Assess the role of the disciple Jesus loved in relation to the Johannine community and the Gospel s creation. Is the person identifiable?

Transcription

1 Assess the role of the disciple Jesus loved in relation to the Johannine community and the Gospel s creation. Is the person identifiable? The Gospel According to John (hereafter John), alongside the other Johannine literature (1-3 John and Revelation), holds a special place in the heart and mind of the Christian Church. 1 Its uniqueness within the genre of gospel is undeniable, 2 and through it, the reader gains a consequently unique impression and understanding of the life, ministry, death and resurrection of Jesus. But there are other insights to be gained from a study of John, not least into the life of one of the founding Judeo-Christian sects of the first and second century, from within which (on the basis of literary correlation and early church witness) the entire Johannine corpus is understood to have come. Central to this distinctiveness (and, apparently, to that community) is the disciple Jesus loved or the Beloved Disciple. The gospel narrative itself contains a number of references to this character: 13:23; 19:26; 20:2 and 21:7, (as well as possible allusions in 1:35; 18:15; 19:35), whilst 20:24 ( This is the disciple who is testifying to these things and has written them, and we know that his testimony is true ), an apparent self-reference by the Beloved Disciple, draws particular interest. This essay considers some of the evidence for the Beloved Disciple s role within the Johannine community, which is undeniably significant, as well as considering some of the possible identifications of that disciple that have been made. It contests that many of those identifications are speculative and can be rejected, but that some characters within the narrative itself remain highly plausible possibilities of his identity. It also argues that the suggestion that the Beloved Disciple is merely a literary device to represent idealistic discipleship to the community can 1 Smalley, S., John Evangelist & Interpreter, p.7 2 Beasley-Murray, G.R., John, pp.xxxii-xxxv Page 1 of 8

2 similarly be rejected. That is not to say that a claim to know who the Beloved Disciple is can be made with any certainty, as all attempts remain inherently speculative. 3 An understanding of the nature of any concept of a Johannine community is hindered by the exclusive use of the Johannine corpus as evidence. On the surface it would appear that John is not a particularly ecclesiological text. As a result, reading into the text to discover a community of believers is problematic due to a necessity to interpolate what is not said as much as, if not more than, what is said. 4 What is apparent though, backed up by much else in the New Testament, is that the Christian communities of which the Johannine was but one would have been sectarian as a result of ostracism by the Jewish religious authorities. 5 This is understood to be particularly so for the Johannine community (or school 6 ), and there are arguments for it having been considered a faction by other Christian groups, 7 potentially as a result of Johannine theological interaction with Hellenistic thought. 8 What is clear is that the Beloved Disciple was important to, and in some way linked with, the Johannine church from which the gospel came. Yet this character is also shrouded in mystery. There has been considerable debate about the historicity or otherwise of the Beloved Disciple (see below), yet his role as the ideal image of discipleship springs clear from the pages of John. 9 In each of the four gospels the disciples (the Twelve) repeatedly receive a somewhat demeaning (and possibly self-depreciating) depiction, variously as having not understood what Jesus has said or done nor grasping who he is. Not so with the Beloved Disciple whose dedication to Jesus, but also 3 Edwards, R., Discovering John, p.26 4 Moody-Smith, D., Johannine Christianity, p.2 5 Brown, R., The Community of the Beloved Disciple, pp Edwards, R., op. cit., pp ibid. 8 Lindars, B., John, pp Brown, R., op. cit., p.31 Page 2 of 8

3 his insight, is given such pride of place that it is not difficult to imagine that the gospel s readers would have considered him to have known and understood Jesus better than anyone else. 10 If, as many believe, the Beloved Disciple can be accepted as a real person, and that he was part of the Johannine community as the evidence of the text itself suggests, 11 then he would have been a living link between the community and Jesus himself, making the community an heir of a tradition based upon some historical witness to Jesus. 12 That would have proved important as Christian communities everywhere began to be persecuted for their new faith, and needed the courage of their convictions to stand firm. Even in disputes between the Christian sects, the eyewitness status of the Beloved Disciple would have been enough to embolden the Johannine community as they asserted their belief. 13 Moreover, that he was the disciple Jesus loved gave him a particular status amongst those who had been eyewitnesses of Jesus. It was a special preferment which meant that he was able to make *Jesus+ known with a very special authority 14 (Jesus own authority) in the same way that Jesus made the Father known. 15 This sense of seeing and believing continues into the rest of the Johannine corpus as an important theme, implicating the Beloved Disciple further in the community s thought and writings. Of course, the main literary product of the Johannine community was John itself, and from what we have said above, the suggestion is that the Beloved Disciple was a significant contributor to its creation, supported by 19:35. The point of debate is the extent of that contribution. Much examination of the internal evidence is centred on the suggestion that the Beloved Disciple is the author of the gospel, 16 and there is evidence that Irenaeus was also convinced that this was the 10 Brown, R., op. cit., p.31p John 21:20-4 NRSV 12 Moody Smith, D., op. cit., p Brown, R., op. cit., p Beasley-Murray, G., op. cit., p.lxx 15 John 17:6, 26 NRSV 16 Beasley-Murray, G., op. cit., pp.lxx-lxxii Page 3 of 8

4 case. 17 However the verses: the rumour spread in the community that this disciple would not die. Yet Jesus did not say to him that he would not die 18 are widely understood to be there to allay the disappointment of the community 19 that the Beloved Disciple had died at the time of their writing. This could be seen as a problem to the suggestion that he is the author, as he cannot have written about his own death (!), but it could easily be a redactor s addition. The ambiguity of the claim in 21:24 leaves us with little choice other than to conclude that we cannot be certain about the extent of the Beloved Disciple s input to the gospel. If we conclude (see below) that he is a real historical figure and also an eyewitness of Jesus life, ministry, death and resurrection, then his involvement in the community (which I have not heard otherwise refuted) would make it difficult to assume that he was any less than a significant first-hand source for the author(s) or redactor(s). 20 This leaves us with the question of the identity of the Beloved Disciple. There have been a number of suggestions in answer to this, some more speculative than others. 21 Having rejected the idea that he was the equally unidentified evangelist himself (unlike Cullman 22 ) we shall consider the possibility that he was, as has already been suggested, no more than a symbolic ideal disciple or John the Apostle, Lazarus, John the Elder, Thomas, Judas or Paul (though these last four will not involve a significant consideration. The suggestion that the Beloved Disciple was not a historical person but an illustration by the author of discipleship for the community to follow was popularised by Bultmann. 23 The unusual manner of his non-identification in the gospel itself has led others to consider this 17 Culpepper, R.A., An Introduction to Johannine Writings in Lindars, B., Edwards, R.B. & Court, J.J., The Johannine Literature, p John 21:21-2 NRSV 19 Beasley-Murray, G., op. cit., p.lxxi 20 Lindars, B., op. cit., p Edwards, R., op. cit., p See Brown, R., op. cit., p Beasley-Murray, G., op. cit., p.lxxiii Page 4 of 8

5 seriously. 24 But the current weight of scholarship is against this, with arguments including that the claim to possess the witness of the Beloved Disciple enabled Johannine Christians to defend their peculiar insights 25 This may be too simplistic, but others have seen the character s interaction with other characters in the gospel narrative as difficult to reconcile if he is a fiction. 26 There is no doubt (see above) that the Beloved Disciple is used as an example of discipleship for the Johannine community, but it does not follow that this exemplar status requires him to be no more than a literary device. Irenaeus assertion (above) that the Beloved Disciple was the author of the gospel was based on his understanding that he was the same as John the Apostle, to whom the later ascription the Gospel According to John is presumed to refer. 27 There are other early church attestations to this theory, which make a strong case due to their chronological proximity to the gospel s writing. But there are also other early references that, it has been suggested, show signs of unnecessary elaboration which cast doubt upon the reliability of the claim. 28 Further, it is difficult to see why John the Apostle would see the need to conceal his identity, 29 as we have noted the significance of eye-witness evidence to the community. I do not, however, conclude that the suggestion of Lazarus is precluded for the same reason, as his status would not have been as great, not being one of the Twelve. The Beloved Disciples first appearance in 13:23 comes immediately after the raising of Lazarus (11-12), during which Jesus weeping caused the Jews to say famously See how much he loved him! 30 (italics mine). It could be that the reader is expected to link these two (or three) references to Jesus 24 Hengel, M., The Johannine Question, p Brown, R., op. cit., p Edwards, R., op. cit., p Beasley-Murray, G., op. cit., p.lxvi 28 ibid., p.lxvii 29 ibid., p.lxxiii 30 John 11:36 NRSV, cf 11:5 Page 5 of 8

6 specific love for an individual and conclude that Lazarus is the Beloved Disciple. 31 Coming from Bethany, Lazarus could well have provided the source material for much of John s narrative in Jerusalem. 32 The suggestions of John the Elder (confusion around the external evidence) 33, Thomas (the arguments for are contradicted by the text) 34, Judas and Paul (no internal or external evidence for either) 35 can be dismissed with relative ease, but the proposal of their names by serious academic scholars merely indicates the uncertainty with which any conclusion can be made as to the Beloved Disciple s identity. From this cursory inspection of some of the suggestions and evidence, I am most in favour of identifying Lazarus as the Beloved Disciple, though as I say, certainty is not a feature of such assertions. John the Apostle retains a good claim, but there is also the possibility of a previously unknown disciple the matter is far from cut and dry. What we can re-assert is that the name of the Beloved Disciple was evidently less significant to the Johannine community than his role as an eye-witness for them and contributor to the gospel narrative that was produced. The Beloved Disciple appears frequently in both academic and devotional study of John. As such, his influence and importance extends far beyond the community with which he is most associated. The persecution that the Church suffered (see above) eventually ended, but the need for an eye-witness as a primary source for one of the canonised gospels is not without its 31 Stibbe, M., John, p Edwards, R., op. cit., p ibid., p,21 34 ibid., p ibid. Page 6 of 8

7 significance even now. Indeed, without his contribution, it is possible to imagine the development of a very different Christology, and consequently a very different Church. We have not been able to positively identify the Beloved Disciple, and in that failure we join with a host of previous and current attempts! His deliberate anonymity 36 leaves us clutching at straws in our attempts. Some are left disappointed at an inability to identify categorically the author of a gospel as someone with apostolic authority, for it is considered a matter of great importance that the New Testament canon can be given authority in this way. But the authority with which John speaks can be found without applying a name to the Beloved Disciple, or even any consideration that he is the actual author. That he was one (perhaps of many) eye-witness source(s) behind the gospel was enough for the Johannine community to stand firm in the face of trial and adversity, and it need not cast a cloud over our application of the text 37 in the twenty-first century. 36 ibid. p Cullmann, O., The Johannine Circle, p.84 Page 7 of 8

8 Bibliography Beasley-Murray, G.R., John: Word Biblical Commentary, Word, Texas, Brown, R., The Community of the Beloved Disciple, Paulist Press, New Jersey, Cullmann, O., The Johannine Circle, SCM Press, London, Edwards, R., Discovering John, SPCK, London, Hengel, M., The Johannine Question, SCM Press, London, Lindars, B., Edwards, R.B. & Court, J.J., The Johannine Literature, Sheffield Academic Press, Lindars, B., SSF, John, JSOT Press, Sheffield, Moody-Smith, D., Johannine Christianity, T&T Clark, Edinburgh, Smalley, S., John Evangelist & Interpreter, Paternoster, London, Stibbe, M., John, Sheffield Academic Press, Page 8 of 8