Who wrote the Gospel we call "John's"?

[polonius]

This seems like a question the answer to which is self-evident.

Not really. Was the gospel signed or does it state John wrote this gospel?

If not, how is it determined to have been written by John?

[JehovahsWitness]

The writer of John is quite consistent in referring to the beloved Apostle so to conclude he chose to also identifiy the same individual clearly as Lazarus of Bethany, and then switched back to leaving him nameless (after having earlier named him) is imposing a lack of logic that is not in my opinion justified by the narrative.

Can you give a specific example where the author explicitly says TDWJL is John the apostle?

I didn't say say that the writer identified the Apostle John as TDWJL, I said he consistently identified whoever he was by this "title" without naming him. My point is to suggest that TDWJL was Lazarus has the writer naming him and then resorting to the nameless title having earlier named him, which is illogical and inconsistent.


JW

[polonius]

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The phrase "the disciple whom Jesus loved" (Greek: � μαθητὴς ὃν ἠγάπα � Ἰησοῦς, ho mathētēs hon ēgap� ho Iēsous) or, in John 20:2, the disciple beloved of Jesus (Greek: ὃν �φίλει � Ἰησοῦς, hon ephilei ho Iēsous) is used six times in the Gospel of John,[1] but in no other New Testament accounts of Jesus. John 21:24[2] states that the Gospel of John is based on the written testimony of this disciple.

Since the end of the first century, the Beloved Disciple has been commonly identified with John the Evangelist.[3] Scholars have debated the authorship of Johannine literature (the Gospel of John, First, Second, and Third Epistles of John, and the Book of Revelation) since at least the third century, but especially since the Enlightenment. The authorship by John the Apostle is rejected by modern scholars.[4][5]

[otseng]

My point is to suggest that TDWJL was Lazarus has the writer naming him and then resorting to the nameless title having earlier named him, which is illogical and inconsistent.

Actually, I believe it is logical and consistent.

If Lazarus and TDWJL were at the same place and at the same time and presented as if they were different people, then it would be illogical and inconsistent. Then it wouldn't make sense for them to be the same person.

This is the case with the theory that Mary Magdalene is TDWJL and the author of the fourth gospel. They both went to the tomb, so it's not logical for them to be the same person.

Jhn 20:1-2 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. 2 Then she runneth, and cometh to Simon Peter, and to the other disciple, whom Jesus loved, and saith unto them, They have taken away the Lord out of the sepulchre, and we know not where they have laid him.

In the case of Lazarus and TDWJL, the last mention of Lazarus is John 12:17.

Jhn 12:17 The people therefore that was with him when he called Lazarus out of his grave, and raised him from the dead, bare record.

The first mention of TDWJL is John 13:23.

Jhn 13:23 Now there was leaning on Jesus' bosom one of his disciples, whom Jesus loved.

Why was not TDWJL ever mentioned prior to this? Why was not Lazarus ever mentioned after John 12:17? Is there any possible reason for the author to change from referring to Lazarus by his name to TDWJL?

We know the author of the fourth gospel is TDWJL.

[Jhn 21:24 KJV] 24 This is the disciple which testifieth of these things, and wrote these things: and we know that his testimony is true.

We also know the author wanted to remain anonymous. So, a reason it was changed from his real name, Lazarus, to his code name, TDWJL, is so he can remain anonymous as an author.

I think an additional reason is if Lazarus was explicit in being the author, his testimony would not carry as much weight. Lazarus of Bethany is not mentioned anywhere else in the Bible. Either he is an insignificant character or there is a conspiracy to remove him from any text. By remaining anonymous, people can easily attach a person of more weight as being TDWJL.

[otseng]

BTW, if you asked me a month ago who wrote the gospel of John, I would've thought that was a dumb question and immediately responded "John." But, after reading through thedisciplewhomjesusloved.com and looking at the evidence, I'm now almost entirely convinced it is Lazarus. I want to see how well this theory can go up against debate, so I welcome any challenges to this theory.

[otseng]

Lazarus is also more likely better educated than John the apostle, so he was more qualified to pen the fourth gospel.

John is described in Acts as "unlearned and ignorant." That might be a bit of an exaggeration, but it might not be too far from the truth since they were by profession fishermen. There was no need for them to be educated and learned.

Act 4:13 Now when they saw the boldness of Peter and John, and perceived that they were unlearned and ignorant men, they marvelled; and they took knowledge of them, that they had been with Jesus.

According to the secret gospel of Mark, Lazarus was rich. "And going out of the tomb they came into the house of the youth, for he was rich."

Lazarus was also buried in a cave with a stone (similar to Jesus), which would indicate having some money. Mary also anointed Jesus' feet with ointment worth one year's wages. Finally, Lazarus was to take care of Jesus' mother, which would also indicate he had some financial stability.

So, if Lazarus was in an upper-income household, he was also likely to be well educated and more likely than John to write the fourth gospel.

[otseng]

Unlike the synoptic gospels, the fourth gospel does not mention the calling of John as an apostle and does not have a list of the 12 apostles. Wouldn't it be strange if John did write the fourth gospel and did not mention these things? However, if it was Lazarus that wrote it, it would make more sense.

Calling of John as an apostle: Matt 4:18-22, Mark 1:16-21, Luke 5:10-11

List of the apostles: Matt 10:2-4, Mark 3:16-19, Luke 6:14-16

[otseng]

Regarding John being humble, according to the synoptic gospels, he does not seem too humble. John wanted to sit at Jesus' side in the new kingdom.

Mat 20:20-21 - Then came to him the mother of Zebedee's children with her sons, worshipping [him], and desiring a certain thing of him. 21 And he said unto her, What wilt thou? She saith unto him, Grant that these my two sons may sit, the one on thy right hand, and the other on the left, in thy kingdom.

Mar 10:35-37 - 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.

Luk 22:24 - And there was also a strife among them, which of them should be accounted the greatest.

[otseng]

The resurrection of Lazarus from the dead is a pivotal event in the fourth gospel. It also draws many parallels with the resurrection of Jesus. The first half of the book ends with the resurrection of Lazarus. The second half ends with the resurrection of Jesus. So, the fourth gospel is presented as Lazarus foreshadowing Jesus. This leads to Lazarus being more likely the author than any other person since he experienced both of these events and wanted to present it as parallel events.

Buried in a cave

Jhn 11:38 KJV - Jesus therefore again groaning in himself cometh to the grave. It was a cave, and a stone lay upon it.

Mat 27:60 KJV - And laid it in his own new tomb, which he had hewn out in the rock: and he rolled a great stone to the door of the sepulchre, and departed.

Dead several days

Jhn 11:39 KJV - Jesus said, Take ye away the stone. Martha, the sister of him that was dead, saith unto him, Lord, by this time he stinketh: for he hath been [dead] four days.

Mat 27:63 KJV - Saying, Sir, we remember that that deceiver said, while he was yet alive, After three days I will rise again.

Stone rolled away

Jhn 11:38 KJV - Jesus therefore again groaning in himself cometh to the grave. It was a cave, and a stone lay upon it.

Jhn 20:1 KJV - 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.

Wrapped in linen

Jhn 11:44 KJV - And he that was dead came forth, bound hand and foot with graveclothes: and his face was bound about with a napkin. Jesus saith unto them, Loose him, and let him go.

Mat 27:59 KJV - And when Joseph had taken the body, he wrapped it in a clean linen cloth,

Jhn 20:7 KJV - And the napkin, that was about his head, not lying with the linen clothes, but wrapped together in a place by itself.

Resurrected from the dead

Jhn 11:44 KJV - And he that was dead came forth, bound hand and foot with graveclothes: and his face was bound about with a napkin. Jesus saith unto them, Loose him, and let him go.

Luk 24:6 KJV - He is not here, but is risen: remember how he spake unto you when he was yet in Galilee,

Meal after resurrection

Jhn 12:1-2 KJV - 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.

Jhn 21:9, 12 KJV - As soon then as they were come to land, they saw a fire of coals there, and fish laid thereon, and bread. ... Jesus saith unto them, Come [and] dine.

[JehovahsWitness]

We also know the author wanted to remain anonymous. So, a reason it was changed from his real name, Lazarus, to his code name, TDWJL, is so he can remain anonymous as an author.

So you recognise the "Lazarus theory" does represent an inconsistency; ie identifyjng the same individual by name during the first half of the narrative but not doing this consistently throughout the book and rather switching half way through to a code name. The explanation for this being the wish to remain anonymous as the author.

But how is the desire to "remain anonymous as the author" protected by the switch? The author remains anonymous as long as he doesn't refer to himself in the first person. Talking about Lazarus throughout from start to finish would not have revealed said Lazarus as the author of the book unless he at some point made the link. Matthew's gospel is effectively anonymous although the writer speaks of Matthew in the second person and tradition holds that the writer was indeed the Apostle by the same name.

At the most a swich might serve to conceal who was Jesus favourite but then we would be left with the paradox of the writer not hesitating to report how Lazarus was a particularly beloved disciple of Jesus, yet using a code so it was not revealed who the beloved disciple of Jesus was. I believe that is called closing the stable door after the horse has bolted.

As for the fact that Lazaurus would not have been a particularly prominent Apostle if that were the case and leaving the name out was to add gravitas to the report, we have the other gospels, evidently in circulation before this last one was penned, two of which (Luke's and Marks) wère not penned by Apostles at all. Matthew arguably was also not one of the most prominent Apostles, yet again this is the name attributed to the gospel. In the light of this, The Gospel according to Lazarus would have had as much if not more weight as any of the others, so leaving it out doesn't seem to be a logical motive for such a switch.





JW

[JehovahsWitness]

[Replying to post 88 by otseng]

Regarding your points here they remain speculative rather than conclusive. I don't see any point absolutely proving Lazarus of Bethany to be the beloved disciple. Can I just clarify, are you suggesting Lazarus was one of the 12 Aposltes ?