United Bible Societies) (emp. Added)

 

This commentary has a number of questionable statements here, but it is an honest admission that not all scholars agree on what Matthew is saying. The majority prefer  “after the Sabbath and towards dawn on the first day of the week”, but not everyone agrees, because they see the way opse is used in Mark and also because Luke 23.54 does not use epiphosko to mean the first rays of dawn.

AV Lk 23:54 And that day was the preparation, and the sabbath drew on.[epiphosko]

 

This is the only other place in the NT where we find this word. See how it is used here? The preparation day was still in progress before the Sabbath had started, but Luke uses epiphosko to describe this progress towards the beginning of this next day at sunset. The translators could not avoid the obvious here and so have correctly applied the true meaning. But they have not been consistent when it comes to Matt. 28.1. Here they have turned to their perception of what this word literally means when they should have referred to its usage in the only other place it is found. They have reasoned correctly that you simply cannot have the light of dawn approaching if the Preparation day has not yet concluded at sunset – hence,  “drawing towards”.  But in Matt. 28.1 many have taken a strictly literal approach. This has distorted the understanding of the passage and as we will see, makes the harmonisation of  the four accounts impossible. Since other translations mentioned above have also confidently translated Matt. 28.1 as towards sunrise, then let’s see how they handle this verse here is Luke.

Amplified : for the Sabbath was dawning (approaching)

Living NT: this was done late on Friday afternoon, the day of preparation for the Sabbath .*Note that this translation does not even attempt to tackle the second part

NASB :  And it was the preparation day, and the Sabbath was about to begin

RSV :  it was the day of Preparation and the Sabbath was beginning.

CLV:  And it was the day of preparation, and a sabbath lighted up.

 

Marshall Interlinear : And a day it was of preparation and a Sabbath was coming on.

 

Here we see consistency because that is the only logical meaning, but not so with Matt. 28.1.

· Some believe this is proof that the new day started at sunrise and that Luke is using epiphosko here to show this, but we will get to this later in the paper.

But notice how Robertson, in his Word Pictures of NT  sees this.

Concerning Matt. 28.1 he says:

This careful chronological statement according to Jewish days clearly means that before the Sabbath was over, that is, before 6.00pm this visit by the women was made “to see the sepulchre”….Both Matthew here and Luke (23.54) use dawn (epiphosko) for the dawning of the 24 day at sunset, not the dawning of the twelve hour day at sunrise. [emph. Mine]

Further, he says this:

Both Matthew here and Luke (#Lu 23:54) use

                dawn (\epiph“sk“\) for the dawning of the twenty-four hour-day

                at sunset, not of the dawning of the twelve-hour day at sunrise.

                The Aramaic used the verb for dawn in both senses. The so-called

                Gospel of Peter has \epiph“sk“\ in the same sense as Matthew and

 Luke as does a late papyrus. Apparently the Jewish sense of

 "dawn" is here expressed by this Greek verb. Allen thinks that

                Matthew misunderstands Mark at this point, but clearly Mark is

                speaking of sunrise and Matthew of sunset. Why allow only one

                visit for the anxious women? (WPNT, Robertson)

 

How should Matt. 28.1 read?

 

We know scholars and translators are divided on this, some claiming this is after the Sabbath and some before it ended. We also know that the first group are inconsistent in their use of this word, claiming it means two things, as does Strongs.

 

Why? Well, it could be that they have been influenced by the Friday/Sunday traditions of Easter, and are attempting to harmonize these events according to their traditions, but we can’t be sure of this motive.

 

Is there no other way that we can confirm who is correct here?

Yes, there is!

By gathering together the four accounts of these events described by Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, we can compare which scenario fits and is the most logical. The reason we are using Matt. 28.1 as our starting point is because this verse is the most problematic and Matthew seems to give a blow by blow account of all that happened to the these two women from the time they left to go to the tomb until they met the risen Christ.

 

Two options

 

The two options are that these women approached the tomb after the Sabbath and towards sunrise or before the Sabbath had ended. The first option gives us a limited time frame in which to fit all the events which happened around the time of the resurrection – probably about an hour.

 

The second gives us about 10-12 hours, because the starting point is during the Sabbath, not sunrise.

 

We are not going to dwell on all the discrepancies which we will come across with the first scenario because they have been dealt with at length in another paper, Unravelling the Gospel Accounts of the Resurrection. Instead we will trace the movement of these women from Bethany – because that is where Mary Magdalene lived, about 2 miles from Jerusalem - to the tomb, and see which option would fit. You will notice that each writer centres his focus on the tomb and we will see that there are different terms used by each writer to show the time frame they are talking about.  Whether we take their time as the actual journey to the tomb or the arrival there is not that important because Bethany [ where Mary M lived ] was only about 2 miles from Jerusalem and about half an hour away under a brisk walk.

* According to a web site I looked at, a brisk walking speed for women today is between 3.5 and 4.5 miles per hour. We have to remember that women back then were fit – walking everywhere – so let’s assume 4 miles per hour.

 

Different women,  different times

One of the keys to harmonizing these events is to realise that each writer is talking about different groups of women who come to the tomb at slightly different times.

 

{For the purposes of this study though, we are assuming, as do most, that there was only one visit to the tomb on the Sunday morning at sunrise.}

First, it is claimed that Matthew writes of two women who came as the first rays of dawn were approaching. [epiphosko]

AV Mt 28:1 . In the end of the sabbath, as it began to dawn toward the first [day] of the week, came Mary Magdalene and the other Mary to see the sepulchre.

 

Mark says a group of women – “they” – came ‘at the rising of the sun’. Literally, this should read, ‘the sun having risen’, as we will shortly see.

 

AV Mk 16:2 And very early in the morning the first [day] of the week, they came unto the sepulchre at the rising of the sun.

 

Luke mentions a group – “they” – who came ‘very early in the morning’. This term means ‘at deep dawn’. We will examine this too.

 

AV Lk 24:1 . Now upon the first [day] of the week, very early in the morning, they came unto the sepulchre, bringing the spices which they had prepared, and certain [others] with them.

 

But John concentrates on only one person – Mary Magdalene – who arrives ‘while it is yet dark’.  Again, this describes a slightly different time of the morning.

 

AV Jn 20:1 . The first [day] of the week cometh Mary Magdalene early, when it was yet dark, unto the sepulchre, and seeth the stone taken away from the sepulchre.

 

So, a major problem with reading Matt. 28.1 as one continuous story flow is that in doing so, we have to gloss over the specific words or phrases each writer uses to describe the time he is talking about.

 

Matthew 28.1 – at sunrise [epiphosko]

Mark 16.1 – after sunrise [lit. ‘the sun having risen’]

Luke 24.1 – deep dawn [orthrou batheos]                

John 20.1  - darkness  [skoita]

 

Each word here has a slightly different meaning and describes a different time frame.

 

· Some will say, yes, they left home at different times and so the writers are describing different times in their journey. But the time difference between departure and arrival would be a maximum of half an hour and this does not account for the spread of meanings these words convey.

 These words, when we look at their meaning, cover a period of more than twelve hours.

Further, we will see that “they” does not necessarily mean the specific women mentioned in the previous verse, nor that each writer is giving us a continuous narrative.

 

Going into detail

 

We have already dealt with the meaning of epiphosko in Matt. 28.1. What we are trying to do now is provide an additional witness as to which way this word should be used. So let’s look at what Mark says.

He says “they” came “at the rising of the sun” (Mark 16.2)

Vincent, Word Studies in the NT, vol. 11, p. 233 says “at the rising of the sun” should be “when the sun was risen”.

Wuest, Word Studies in the Greek NT, vol. 1.  p. 289. “The words ‘at the rising of the sun’ are literally ‘the sun having risen’. The action of the aorist participle precedes that of the leading verb. The sun arose before they reached the tomb.

 

Luke also talks about a group of women – “they” – who came “very early in the morning”.( Luke 24.1)

The Greek words  here translated in the KJV as ‘very early in the morning’ are orthros bathus . Strongs says this means sunrise, but it does not. It refers to the time before sunrise and is translated ‘early depths’ in the CLV.

 

CLV Lk 24:1 Now in the early depths of one of the sabbaths, they, and certain others together with them, came to the tomb, bringing the spices which they make ready.

 

Vincent has this to say, ibid. vol. 11, p. 433.  Lit. at deep dawn, or the dawn being deep. He says this is the time of the very early glimmer of dawn on the horizon before the rays of the sun are visible at sunrise.

Robertson also recognizes this phrase means before sunrise..

At early dawn (\orthrou batheos\). Genitive of time.

 Literally, at deep dawn. The adjective \bathus\ (deep) was often

 used of time. This very idiom occurs in Aristophanes, Plato, et

 cetera.

 

Zodhiates, Word Studies in the NT, p.307 says: Bathus: ....deep (John 4.11; Sept. Job11.8; Prov. 22.14) . Deep, in a metaphorical sense, as sleep (Acts 20.9) . As spoken of the morning, early, very early (Luke 24.1) ; Lit. Deep twilight, earliest dawn, ....

And finally John 20.1 says that Mary M came to the tomb “while it was yet dark”.

The words underlined here are from the Greek proi skotias eti eoses. Literally this reads, ‘morning of darkness still being’.

CLV Jn 20:1 Now, on one of the sabbaths, Miriam Magdalene is coming to the tomb in the morning, there being still darkness, and is observing the stone taken away from the door of the tomb.

This word, ‘darkness’ is skotias. It means darkness with no sunlight as explained in more detail in the above mentioned paper on Unravelling these things. Look up the Blue Letter Bible at www.blueletterbible.org  under Strongs  # G4553 and you will see this:

 

1) darkness

2) the darkness due to want of light

3) metaph. used of ignorance of divine things, and its associated wickedness, and the resultant misery in hell

The encapsulated meaning of the word is found in this verse.

CLV 2C 6:14 Do not |become~ diversely |yoked with unbelievers. For anywhat partnership have righteousness and lawlessness? Or anywhat communion has light towardwith darkness? [skotia]

 

Vines Dictionary of NT Words, taken from the Blue Letter site, says this of skotia.

Dark, Darken, Darkly, Darkness:

is used

(a) of physical darkness, "dark," Jhn 6:17, lit., "darkness had come on," and Jhn 20:1, lit., "darkness still being;"

(b) of secrecy, in general, whether what is done therein is good or evil, Mat 10:27; Luk 12:3;

(c) of spiritual or moral "darkness," emblematic of sin, as a condition of moral or spiritual depravity, Mat 4:16; Jhn 1:5; 8:12; 12:35, 46; 1Jo 1:5; 2:8, 9, 11.

John does not use a word which is a mixture of light and darkness because he is not talking

about dawn.

Bullingers Companion Bible in notes on this verse says ‘early’ here means 3-4.00am.

 

Disregarding Matthews account then, we have a spread of times ranging from perhaps 3.00 am or even earlier, until after sunrise. This is at least three hours. The light ranges from complete darkness through to after sunrise.

On reading these three accounts, none of the women lingered long at the tomb. At best we could say they were there for a few minutes – certainly way less than an hour - because all of them were eager to get away and spread the good news, or because they were terrified at what they saw.

 

Here is a partial list of other discrepancies which also become problematic if Matt. 28 is one continuous story flow.

1)      If the resurrection occurred at sunrise and all the women arrived around this time, then they would have met each other. But the writers are at pains to show that they acted independently of each other and had different reactions to what they saw and heard. Some saw different things from others. One group saw two angels, another just one.  Some were scared and spoke to no one, while others ran to tell the Disciples.  Some saw Jesus and held Him, while others didn’t see Him at all. Mary was told not to hold Him.

2)      A sunrise resurrection with all the women converging about the same time, does not account for the soldiers sleeping like dead men, but at the same time travelling into Jerusalem to tell the religious leaders what happened. There is not enough time for this.

3)      Mark 16.9 says that Mary Magdalene saw Jesus first. How could she do this if all the other women were in the vicinity at the same general time?

4)      John describes Mary M’s visit to the tomb in great detail in John 20.1-18. This visit - her discovery of the empty tomb, the rush to tell the two Disciples, their arrival and inspection of the tomb to confirm it was empty, her lingering and then finally meeting Jesus – must have taken at least half an hour. John’s use of the word skotia to describe the time this happened and  coupled with Mark 16.9 confirms that all this took place before the other groups arrived. Otherwise she would have surely run into other women who came not knowing the stone had already been rolled away.

A Sabbath visit in Matt. 28.1

Translating this verse to read that the two Marys came after the Sabbath and towards dawn on the first day of the week, creates insurmountable problems in trying to harmonizing the resurrection events.

a)      It makes the four accounts contradictory and hopelessly incoherent.

b)      It squeezes all the events into an impossible time frame of about an hour and does not allow for John 20.1-18

c)      It ignores the specific words used to describe the time of day various women came to the tomb

d)     It gives a false impression that the resurrection occurred on Sunday morning when it is demonstratively proved that it did not.

So, when we read Matthews account, we are not reading a blow by blow description of everything that happened in time sequence. He is merely giving us some of the highlights over a period of twelve hours. In fact, in these latter verses of this chapter he is talking about events a week later. Here is how this verse should read.

But late of [the] Sabbaths, at the drawing on towards one of [the] Sabbaths ....( Marshalls Interlinear)

These two women came to the tomb late on the Sabbath day. They had been and gone before the next verse takes place, therefore before the Sabbath had ended.

AV Mt 28:2 And, behold, there was a great earthquake: for the angel of the Lord descended from heaven, and came and rolled back the stone from the door, and sat upon it.

 

AV Mt 28:3 His countenance was like lightning, and his raiment white as snow:

Verse 1 is talking about events before the Sabbath ended. Verse 2-3  describe what happened when the Sabbath had just ended, as does verse 4.

 

AV Mt 28:4 And for fear of him the keepers did shake, and became as dead [men].

 

But verse 5- 11 is several hours later. “The women” here are not the same ones as in verse 1.

 

AV Mt 28:5 And the angel answered and said unto the women, Fear not ye: for I know that ye seek Jesus, which was crucified.

 

That this cannot be Mary M in this group is explained in the companion paper Unravelling the Accounts of the Resurrection. Matthew is highlighting another group here. He does not tell us when this group arrived at the tomb, but it must have been after Mary’s visit described in John 20. .

 

AV Mt 28:6 He is not here: for he is risen, as he said. Come, see the place where the Lord lay.

AV Mt 28:7 And go quickly, and tell his disciples that he is risen from the dead; and, behold, he goeth before you into Galilee; there shall ye see him: lo, I have told you.

AV Mt 28:8 And they departed quickly from the sepulchre with fear and great joy; and did run to bring his disciples word.

AV Mt 28:9 And as they went to tell his disciples, behold, Jesus met them, saying, All hail. And they came and held him by the feet, and worshipped him.

AV Mt 28:11 . Now when they were going, behold, some of the watch came into the city, and shewed unto the chief priests all the things that were done.

 

This is not the same group that Mark is talking about in chapter 16 because they were afraid and did not tell anyone about what they saw. Nor did they see Jesus.

Nor is it the group of women in Luke’s account because they saw two angels and did see Jesus. Matthew says about the group here, that they saw one angel and then Jesus.

 

So it seems we have probably four different visits to the tomb on that Sunday morning. The first was Mary Magdalene by herself, in the wee hours of the morning. The other women arrived at various times after she had left  - from “deep dawn” until after sunrise.  This period covers about an hour and left plenty of time for them to arrive and depart unbeknown to each other. Mary M’s arrival and departure occurred in the hours before this.

The NT day began when?

 

Matt. 28.1 gives us a clue as to the status of the Sabbath ending. While some claim that epiphosko offers proof that the new day began at sunrise, they are like many translators who have simply taken this word at face value and applied a literal interpretation. But when correctly understood, this word does not support a sunrise start to the day. Further, when we examine the times in which the women arrived at the tomb we have two groups who arrived before sunrise and yet each writer says these things took place on the first day of the week. Mary arrived while it was still dark – skotia – and another group arrived at deep dawn. Both before sunrise, and yet Sunday had begun before this.

 

It is clear that the new day then began at sunset because this is the only other possible marker before sunrise. Those who claim otherwise must contend with these facts.

 

With this information presented in this paper, it is plain to see that the rise of the tradition that Christ was resurrected on Sunday morning is based on a misinterpretation of Matt. 28.1.  The insistence on a false reading of this verse also does great damage to the credibility of the NT writers, making them out to be an unreliable group who cannot even coordinate writing about the most momentous occasion in their lives.

 

Rather, when correctly understood, Matt 28.1 is a key to unravelling a fascinating and completely coherent harmony of  what happened on that day. It is further internal proof from the Scriptures themselves that no human mind could have concocted to write these events down in such a way that it has fooled millions of people into believing a falsehood.

 

It is further evidence that correctly cutting the Word of truth (11 Tim. 2.15) is an extremely rewarding and faith-building experience which gives peace of mind showing the Scripture cannot be broken.