John the son of Zebedee?
For decades I assumed the disciple whom Jesus loved was the apostle John the son of Zebedee. I presumed that whatever slight doubt there was, would be eliminated if I took the time to study the matter in detail. Then I had an occasion to read the gospel of John straight through in one sitting, and two things struck me:
- The fourth gospel has none of the episodes found in the synoptic gospels2
Here are four witnesses to the fact that Lazarus was loved by Jesus. This testimony alone should be ample evidence that Lazarus is the Beloved Disciple. Lazarus (John 11-12) disappears by name just as the Beloved Disciple appears (John 13; John 18-21); the two are never seen together. The author of the fourth gospel follows a similar pattern for Mary of Bethany, the sister of Martha and Lazarus (John 11-12; cf. Luke 7:36-8:3; Mark 14:3-9; Matt 26:6-13), who is referred to as Mary Magdalene in John 19-20 (cf. Mark 15-16; Matt 27-28) but not before.3
“Now there was leaning on Jesus’ bosom one of his disciples, who Jesus loved. Simon Peter therefore beckoned to him, that he should ask who it should be of whom he spake. He lying on Jesus’ breast saith unto him, Lord, who is it?” (John 13:23-25; cf. 21:20).
It is unlikely that this disciple is John Zebedee. It wasn’t long before this incident that John and his brother James had manifested an inappropriate superiority complex which annoyed the other ten:
“And James and John, the sons of Zebedee, come unto him, saying, Master, we would that thou shouldest do for us whatsoever we shall desire. And he said unto them, What would ye that I should do for you? They said unto him, Grant unto us that we may sit, one on thy right hand, and the other on thy left hand, in thy glory… And when the ten heard it, they began to be much displeased with James and John” (Mark 10:35-37, 41).
After such self-important thinking, would Jesus have encouraged John Zebedee by giving him the place of honor at this historic meal? Would he have risked further irritating the others by doing so?
In contrast, this place of honor would be especially appropriate for Lazarus, whom Jesus had only recently raised from the dead. Jesus would want him to have it, and so would the others. In fact, this is precisely where we find Lazarus in the previous chapter:
“Then Jesus six days before the Passover came to Bethany, where Lazarus was which had been dead, whom he raised from the dead. There they made him a supper; and Martha served: but Lazarus was one of them that sat at the table with him” (John 12:1-2).
At the trial (John 18:15-16)
“And Simon Peter followed Jesus, and so did another disciple; that disciple was known unto the high priest, and went in with Jesus into the palace of the high priest. But Peter stood at the door without. Then went out that other disciple, which was known unto the high priest, and spake unto her that kept the door, and brought in Peter” (John 18:15-16).4
Compared to John Zebedee, Lazarus is a much better candidate for this other disciple who was known to the high priest.
John Zebedee was a Galilean and a fisherman. Both of these make it highly unlikely for him to have been known to the high priest. It is difficult to imagine a plausible scenario in which John Zebedee was known to the high priest while his coworker Peter was not. The idea that John Z provided fish to the high priest’s household is an invention without evidence, created to fill an obvious gap in the usual assumption. Months after the trial of Jesus, following the healing of the lame man at the temple, Peter and John’s interrogators are surprised by the boldness of these uneducated men: “Now when they [including the high priest and his family, v 6] saw the boldness of Peter and John, and perceived that they were unlearned and ignorant men, they marveled; and they took knowledge of them, that they had been with Jesus” (Acts 4:13). In other words, before this incident the high priest and his entourage had not known John Zebedee personally; they realize that he had been a disciple of Jesus who had exhibited similar qualities (John 7:15).
On the other hand, Lazarus was certainly known by the priests. Lazarus lived in Bethany just outside Jerusalem, providing convenient access to the temple and the priests (cf. the last weeks of Jesus’ ministry).
Moreover, his father was a Pharisee (Luke 7:36-50), Simon the leper (Mark 14:3; Matt 26:6). Lazarus and his sisters Mary and Martha were unmarried, perhaps because leprosy was in the family. Dealing with this disease would have required regular interaction with the priests (see Lev 13-14; Mark 1:40-44; Matt 8:2-4).
Many Jews [i.e., Jewish leaders]5attended Lazarus’ funeral to mourn for him and to comfort his sisters:
“And many of the Jews came to Martha and Mary, to comfort them concerning their brother… The Jews then which were with her in the house, and comforted her, when they saw Mary, that she rose up hastily and went out, followed her, saying, She goeth unto the grave to weep there… When Jesus therefore saw her weeping, and the Jews also weeping which came with her, he groaned in the spirit, and was troubled… Then said the Jews, Behold how he loved him!… Then many of the Jews which came to Mary, and had seen the things which Jesus did, believed on him” (John 11:19, 31, 33, 36, 45).
This behavior shows that Lazarus and his family were well-known to and well-liked by the Jewish leadership.
Following his resurrection, Lazarus was certainly known to the chief priests:
“Then Jesus six days before the Passover came to Bethany, where Lazarus was which had been dead, whom he raised from the dead. There they made him a supper; and Martha served: but Lazarus was one of them that sat at the table with him… Much people of the Jews therefore knew that he was there: and they came not for Jesus’sake only, but that they might see Lazarus also, whom he had raised from the dead. But the chief priests consulted that they might put Lazarus also to death; Because that by reason of him many of the Jews went away, and believed on Jesus” (John 12:1-2, 9-11).
At the cross (John 19:25-27)
“Now there stood by the cross of Jesus his mother, and his mother’s sister, Mary the wife of Cleophas, and Mary Magdalene. When Jesus therefore saw his mother, and the disciple standing by, whom he loved <25>, he saith unto his mother, Woman, behold thy son! Then saith he to the disciple, Behold thy mother! And from that hour that disciple took her unto his own home” (John 19:25-27).
The synoptic gospels Matthew, Mark, and Luke say the apostles had fled so were not at the cross or at most saw it afar off (Mark 14:27, 50; 15:40-41; Matt 26:31 cf. Zech 13:7; Matt 26:56; 27:55-56). This makes it unlikely that John Zebedee could have been “standing by”.
Also, John Zebedee lived in Galilee, a long way for Mary to walk, especially since “from that hour that disciple took her unto his own home.” Besides, would Jesus have entrusted his mother to the care of one whom he had called to leave his family and career to become an itinerant fisher of men? (Mark 1:19-20; 10:23-31, esp. v28). As Peter says, “we have left all and followed thee.”
On the other hand, Lazarus was from Bethany, near Jerusalem, whose family (Mary, Martha, and Lazarus) was loved by Jesus, and whose home would be suitable for his mother Mary. Jesus had spent lots of time at this home with this family. It had been his home base for the weeks leading up to his crucifixion. The record in Acts makes it likely that Mary lived near Jerusalem: “These all continued with one accord in prayer and supplication, with the women, and Mary the mother of Jesus, and with his brethren” (Acts 1:14). Mary living with Lazarus would also explain how Lazarus came to know about the wedding at Cana (John 2:1-11): Mary, who had attended the wedding, told him about it.
At the tomb (John 20:1-10)
“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. Then she runneth to Simon Peter, and to the other disciple, whom Jesus loved <5368 phileo>, and saith unto them, They have taken away the Lord out of the sepulchre, and we know not where they have laid him. Peter therefore went forth, and that other disciple, and came to the sepulchre. So they ran both together: and the other disciple did outrun Peter, and came first to the sepulchre. And he stooping down, and looking in, saw the linen clothes lying; yet went he not in. Then cometh Simon Peter following him, and went into the sepulchre, and seeth the linen clothes lie, and the napkin, that was about his head, not lying with the linen clothes, but wrapped together in a place by itself. Then went in also that other disciple, which came first to the sepulchre, and he saw, and believed. For as yet they knew not the scripture, that he must rise again from the dead. Then the disciples went away again unto their own home” (John 20:1-10).
If this is John Zebedee , then why doesn’t Luke include him? “Then arose Peter, and ran unto the sepulchre; and stooping down, he beheld the linen clothes laid by themselves, and departed, wondering in himself at that which was come to pass” (Luke 24:12). (This is one of many occasions in which one of the gospels omits people known from parallel records to have been present.)
On the other hand, if this is Lazarus, then Mary Magdalene ran to her own home, where she knew everyone was gathered, including Peter and her brother Lazarus. It is easy to imagine how Lazarus would have been able to outrun Peter: first, he was from nearby Bethany, so he knew the way (he had probably taken the same path many times); second, he was energized by his restoration to life and health; and third, he was eager to see Jesus alive again. (Lazarus of all people would know that this was a real possibility).
That Lazarus would have believed first makes sense, too. His spiritual acuity was now off the charts. Furthermore, he immediately recognized the significance of “the napkin”,
“And the napkin <4676 soudarion>, that was about his head, not lying with the linen clothes, but wrapped together in a place by itself. Then went in also that other disciple, which came first to the sepulchre, and he saw, and believed” (John 20:7-8), because it recalls his own experience:
“And he that was dead came forth, bound hand and foot with graveclothes: and his face was bound about with a napkin <4676>. Jesus saith unto them, Loose him, and let him go” (John 11:44).
At the lake – Fishing on the Sea of Tiberias (John 21:1-7)
“After these things Jesus shewed himself again to the disciples at the sea of Tiberias; and on this wise shewed himself. There were together Simon Peter, and Thomas called Didymus, and Nathanael of Cana in Galilee, and the sons of Zebedee , and two other of his disciples. Simon Peter saith unto them, I go a fishing. They say unto him, We also go with thee. They went forth, and entered into a ship immediately… But when morning was now come, Jesus stood on the shore: but the disciples knew not that it was Jesus… Therefore that disciple who Jesus loved <25> saith unto Peter, It is the Lord” (John 21:1-2, 4, 7).
John the disciple, together with his father Zebedee, brother James, and Simon Peter, were Galilean fishermen, so it makes sense that he was among those involved in this episode.
Lazarus fishing on the Sea of Tiberias? This is the only episode that, naturally speaking, fits John Zebedee better than Lazarus. Perhaps this story is included to show that after being raised from the dead Lazarus was now able to travel. He was eager to be with Jesus wherever he went. That Lazarus would be first to recognize the Lord was another example of his increased spiritual awareness.
- The synoptic gospels are Matthew, Mark and Luke. The word “synoptic” comes from Latin (syn-opticus) and means “seeing together”. In contrast with John, these three gospels have many of the same episodes in the ministry of Jesus which are often displayed side by-side in parallel columns.
in which Jesus takes Peter, James, and John into his special confidence. John’s gospel doesn’t have the healing of Jairus’ daughter, or the Transfiguration, or the Olivet Prophecy, or any of the other “inner circle” incidents. These exclusions are strange if John Zebedee were indeed the eyewitness behind this gospel. - This one came like a thunderbolt: if you read John 11-13 without stopping, then the Beloved Disciple is no longer “anonymous” — his name is Lazarus.
This article (in two parts, God willing) summarizes the evidence supporting Lazarus and challenging John Zebedee as the Beloved Disciple. The sections of the article correspond to the appearances of this “other, Beloved Disciple” at the supper (John 13), at the trial (John 18), at the cross (John 19), at the tomb (John 20), and at the lake (John 21). The last of these will be completed in Part 2, which will continue with a sketch of Lazarus as an ideal disciple who mirrors the experiences of Jesus, and then close with a proposed answer to the related question, “Who wrote the gospel according to John?”
At the supper (John 13:23-25)
“Now there was leaning on Jesus’ bosom one of his disciples, who Jesus loved <25 agapao>…” (John 13:23).
The assumption that this Beloved Disciple is the apostle John is common (see John Carter, The Gospel of John, Preface, pp. 5, 37, 149, 203, 213, 219, 229, 232; Harry Whittaker, Studies in the Gospels, pp. 78, 647, 735, 776, 800, 801, 803-805, 826, 834; Sam Alexander, “John: the disciple whom Jesus loved,” The Testimony, December 2013, pp. 454-459; Bill Link, Jr., “The Apostles in the Gospel of John,” The Tidings, August 2014, pp. 366-369; and many others). It is so conventional that it is often presumed without argument.
When evidence is offered it is often based on a process of elimination:
- It starts by asserting that the twelve apostles were the only ones with Jesus at the last supper (Mark 14:17), so the Beloved Disciple must be an apostle.
- He must also be one of those listed in John 21:2 — Simon Peter, Thomas, Nathanael, the sons of Zebedee [James and John], and two other of his disciples (John 21:1-7).
- In addition, he must have had a particularly close relationship with Jesus, which the synoptic gospels show to have been true, for example, of Peter, James, and John.
- Peter is ruled out because he appears with the Beloved Disciple in every episode except at the cross.
- James Zebedee can be crossed off the list because he died too early (Acts 12:1-2, fulfilling Mark 10:39).
- Thomas can be eliminated because he doubted the resurrection (John 20:24-29) in contrast to the reaction of the Beloved Disciple (John 20:1-10).
- Nathanael is not possible because he couldn’t be the unnamed disciple in John 1:35-51, who is assumed to be the same as the Beloved Disciple (see the citations above).
- This leaves John Zebedee or one of the two unnamed disciples in John 20:2.
Therefore, because he had to be an apostle, and he was regularly seen with Peter, and he had a special relationship with Jesus, the Beloved Disciple must be the apostle John.
Some of these arguments and this conclusion are more suspect than may appear at first. For example, the starting point in the above argument is flawed because we know there were other people at the last supper besides Jesus and the twelve; in particular, at least the two candidates to replace Judas were there: “Wherefore of these men which accompanied with us all the time that the Lord Jesus went in and out among us, beginning from the baptism of John, unto that same day that he was taken up from us, must one be ordained to be a witness with us of this resurrection” (Acts 1:21-22). This period includes the last supper.
The concluding inference is not necessary either, as the Beloved Disciple could just as easily be one of the two “other” unnamed disciples mentioned in John 21:2. This possibility is all the more likely because “the disciple… whom Jesus loved” (John 20:2) is repeatedly called “the other disciple” (John 20:2, 3, 4, 8) in the episode of the empty tomb (John 20:1-10), and probably also at the trial in the palace of the high priest (John 18:15-16). Referring to the Beloved Disciple as “the other disciple” might be the author’s way of indicating that he wasn’t one of the twelve.
Besides these issues, we should note the obvious: there are no references anywhere in the New Testament to Jesus “loving” John Zebedee in any special way.
This last point is even more telling because, in contrast, just two chapters earlier Lazarus is explicitly said to be loved by Jesus. This epithet is repeated four times:
- In their message to Jesus that Lazarus is sick, Mary and Martha say, “Lord, behold, he whom thou lovest <5368 phileo from 5384 philos> is sick” (John 11:3) — this phrase by itself is sufficient for Jesus to know that they were talking about their brother Lazarus (John 11:1-3).
- The author declares outright, “Now Jesus loved <25 agapao> Martha, and her sister, and Lazarus” (John 11:5).
- Jesus says, “Our friend <5384 philos; cf. 3:29; 15:13-15> Lazarus sleepeth; but I go, that I may awake him out of sleep” (John 11:11).
4) Finally, seeing Jesus weeping at the grave of Lazarus, the Jews observe, “Behold how he loved <5368> him!” (John 11:33-36).1Both Greek words for “to love” (agapao and phileo) are used for Lazarus (agapao: John 11:5; phileo: 11:3, 36; philos: John 11:11) and for the Beloved Disciple (agapao: John 12:23; 19:26; 21:7,20; phileo: John 20:2). In effect, the two words are used essentially interchangeably as is generally the case (see the multiple discussions on this issue in the Tidings, 1998, pp. 61, 105, 215-217, 271-273, 349-351).
The Origin of the Organic World – Part One