“Paper on a passage from the Gospel of John” by Hugh O’Donnell, due Oct 25, 2005

Essay #2 on a “passage” from John’s Gospel (19:38-42): “The Burial of Jesus”

by Hugh O’Donnell THEO 64103 October 17, 2005

The 19^th chapter of John’s Gospel concludes the crucifixion of Jesus with his burial. The burial account (19:38-42) differs from the synoptic gospels in three significant ways. First, Jesus’ burial covering is not described as a single shroud but multiple wrappings. Secondly, Jesus is laid to rest by two male witnesses having status in the Jewish community. The author of John leaves no doubt to the details of body preparation and location of Jesus’ tomb certifying his death on the cross. Lastly, John describes a kingly burial concluding a crucifixion narrative where Jesus dies as “King of the Jews.”

The Fourth Gospel says Jesus’ body was covered with multiple wrappings before being placed in the tomb (19:40) similar to the way Lazarus was buried in John 11:44[1]. In contrast, Matthew, Mark and Luke’s Gospels all describe the wrapping as a singular linen shroud (Mt 27:59, Mk 15:46, Lk 23:53). The discrepancy was not important to the Johannine community[2]. However, later generations would find the detail problematic for those who hoped a 14 by 3.5 foot linen cloth, stored in a Turin Italy Cathedral, containing the image of a crucified man, was the authentic burial wrapping of Jesus.

The contrasting burial details of John’s Gospel eliminated the problematic synoptic suggestions Jesus’ burial was not properly documented, was only provisional[3], and was not sufficiently described. The synoptic burial testimonies all had only one male witness - Joseph of Arimathea. Jesus knew the importance of having two males attest facts as true (Jn 8:17). The Synoptic Gospels had no second male witness. The additional witnesses were women ( Matt 27:61, Mark 15:40, Luke 23:55). Having women preparing spices and ointments (Lk 23:56) for later use (Lk 24:1) would have been very confusing to the Johannine community. Mark’s Gospel had women coming to anoint the body of Jesus on Sunday (Mk 16:1). John’s Gospel completes the burial on Friday according to proper Jewish custom (19:40). Finally, John’s explicit description of a royal burial eliminated additional synoptic confusion about Jesus’ burial.

Certainly, the most problematic synoptic detail for the Johannine community would have been the absence of two male witnesses. Women witnesses would have been highly suspect (Jn 4:27). The social status of witnesses was a key emphasis item throughout John’s Gospel. Testimonies had to come from honorable, educated, prominent and male people[4]. The best witnesses were high status, prominent persons like Joseph of Arimathea and the Pharisee Teacher Nicodemus. In John’s Gospel both Joseph of Arimathea and Nicodemus prepare Jesus’ body for burial (Jn 19:38-39). Both witnesses were highly respected influential members of the Jewish ruling authority (Jn 3:1, Jn 7:50, Mk 15:43, Lk 23:50). Two men witnessed Jesus laid into the tomb and two men witnessed the empty tomb and wrappings on Sunday (Jn 20:3-8).

A less important synoptic problem for the Johannine community would have been the transitional or provisional nature of Jesus’ burial. Women observing the tomb was extraneous detail as was the story these women intended to do further anointing on Sunday. John’s Gospel completes the burial of Jesus on Friday immediately after his death in accord with Jewish Pharisaic custom (19:40.

Obviously missing from the synoptics, is any mention of the royal nature of Jesus’ burial. In John’s Gospel, Jesus was crucified as King of the Jews (19:3,12,14,15,19,21) therefore Nicodemus prepares the body of Jesus like a king. He brings an extravagant amount, 100 pounds (19:39) of spices, to anoint Jesus’ body. Exegetes Bultmann[5] and Lindras[6] suggest this excessive amount is similar to the account of King Herod the Great’s burial[7] where an extravagant amount of spices was also used. The excessive amount of spices left no doubt the anointing was fully accomplished and also linked the account to the description in Chapter 12 where Mary prefigured Jesus’ burial anointing (12:7) a few days earlier. Mary used an excessive amount of perfume at Bethany to anoint Jesus’ feet (12:3,5). Both descriptions portray extravagant acts of love and respect[8].

For the author of the Fourth Gospel, Jesus’ burial was a fitting end for a crucified king (Jn 19:3-21). John’s kingly burial account explicitly and appropriately concludes a crucifixion narrative where Jesus is crowned by thorns and hailed as king throughout his trial. Two well established Jewish authorities, who hesitated to acknowledge Jesus as King during His ministry, bury him. The outpouring of royal spirit from Jesus’ throne in the passage just proceeding the burial (19:34), opened the hearts of two secret subjects of this King who now show their unreserved love with an extravagant and kingly burial. As Raymond Brown well noted, if there is a theological theme hidden symbolically in the narrative, it should be the terminal stage of a theme, such as kingship, that played a prominent part in the crucifixion[9].

Finally, the location of Jesus’ burial place depicted in John’s gospel leaves no uncertainty that Jesus was buried in a well defined and honorable place. None of the Synoptic Gospels describe the burial place as a garden nor do they exactly locate the tomb as being next to the crucifixion site like John does. Only Matthew gives specifics on the location of the tomb saying Jesus was laid in Joseph of Arimathea’s own new tomb (27:60). John emphasizes the new tomb was a place “where no one had ever been laid” (19:42). The accounts of John’s gospel leaves little chance people can latter claim Jesus’ body was lost or stolen during a quick and provisional burial.

The burial description in John’s Gospel clarifies problems contained in the Synoptic Gospels for the Johannine community. Jesus’ body had a proper burial preparation, one fit for a King, which fully certified his death on the cross. The location of Jesus’ burial site was now well established, close to the site of his crucifixion, which everyone could certify was an honorable and well defined garden tomb. Two well respected male witnesses testified to both the preparation of Jesus’ body and placement of Jesus’ body in a well defined tomb. For the Johannine community, the author of John left no confusion that Jesus was crucified to a certain death and certain burial as King of the Jews.

[1] C. K. Barrett, The Gospel According to St John, pg 298, S. P. C. K., London, 1955.

[2] Rudolf Bultmann , The Gospel of John: A commentary, pg 680, Westminster Press, Philadelphia, 1971.

[4] Jerome H. Neyrey, The Trials (Forensic) and Tribulations (Honor Challenges) of Jesus: John 7 in Social Science Perspective, Biblical Theology Bulletin, pg 110, Vol 26, 1996.

[6] Barnabas Lindars, The New Century Bible Commentary: The Gospel of John, pg 592, Wm. B. Eerdmans Publ. Co, Grand Rapids, 1972

[7] Josephus, Antiquities, xvii,viii,3, pg 199

[9] Raymond E. Brown, The Gospel According to John (xiii-xxi), Pg 960, Doubleday and Company, Garden City, New York, 1970.