Chapter 6 - WHY DID THE AUTHOR REMAIN ANONYMOUS?
+ MORE EVIDENCE OF HIS IDENTITY

The Motive

The anonymous author in question took the time to document his purpose for writing his Gospel, and it is from this passage that we can begin to see why this author hid his identity. John 20:30-31 says, “And many other signs truly did Jesus in the presence of his disciples, which are not written in this book: But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing ye might have life through his name”.

The author’s goal therefore, was to focus the attention of his readers on Jesus and to provide the information that they would need to “believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God”. While this may appear to be merely the author’s goal for his ‘book’, it turns out that this objective also provided a motive for this author to cloak his identity. [All of this was under the inspiration of God of course, but God does use individuals in their existing circumstances to declare His will and carry it out.]

Since the author’s intent was to point people toward Jesus, then he would have certainly avoided doing anything that might interfere with that aim. And Lazarus would have had good reason to believe that his identity could have interfered with the objective stated in John 20:31. Recall what happened after Lazarus was raised from the dead and you will understand the problem that Lazarus had to deal with – he was a celebrity. Do you see how this might present a dilemma for Lazarus and a conflict with John 20:31?

The Fame Problem

In John 12 (which is the last place that the author mentions Lazarus), three verses indicate just how famous Lazarus became. For example, John 12:9 says, “and they came not for Jesus’ sake only, but that they might see Lazarus also, whom he had raised from the dead”. Think about the implications of that. “They came not for Jesus’ sake only”! How do you think this would have affected Lazarus? Would he have enjoyed the spotlight and basked in the glory this brought to him? There is no evidence that Jesus’ friend Lazarus took advantage of this situation or milked it for his own ego. (The sudden disappearance of Lazarus from the pages of this Gospel actually indicates quite the contrary.)

Prior to Pentecost we don’t read of people coming to see Peter or any of the disciples, even though they helped feed the crowds (Mt. 14:19; 15:36; etc.) and displayed power over “the devils” (Lu. 10:17). The focus of the people had always been Jesus – they came to confront, see, hear, touch or be healed by Jesus. But this changed after Lazarus was raised from the dead in front of many witnesses (John 11:44-45). Therefore, this “friend” whom Jesus “loved” faced a peculiar dilemma.

John 12:11 says, “by reason of him (Lazarus) many of the Jews went away, and believed on Jesus”. And the raising of Lazarus was a key reason (if not THE reason) that the crowd met Jesus when he rode in on the donkey. “For this cause the people also met him (Jesus), for they heard that he had done this miracle” (Jn. 12:18).

This may lead some to suggest that Lazarus’ celebrity status was actually a good thing because it could help bring out the people, who would then get to listen to a message from Jesus. However, the only evidence we have indicates that this would not achieve a lasting result, since the crowd at Jesus’ ‘triumphal entry’ was not there to cheer for him a few days later when the choice was Jesus or Barabbas.

There is no reason to believe that the raised Lazarus was anything but loyal to his friend Jesus. Nonetheless, Lazarus had become a novelty that people also sought in addition to Jesus (Jn. 12:9).

We should immediately recognize that this would have presented Lazarus with a huge problem. To paraphrase something that John the Baptist said, Jesus must increase, but Lazarus must decrease. (A paraphrasing of Jn. 3:30.) One way that Lazarus could be sure to avoid drawing attention away from Jesus would be to ‘disappear’. Changing his identity or becoming anonymous would accomplish this too.

Remember that the unnamed author didn’t try to report everything (Jn. 20:30). The Gospel that he wrote was intended to accomplish one purpose – that its readers “might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God” and “have life through his name.” (Jn. 20:30-31)

This author must have had a reason for cloaking his identity. If Lazarus was this author, then it made sense for him to hide his identity – due to the fact that Lazarus knew that he could become a distraction that might diminish the focus on Jesus.

‘What About Him?’

Even the disciples of Jesus weren’t immune to this distraction effect. We can see an example of this in John 21, when Jesus visits a small group of disciples that have gone fishing. Even though there are several disciples present, the resurrected Jesus takes the time to focus on Peter in John 21:15-19. Moreover, John 21:14 explains that this was only, “the third time that Jesus shewed himself to his disciples, after that he was risen from the dead.”

In spite of Jesus’ focus on him at that time however, Peter’s attention seems easily distracted – by the presence of “the disciple whom Jesus loved”! “Then Peter, turning about seeth the disciple whom Jesus loved following; which also leaned on his breast at supper and said, Lord, which is he that betrayeth thee? Peter seeing him saith to Jesus, Lord, and what shall this man do?” (Jn. 21:20-21)

Instead of responding to the words that Jesus had just spoken to him, Peter appears to change the subject. It’s not likely that he did this simply because “the disciple whom Jesus loved” happened to fall in his line of sight. So what do you think could have prompted Peter to ask this question?

Furthermore, we know several disciples were present, so why was Peter motivated to focus on “the disciple whom Jesus loved”? [John 21:20 & 21 refer to him “following” and Peter’s “seeing him”. But the mere fact that he was nearby would not have been a sufficient reason for Peter to single out this mysterious “disciple whom Jesus loved”.]

At that instant, Peter bothered to refer to this one particular “disciple” only. Why? Consider the possibility that Peter was prompted to ask the question at that time precisely because of whom “the disciple whom Jesus loved” was – since Peter would have known this man as Lazarus!

One other thing to take into account is the particular moment that Peter’s attention turns to this particular “disciple”. What makes this noteworthy is the subject that Jesus was speaking to Peter about at that moment – the topic was Peter’s death!

Jesus Foretells Peter’s Death

“This spake he (Jesus) signifying by what death he (Peter) should glorify God” (Jn. 21:19). Without getting into the particulars of Jesus’ words in John 21:18, just note that we are told that Jesus raised the topic of Peter’s death. Then Jesus had two more words for Peter, “Follow me” (Jn. 21:19).

[When the matter of his death was raised Peter seemed to change the subject, which might be dismissed by some as a typical reaction to anxiety. But bear in mind that the one speaking to Peter was the resurrected Jesus, who had overcome death!]

What did Peter do when Jesus told “by what death he (Peter) should glorify God”? John 21:20-21 says, “Then Peter, turning about, seeth the disciple whom Jesus loved… Peter seeing him saith to Jesus, Lord, and what shall this man do?” [The literal Greek reads, “Lord, but of this one what”.]

Why is it that upon learning “by what death he should glorify God”, Peter felt compelled to refer to this one particular individual? Was Peter merely concerned about the future of a fellow disciple or is there a more rational explanation that can account for his question?

Of course if “the disciple whom Jesus loved” was Lazarus, then there is logic to Peter’s question. Peter knew that Lazarus had been raised from the dead, so he may have been asking if Lazarus would have to die another physical death. Or because of what Jesus had just said, Peter may have wondered if he would be raised from the dead like Lazarus. But the intent of Peter’s question isn’t material to our study. We need to focus on the effect of Peter’s question on “the disciple whom Jesus loved”.

Death is a weighty matter. Still, when Jesus brought up Peter’s death Peter turned his attention from Jesus to “the disciple whom Jesus loved”. However, the most striking thing about this passage is neither the topic of death, nor Peter’s turning away from Jesus. It’s the timing! As soon as the topic became death, who did Peter’s mind turn to? [Lazarus, naturally!]

This was only “the third time that Jesus shewed himself to his disciples, after that he was risen from the dead” (Jn. 21:14). Even so, Jesus wasn’t the sole focus of Peter’s attention. The author – who is known to us as “the disciple whom Jesus loved” – proved to be a distraction for Peter, just as he later became a distraction to those who spread the rumor that he wouldn’t die (Jn. 21:23).

Being a distraction would certainly seem to be in conflict with the author’s objective (Jn. 20:31). We have already discussed how such a potential conflict provides a motive for the author’s desire to remain anonymous. What you will have to decide is was this author Lazarus – who became anonymous in order to avoid any possible hindrance to his goal?

The Humbleness Question

The idea that Lazarus would forgo the use of his name (to avoid becoming a distraction to others) is consistent with the stated goal of John 20:31. After he was raised from the dead, Lazarus became an attraction for a number of people (Jn. 12:9). If he was also the God inspired writer of this ‘book’, then Lazarus would definitely have been willing to avoid claiming authorship rather than take the risk of interfering with the reader’s focus on Jesus.

“The disciple whom Jesus loved” might not sound like a humble term to hide behind, but we know that it’s a true description since it was written under the inspiration of God. And note the timing here too! The author began using the term “the disciple whom Jesus loved” to refer to himself only after describing the ‘fame’ of Lazarus, in John 12:9!

Many who presuppose that the Apostle John wrote this Gospel conclude that John was humble because the author was willing to remain nameless. They are incorrect about John being this author. Nevertheless consider whether this proposition may still be applicable. If this anonymity indicates that the author was humble, then it suggests this of Lazarus. Likewise, another fact may also imply humility on the part Lazarus. This Gospel tells of the raising of Lazarus and the subsequent public response, but the author didn’t record a single word that was spoken by Lazarus. We have no way to know for sure that humility was responsible for this or the anonymity. Still, it is worthwhile to note these things so that you can weigh all of the data regarding the author’s character [and thus, Lazarus’ character].

The Name Game

The idea that Lazarus might forgo his name is not foreign to the Bible. The disciples of Jesus were quite willing to change their names. Simon became Peter (Lu. 6:14), Saul became Paul (Acts 13:9), etc. Further, this practice was not new. Abram became Abraham way back in Genesis 17:5.

In addition, the scriptures often use multiple names for people. James and John were surnamed “Boanerges” (Mk. 3:17). Thomas is “called Didymus” (Jn. 21:2). And “Judas” (not Iscariot) was also called “Thaddaeus”, as can be demonstrated by comparing Luke 6:16 to Mark 3:18.

Thus it is at least compatible with scripture to suggest that Lazarus may have stopped using his name. Did he do this? If he was the unnamed author of this Gospel, then in so far as this Gospel is concerned the answer is yes. Your duty as jury is to decide if this author was Lazarus. Hopefully, you have been convinced, but let’s look at one final piece of evidence that may help anyone who is still unsure.

The Other Murder Plot

The disciples were not the only ones who found the ‘raised’ Lazarus to be a distraction. He was also a big distraction for “many of the Jews”. John 12:11 says, “by reason of him (Lazarus) many of the Jews went away, and believed on Jesus”.

As we saw earlier this is the reason that “the chief priests consulted that they might put Lazarus also to death” (Jn. 12:10). In John 12:9, 11 & 17-19 we can discover some important information from both the reaction of “the Jews” to Lazarus and the extreme response to this by the priests.

A murder plot doesn’t simply materialize out of thin air. So how long do you suppose it took for the ‘Lazarus effect’ to build to such a point that the “chief priests” felt they had to kill Lazarus?

We are not told how much time passed between the raising of Lazarus (Jn. 11:17-44) and the plot to kill him (Jn. 12:10). However, we know that sufficient time passed for a ground swell of interest in this miracle to develop among the people (Jn. 12:18). As word of the raising of Lazarus spread the “chief priests” and others would also have heard about this story repeatedly.

In addition, remember that the “chief priests” did not plot to kill all of the disciples of Jesus and they didn’t want to murder just any random disciple. These men wanted to execute Lazarus specifically – because of the effect he was having on the Jews.

John 11:46-47, 12:9-11 & 18, all reveal one important truth. The key thing for us to realize from these verses is that the “chief priests” knew about Lazarus, the public’s fascination with him and the reason that the people sought after him. Furthermore (prior to the day of Pentecost), Lazarus was the only person in the Bible, other than Jesus, who was the object of a murder plot by those “chief priests”.

Nothing suggests that murder was a common practice for those men. Still, they decided that their predicament warranted taking this momentous step. They knew who it was they were plotting to kill when they “consulted that they might put Lazarus also to death” (Jn. 12:10). This is very relevant because we can reasonably conclude from the foregoing facts that, Lazarus was known unto the “chief priests”.

Which Disciple Was Known

Now recall that John 18:15 & 16 take the time to emphasize that the “other disciple” was “known unto the high priest”. If the author of the Gospel that is attributed to John was actually Lazarus, then this evidence does not present a problem.

These same verses helped prove that John wasn’t “the disciple whom Jesus loved”, since in his case they presented an insurmountable problem (as shown in chapter 4). But as with all of the other evidence that we have looked at, we see that the scriptures harmonize perfectly if Lazarus was “the disciple whom Jesus loved”.

Chapter 7 - BIBLE STUDY SHOWS LAZARUS WAS THE BELOVED DISCIPLE, NOT JOHN
 

Click here for free printable versions of this beloved disciple Bible study