for the last several years, right around easter i have seen the same “devotional” or article floating around social media that describes a hidden meaning behind the fact that, when jesus’ empty tomb was discovered by his disciples, part of the grave clothes were left neatly folded. the explanation from one such article is as follows:
“In order to understand the significance of the folded napkin, you have to understand a little bit about Hebrew tradition of that day. The folded napkin had to do with the Master and Servant, and every Jewish boy knew this tradition.
When the servant set the dinner table for the master, he made sure that it was exactly the way the master wanted it. The table was furnished perfectly, and then the servant would wait, just out of sight, until the master had finished eating, and the servant would not dare touch that table, until the master was finished. Now, if the master were done eating, he would rise from the table, wipe his fingers, his mouth, and clean his beard, and would wad up that napkin and toss it onto the table. The servant would then know to clear the table. For in those days, the wadded napkin meant, ‘I’m done’.
But if the master got up from the table, and folded his napkin, and laid it beside his plate, the servant would not dare touch the table, because… the folded napkin meant, ‘I’m coming back! ‘”HE’S COMING BACK!!!! “
this gets shared, forwarded, and highlighted every year, with the assumption that the significance of the napkin is evidence that jesus is coming back. the problem is, this “significance” seems to be completely fabricated.
the biggest problem with this very sentimental story is that it doesn’t seem to be true- at all. i looked through my personal library (nearly 2,000 volumes) and my digital bible software (many thousands more) and i can’t find any reference to a jewish teaching about the significance of folding a napkin that is mentioned in the article. as far as i can find, this is just another in a long line of well-meaning stories that have been made up in order to make biblical accounts *more* real or believable. stories like this are circulated widely as if it they are proven fact, even though no one ever cites any sources or evidence that what is asserted is true.
another problem with this is the (probably unintentional but no less real) thought that what the bible says about a matter isn’t sufficient- that their needs to be some special insight or hidden truth discovered in order to have even better or more reliable information that the claims of the bible are true.
certainly part of studying and interpreting the scriptures responsibly is to look at background information- linguistics, cultural, etc. there is nothing wrong with seeking to understand the context (time, place, people, culture, language, assumptions, etc.) of the author and original audience. that is what good preachers and writers do.
but just asserting something because it sounds nice or because it would “strengthen the argument” is not only dishonest, it belies an attitude of unbelief.
in this particular case, besides the fact that there is no evidence that this “napkin tradition” ever existed, the whole thing depends on a lot of assumptions.
the greek word john uses that is translated as “napkin” is σουδάριον (soudarion), it *can* mean napkin- but it can *also* mean cloth or handkerchief. the word translated as “folded” – ἐντυλίσσω (entylisso) *can* mean fold- *or* it can mean to wrap, or roll up.
to make this story work, one has to assume that both “napkin” and “folded” are the exact intended meaning of those two greek words. they might be, but it is still an assumption. but the whole illustration falls apart if that isn’t the intended meaning. which is ok- because whether it was a napkin, handkerchief, or cloth and whether it was folded, wrapped, or rolled up- the truth claim john is making isn’t impacted. the main point is that jesus’ tomb was empty. if it was actually a handkerchief and if it was rolled up instead of folded, it doesn’t matter- jesus’ body was not there.
the significance of john even mentioning this piece of fabric (again- whatever it was- napkin, face cloth, handkerchief) is most likely meant to convey the improbability of the speculation that jesus didn’t rise, but that his body was stolen. if thieves stole the body, they wouldn’t have gone to the trouble to take off the grave clothes of what would have been a brutalized and bloody mess of a body. they certainly would not have taken off the grave clothes only to place them neatly on the slab.
it is also probable that john intends to contrast jesus’ rising with his earlier account of lazarus being raised in ch. 11 (same book/ by the same author). jesus had to tell other people to “unbind him and let [lazarus] loose/go”. lazarus needed someone to help him out of his grave clothes- but jesus didn’t need help. his was the first of a new resurrection- not just a reversal of death, but a defeat of it.
the significance (if any was intended by john) of the grave clothes being as they were ,*may* mean (if entylisso means “folded” in this instance- again-*if*) that he just passed through them, like he appeared in the upper room later though the door was locked.
but again- these details are not the point. the point is that even though the tomb had been sealed and guarded, when peter and john looked in on sunday morning, they found jesus’ grave clothes, but not jesus himself. that’s the point of the passage. we distract from the main point by getting lost in speculating about minor details.
the fact that jesus is coming back is not established by the condition of the grave clothes- it is because jesus himself repeatedly said he is returning. we don’t need a made up story to get us excited about that or to actually believe it- or at least we shouldn’t.
the next time you see a social media post with some elaborate or fantastic “hidden meaning” story or some other speculation that there is some extra-biblical information you *must* know in order to really understand the bible- resist the urge to “like” or “share it. do some research first.
when christians- again, even with good intentions- pass stuff like this around with no evidence, it makes us less credible to people when we try to share things we can know, but are hard to believe. the same is true with spreading conspiracy theories. unfortunately, preachers can be the worst at this- coming up with a neat story or “insight” to sound creative or to get an emotional response- sacrificing the truth and their integrity in the process.
god has spoken in his word and the plain meaning is sufficient- the lord doesn’t need our help to dress it up or make it more interesting or believable.
the lowercase 