5.0 out of 5 stars
A FORCEFUL PRESENTATION OF THE "BELOVED DISCIPLE WAS LAZARUS" THEORY BY AN EVANGELICAL, December 24, 2009
This review is from: The Beloved Disciple: His Name, His Story, His Thought: Two Studies from the Gospel of John (Paperback)
Vernard Eller has published quite a number of completely "orthodox" Christian books, and this 1987 book is published by Eerdmans (no bastion of "liberalism"). Yet he undertakes to provide evidence that "John, son of Zebedee" is NOT the author of the fourth gospel. Against the traditional Johannine authorship, Eller asks, "If, however, the Writer was the same person as the Source (was himself the Beloved Disciple), it is hard to believe that he would be so presumptuous as to write a document identifying HIMSELF, against all others, as 'the disciple whom Jesus loved.'"
Eller begins by mentioning some of the significant differences between the fourth gospel and the Synoptics: e.g., Peter is said to be from Bethsaida, not Capernaum; it uses the term "disciples" rather than "the twelve"; it specifically mentions disciples such as Thomas and Nathaniel; the action if centered on Jerusalem, not Galilee; there is no "Last Supper" sharing of the cup and bread, etc.
Eller eventually admits that "based on the fact that, in the Fourth Gospel, Lazarus is the only named disciple of whom it is also said that Jesus loved him, we have set up the hypothesis that Lazarus is indeed the Beloved Disciple. So, assuming that identity, we will proceed to test the hypothesis by seeing how well Lazarus fits the role."
After satisfactorily conducting such biblical tests, he asks, "would there be any reason for a 'saying' about 'not dying' to attach to any of them except Lazarus? Only he is both the disciple about whom it is explicitly said that Jesus loved him and the one whose very existence was owed to Jesus' miraculous communication of a special quality of life people might easily assume could have no end.... And would not the Writer then need to assure people that Lazarus's death did not invalidate the fact that he nevertheless was 'the disciple whom Jesus loved'?"
Modestly, Eller concludes, "I am not claiming to have proved that Lazarus of Bethany was the Beloved Disciple. But I will say again that, if it is not Lazarus, then we have not been given the ghost of an idea about who it might have been. Lazarus fits better than any other possible candidate."
Eller is not the only biblically conservative writer to reach such a conclusion (e.g., see J. Phillips (
The Disciple Whom Jesus Loved - The Bible v. Tradition on the beloved disciple), but he has written one of the more subtle and challenging expositions of the idea. HIGHLY RECOMMENDED!
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
