An Atheist Explores the Bible Part 205: Lazarus, Lovers, and the Last Supper (John 11-15)

John 11-15
Lazarus, Lovers, and the Last Supper.

Welcome to another instalment of An Atheist Explores Sacred Texts (Bible version).

In this series I work my way chapter-by-chapter through the King James Bible, commenting on it from the point of view of the text as literature and mythology.

For more detail, see the introductory post http://bit.ly/2F8f9JT

For the online KJV I use, see here http://bit.ly/2m0zVUP

And now:

John 11

“Now a certain man was sick, named Lazarus, of Bethany, the town of Mary and her sister Martha.”

This chapter covers the story of Lazarus. Offhand, without checking back, I *think* Lazarus has been covered before but this seems to me to be the most detailed version (on checking this time, it looks like the Lazarus previously mentioned is a man in a parable). Here, Lazarus is the brother of Mary and Martha, two of Jesus’s followers. Mary is detailed here as being the one who washes Jesus’ feet with her hair, making her in common usage Mary Magdalene, although there’s nothing to actually show that she is the same one. It’s interesting, however, that the women are described here as being very important to Jesus, who suffers quite a lot of distress over the fate of Lazarus on behalf of the two women.

Some famous verses crop up in this chapter – “Jesus Wept”, and “I am the resurrection and I am the life”. By bringing Lazarus back from the dead, Jesus uses this to demonstrate that “whosoever liveth and believeth in me shall never die”. But what does this actually mean? Plainly Christians do die, so “everlasting life” is not any kind of material immortality. Hence the belief in the afterlife, although Jesus here makes no mention of that, and uses physical resurrection to demonstrate his point. Look at it too closely and it’s a puzzling matter.

Meanwhile, the Pharisees look on and mutter about the growing following of Jesus, worried that it will bring down the anger of the Romans on the Jews as a whole. Caiaphas, the high priest, determines that Jesus must die for the good of the people. He’s talking realpolitik, but the gospel interprets this in its mystical sense, saying that Caiaphas has unwittingly made a prophecy. All told, it’s quite a good chapter, perhaps because it comes across as better written than many others.

John 12

“Took branches of palm trees, and went forth to meet him, and cried, Hosanna: Blessed is the King of Israel that cometh in the name of the Lord.”

Quite a few incidents are related in this chapter. It starts with Mary (who may or may not be Magdalene) anointing Jesus with a costly ointment, and Judas getting annoyed with this because the money could have been spent on the poor. (the chapter tells us that “This he said, not that he cared for the poor; but because he was a thief, and had the bag, and bare what was put therein”, which is a bit of a character assassination when he has a point). Jesus’ reply, that “For the poor always ye have with you; but me ye have not always” smacks of “because I’m worth it” to me.

Anyway, there then follows the procession into Jerusalem and fulfilment of the prophecies of Isaiah (or Esaias as he is called here), and the chapter readily admits that recognition of this is an afterthought – the disciples here don’t understand the meaning. There are some more vagueries from Jesus about being “the light” and that it will soon be time to be “glorified”; that He has come to “save the world” and that God’s “commandment is life everlasting”. Which all sounds impressive, but as I say all a little vague if you look too closely. Save the world from what? Does the world now seem “saved” compared to 2000 years ago?

John 13

“A new commandment I give unto you, That ye love one another; as I have loved you, that ye also love one another.”

We’re at the Last Supper already. Jesus washes the disciples’ feet, and the intent here is to indicate that He is merely the servant of God. Jesus also hints that someone would betray Him, and secretly picks out Judas and tells him “That thou doest, do quickly”.

Now, something stands out to me here. Jesus could have easily denounced Judas in front of everyone, but He doesn’t (unlike what is implied in the synoptic gospels). He sends Judas to do it anyway. Since Jesus is already expecting to die (“Whither I go, thou canst not follow me now”, in order to “glorify” God), it could be read that Judas, rather than being entered by Satan as the chapter says, was actually doing Jesus’ bidding. There is one reading of it that reckons that Judas wasn’t the betrayer, but was actually the most devout of Jesus’ followers, the one who was the most sure that Jesus’ arrest and martyrdom was necessary. Look at the reactions of the other disciples – Peter is clueless as ever, and although he promises to die for Jesus, Jesus calls him out on this and basically says – no, you won’t.

The other enigmatic snippet that stands out to me is “Now there was leaning on Jesus' bosom one of his disciples, whom Jesus loved.” This disciple isn’t named in the chapter, itself interesting because John is actually quite robust at naming specific names compared to the other gospels. It’d be tempting to go full Holy Blood/Holy Grail here and assume that this was Mary (Magdalene), but a couple of verses later Peter asks this beloved disciple something and the Bible says “He then lying on Jesus' breast saith unto him, Lord, who is it?” (my emphasis). Translation error? Greek-style best buds? What is odd is that this most-favoured disciple doesn’t get a name and isn’t mentioned elsewhere – it’s not Peter, the “rock” and most mentioned disciple. Maybe Andrew, James or John, one of the early disciples? Maybe Mary or Martha mentioned in the last chapter? Enquiring minds want to know.

Oh, after all that, I should highlight the chapter quote above, which seems kind of fundamental to how people would like Christianity to be.

John 14

“Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.”

The Last Supper continues, with Jesus expounding more of His philosophy. This seems very changed from the early Sermon on the Mount aspects, and is very metaphysical, pertaining to the “route” as it were to the Father – via (variously) belief, knowledge and love of Jesus. As with similar themes, there’s a maddening sense that either Jesus is using these words to mean something other than their most common meaning, or that somewhere in the translation process some subtlety of language has been lost.

This chapter has a lot in it that can be seen as core to the Christian faith – the quote given above, for example, as well as mention of the Father and the Holy Ghost, which will be “sent” in the “name of the Father” to give comfort, possibly to the disciples only, it isn’t clear. Once again the rather vague promises elude me here – it sounds like it all means something very profound, but I can’t figure out exactly what. Perhaps that’s the point and we’re deep in Gnosticism/mystery cult territory here.

John 15

“I am the vine, ye are the branches: He that abideth in me, and I in him, the same bringeth forth much fruit: for without me ye can do nothing.”

This chapter is entirely in reported speech from Jesus, a continuation from the last two chapters of His preaching to the disciples at the Last Supper. I think, without checking back, that this is one of the more comprehensive discussions on Jesus’s philosophy, or perhaps I should call it theology.

The metaphor of the vine given in the quote is repeated and expanded – the disciples (and one assumes everyone else by extension) are unable to be fully alive, unable to bring forth fruit, without the underlying support of Jesus (and/or the Father). What the fruit represents, I’m not sure. Good works, perhaps.

There’s further exhortation for fraternal love, including the famous verse “Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends”, which seems a fine altruistic sentiment unless contrasted with “If ye were of the world, the world would love his own: but because ye are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you”, amongst warnings to the disciples that the world will hate them (because the world is ashamed of its sin). Which then makes it all a little but cult-like, demarcating the lines between “us” (the disciples) and “them” (the haters). It would seem more productive to me to encourage reaching out and helping. But perhaps this is meant and I’ve misread.