The Gospel According to Lazarus

The scriptures referred to are John 11:1-45.

New Testament Professor Ben Witherington III has an intriguing theory about the beloved disciple mentioned in the Gospel of John. He thinks the beloved disciple was Lazarus and not the apostle John, the son of Zebedee. And according to the 1^st century bishop Papias, the Gospel of John, along with the 3 letters of John and the book of Revelation, were done not by the apostle but by John the elder of Patmos, whom Papias knew. Witherington thinks the fourth gospel comes largely from Lazarus and was edited by John. His reasons? Lazarus lived in Judea where most of that Gospel takes place rather than Galilee. It doesn't mention any of the things where the apostle John would be present, like his call to follow Jesus, the resurrection of Jairus' daughter, the transfiguration, or Jesus' prayer in Gethsemane. The beloved disciple isn't mentioned until after John 11:3 when Lazarus' sisters send Jesus word that “he whom you love is ill.” Lazarus was apparently known by a group of Judeans who know the religious leaders in Jerusalem and report this miracle to the Pharisees and priests. (John 11:45-47) And it makes sense that a prominent person living in Judea, and not a Galilean fisherman, would be known to the high priest and be able to get into his courtyard during Jesus' trial. (John 18:15) When Jesus commends his mother to the care of his beloved disciple, it's implied that he lives nearby. (John 19:25-27) And indeed Mary is still living near Jerusalem in Acts 1:14. Plus the disciples flee when Jesus is arrested. (Mark 14:50) Yet at the cross, along with the female disciples, there is one male disciple, the one Jesus loved. I think it's because Lazarus would be the only one not afraid of death, having been resurrected by Jesus. It also explains why the rumor started that the beloved disciple would not die. (John 21:20-23) After all, Jesus brought him back to life. People just assumed he would still be alive when Jesus returned. And right after mentioning this, John of Patmos added this postscript about the beloved disciple: “This is the disciple who testifies to these things and who wrote them down. We know that his testimony is true.”

Whether Witherington is right or not, it is certainly true that the raising of Lazarus is pivotal, the climax of the 7 signs that John's Gospel is built around. It led directly to Jesus' crucifixion. As we said, some who witnessed it reported back to the religious leaders, whose reaction was to panic. They say, “What are we doing? For this man is performing many miraculous signs. If we allow him to go on in this way, everyone will believe in him, and the Romans will come and take away our sanctuary and our nation.” (John 11:47-48) What's interesting is that they are not concerned about whether Jesus is the Messiah or not, just with whether the people will believe he is. They are more worried about the political and religious impact of Jesus being hailed as the Messiah than the spiritual implications of Jesus really being the one anointed by God.

“Then one of them, Caiaphas, who was high priest that year, said, 'You know nothing at all! You do not realize that it is more to your advantage to have one man die for the people than for the whole nation to perish.'” (John 11:49-50) If he really believed that Jesus was sent by God, the high priest would not have suggested this. But he was seeing this strictly in terms of the political and earthly ramifications of someone being seen by ordinary Jews as the Messiah. And since Passover was coming up, this was especially troublesome. Jerusalem would be crammed with Jewish pilgrims from all over the empire. Passover was a feast commemorating God liberating his people from slavery and oppression. Its theme could inspire a revolution. And as the council could clearly see, the might of Rome would crush them. The temple could be destroyed again. They could go into exile again. And so to prevent the possibility of this happening, the leaders start to plot to kill Jesus. (John 11:53)

Which raises the question of what does it take to make people believe something? You would think a man raising folks from the dead would do it. Each of the gospels recounts Jesus reviving someone who died: Jairus' daughter in 3 of the synoptic gospels (Mark 5:21-43; Matthew 9:18-26; Luke 8: 40-56) and the son of the widow of Nain in Luke. (Luke 7:11-17) John focuses on Lazarus. Perhaps it had a greater impact because the others were in Galilee while the raising of Lazarus was in Bethany, just 2 miles from Jerusalem, and it was witnessed by people who knew the religious leaders there.

But why was its effect to make them plot to get rid of Jesus rather than to make them believe he was the Messiah sent by God?

A lot of research has been going on into why people persist in believing things despite evidence to the contrary. It's called belief persistence. It's maintaining a belief despite strong evidence that contradicts it. In fact, presenting evidence that debunks someone's firmly held belief can paradoxically strengthen that belief in them. This is called the backfire effect, a version of confirmation bias, where you cherry-pick evidence that confirms what you already believe. People will also nitpick the contradictory evidence for any perceived flaw or error, however slight, and use that to dismiss all the evidence, no matter how overwhelming. We see that in those who believe in conspiracy theories, like the hurried and tortured explanations by those who said the world was flat when they saw photographic evidence of a round earth taken by our astronauts on the moon.

To change your mind can cost you emotionally. That's true for the average person, but when you have maintained an extreme belief despite what everyone else says, it's really hard to admit they were right all along and you were wrong. The reasons people reject the truth are not so much logical as psychological.

And for Jesus' religious opponents, the cost was even higher. They would have to change their mind about God. The Pharisees believed God supported their elaborate interpretations and rules that went far beyond what the Torah actually said. For instance, Jesus healed folks on the Sabbath. To admit he was doing this in alignment with God's will meant throwing out huge swaths of the oral law. They couldn't bring themselves to do that.

The Sadducees were the priestly party, supporting the operation of the temple. Jews must come there to offer sacrifices for their sins. To admit that Jesus could forgive sins would be to undermine their whole understanding of the relationship between God and his people. They didn't want to face the idea that Jesus might supersede the temple.

In the absence of a king, Caiaphas was the closest thing to a leader of the Jewish people. (Yes, Pilate, the Roman governor, had ultimate authority, but Caiaphas stood up to him over things like bringing the empire's insignia, considered idols by the Jews, into Jerusalem. This is probably why, when Caiaphas handed Jesus over to be crucified, Pilate was in no hurry to comply, especially when he found Jesus to be no real threat to Rome. If Jesus was causing Caiaphas headaches over religious matters, Pilate was all for it.) But for Caiaphas to admit that Jesus was the Messiah would mean the high priest was not the highest religious authority in Judea. A handyman's son would outrank Caiaphas.

Now let's give Caiaphas some credit in looking out for his people. The popular conception of a Messiah was as a warrior-king. And while the Zealots liked that idea, the establishment was afraid of what would happen if the people following Jesus decided to make him king and revolt against the most powerful empire on earth at that time. Caiaphas and the Sanhedrin had no illusions of how that would go for the Jews.

The reason that these people didn't believe in Jesus was not that they lacked the evidence, it was that they lacked the motivation to change. Believing in Jesus would upend their lives and they liked things just as they were. Sadly, what they were settling for was far less than what they would gain if they actually listened to and believed Jesus.

Jesus' awareness of their cognitive bias may explain the other Lazarus in the gospels. He is the poor, sick, starving man in Jesus' parable about him and the rich man. They both die and the rich man is tormented in hell. He sees Lazarus in paradise and asks Abraham to send Lazarus to his brothers so they can avoid the rich man's fate. Abraham points out that they can heed Moses and the prophets. The rich man says that won't work on them but they will repent if someone returns from the dead. To which Abraham replies, “If they do not respond to Moses and the prophets, they will not be convinced even if someone rises from the dead.” (Luke 16:19-31) I can see Jesus appropriating the name of his friend and winking at him at the private joke as he tells this parable. Jesus knows that people would rather believe whatever they want to rather than the truth. If Lazarus' return to life won't make believers out of them, neither will Jesus' resurrection.

So why then did the average Jew put their trust in Jesus? Because of what he did. He healed the sick; he fed the hungry; he revived the dead. And his teachings got to the heart of matters unlike the Pharisees' teachings. When Jesus saw a need, he fulfilled it. He didn't hold back because it was the Sabbath or because it would make him ritually unclean. He touched lepers, bleeding women, and the dead and he made them well. He healed Gentiles. He taught women. He hung out with tax collectors and sinners. He went where he was needed.

Like going to the tomb of his friend Lazarus. Though this miracle kicked off the events that would lead to his crucifixion, I don't think that was Jesus' primary reason for doing it. And, yes, he also wanted to give his disciples a big reason to believe more deeply in him, as it says in verse 15. They are going to be grieving soon, this time for Jesus, and they still haven't grasped his teachings about him rising again. (Mark 9:10)

But he was genuinely fond of Lazarus, Mary and Martha, as we are told in verse 5. And it hurts Jesus when the sisters each tell him that had he been there, their brother would not have died. (verses 21, 32) And when Jesus saw them and their friends weep, he began to weep as well. (verse 35) He felt their pain and loss.

So we must picture Jesus standing at the tomb of his friend, with tears streaming down his cheeks as he tells them to roll away the stone and as he tells Mary she will see the glory of God and as he prays to his Father and as he cries out “Lazarus, come out!” And they became tears of joy as Lazarus shuffled out, straining against the cloths that tied his limbs and Jesus said, “Unbind him and let him go!”

The Pharisees saw a God of rules. The Sadducees saw a God of rituals. Caiaphas saw a God of earthly power. If they had been there, or if they had really listened to the witnesses, they would have seen in Jesus a God of compassion, a God who cares for his people, a God who feels what they feel.

And they would have seen a God who is greater than their greatest fear: death. So they would not have been afraid of what would happen if they believed in Jesus. They would have gladly given up their preconceptions of what God was like and what God wants. They would have unreservedly given up their positions and followed him.

But they valued their preconceptions and their power more than the truth. They put their trust in lesser things. And then those things were taken away from them. Both Pilate and Caiaphas were removed from their positions in 36 AD, just a few years after this. Both are remembered chiefly for their infamous roles in Jesus' execution, and not for anything else they did. The temple would be destroyed in 70 AD, a mere generation after Jesus was crucified. And with the destruction of the temple, there went the role of the Sadducees. There too went the laws concerning it, half of the 613 rules in the Torah, of which the Pharisees saw themselves as custodians.

But the movement that Jesus started did not go away. Most messianic movements start to die after their leader dies. There aren't a lot of Branch Davidians around now that David Koresh is dead. There aren't a lot of active members of the People's Temple now that Jim Jones is dead. Nor is there much left of the International Peace Mission started by George Baker Jr, a preacher who in the 1930s started calling himself Father Divine and saying he was God. He died in 1965. Wikipedia has pages of people who claimed to be God or the Messiah, most of whom you've never heard of.

But Jesus, who had a mere handful of followers at his death, has, 2000 years later, more than 2.2 billion people who call themselves Christians. Why? Because of the evidence left by people like Lazarus. In the Gospel of John we are told that Mary Magdalene ran to Simon Peter and the disciple Jesus loved and told them Jesus' tomb was empty. And the two men raced to the tomb. The other disciple beats Peter to the tomb and looks in. Peter barges right into the tomb, sees the empty burial clothes and doesn't know what to make of them. But when the other disciple finally enters the tomb, we are told, “He saw and believed.” (John 20:1-8)

Why did he believe then and not Peter? Well, if he was Lazarus, he had experienced both the power of death and the power of Jesus and he knew which was stronger. He put his trust in the one who said, “I am the resurrection and the life. Those who believe in me, even though they die, will live, and everyone who lives and believes in me will never die. Do you believe this?” Jesus said this to Martha prior to raising Lazarus. She probably told her brother the whole conversation after he was raised. And I think we know Lazarus' answer to Jesus' question about believing he was the resurrection and the life. It would be a resounding “Yes!” Which is why John the elder of Patmos, who compiled the fourth gospel, wrote, “Now Jesus performed many other miraculous signs in the presence of the disciples, which are not recorded in this book. But these are recorded so that you might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name.” (John 20:30-31)