Why does Matthew 28:1 mention two women visiting the tomb? Text of Matthew 28:1 “After the Sabbath, at dawn on the first day of the week, Mary Magdalene and the other Mary went to see the tomb.” Immediate Literary Purpose Matthew’s Gospel is tightly structured around paired witnesses (Joseph/Mary, two demon-possessed men, two blind men, two donkeys, two false witnesses, two women). Naming “Mary Magdalene and the other Mary” continues this pattern and supplies two corroborating observers for the resurrection events that follow (vv. 2-10). Identities of the Two Women 1. Mary Magdalene—introduced in 27:56; delivered from seven demons (Luke 8:2), she exemplifies radical transformation. 2. “The other Mary”—identified in 27:56 as “the mother of James and Joseph,” probably the wife of Clopas (John 19:25). Her sons were known to the Jerusalem church (Acts 1:13), making her a verifiable eyewitness for early readers. Historical Context: Women as Witnesses First-century Judaism discounted female testimony (Josephus, Antiquities 4.219). By selecting women—whose statements would never be invented by fabricators—Matthew preserves historical memory, not apologetic convenience. The criterion of embarrassment thus supports authenticity. Legal Sufficiency in Jewish Jurisprudence Deuteronomy 19:15 required “two or three witnesses” to establish a matter. While rabbinic courts preferred male witnesses, Matthew portrays God Himself convening a higher court in which two qualified, godly women satisfy the Mosaic standard (compare the two angels at the tomb in John 20:12). Harmony with the Other Gospels Mark 16:1 lists Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James, and Salome. Luke 24:10 adds “Joanna.” John focuses on Mary Magdalene, later mentioning the others implicitly (20:2). Each writer selects names for thematic reasons; none contradict the others. Matthew, emphasizing Jewish legal sufficiency and covenant fulfillment, highlights the two most prominent. Narrative Consistency Across Manuscripts Every extant Greek manuscript family—Alexandrian (𝔓^45, 𝔓^75, Vaticanus, Sinaiticus), Byzantine, Western—preserves the dual-women wording without meaningful variant. Patristic citations (Ignatius, c. A.D. 110; Justin Martyr, c. 150) quote the verse verbatim, showing stable transmission. Theological Motifs • Creation/New Creation: Two women arrive “at dawn,” paralleling the first light of Genesis 1:3; the new creation is authenticated by a pair, just as the first creation was witnessed by the triune Godhead. • Covenant Witness: Women first at His birth (Mary, Elizabeth, Anna) and now at the empty tomb bookend the incarnation-resurrection arc. • Reversal of the Fall: Whereas Eve and Adam witnessed the inception of death, two redeemed women first see death’s defeat. Archaeological Corroboration The rolling-stone tombs characteristic of the wealthy in Second-Temple Judea (e.g., the Sanhedrin-member Joseph of Arimathea’s tomb recently paralleled by the Hazon-Gabriel Tomb find) match Matthew’s description (27:60). Access to such tombs was open to small groups, lending plausibility to a two-woman visit at dawn. Answering the “Why Only Two?” Objection • Selectivity, not exclusion: Matthew cites witnesses relevant to his narrative aim; silence about Salome or Joanna is not denial. • Narrative economy: The evangelist telescopes the pre-dawn group’s approach (v.1) and focuses on Mary Magdalene’s subsequent encounter (vv. 9-10), reflecting eyewitness condensation rather than contradiction. • Emphasis on reliability: Two named, traceable persons > a longer anonymous list. Practical Implications for Discipleship • Faithful Presence: These women remained at the cross (27:55-56), the burial (27:61), and the tomb (28:1). Matthew commends steadfast devotion. • Evangelistic Commission: They become the first heralds of the risen Lord (28:10), foreshadowing the Great Commission (28:18-20). Their example urges believers to bear witness despite cultural marginalization. Conclusion Matthew specifies two women to provide legally sufficient, historically credible, theologically rich, and pastorally instructive testimony to the reality of the resurrection. Their presence fulfills Scripture’s demand for multiple witnesses, harmonizes seamlessly with the other Gospels, and underscores God’s intentional reversal of human expectations by entrusting the proclamation of His greatest miracle to those the culture least valued—thereby magnifying His glory and the reliability of the Gospel record. |
    |