John 11 - Expositor's Bible Commentary - Abridged

4. The miracle at Bethany (11:1–44) a. The announcement of death (11:1–16)

The account of the raising of Lazarus is the climactic sign in the gospel of John. Each of Jesus’ seven signs illustrates some particular aspect of his divine authority (cf. comment on 5:36), but this one exemplifies his power over the last and most irresistible enemy of humanity—death. For this reason it is given a prominent place in the gospel. It is also significant because it precipitated the decision of Jesus’ enemies to do away with him. Furthermore, this episode contains a strong personal command to believe in Jesus in a crisis, when such belief would be most difficult. All that preceded in John is preparatory; all that follows it is the unfolding of a well-marked plot.

1–2 At this point Lazarus is introduced, though Mary and Martha are mentioned in Luke (10:38–42). Apparently Jesus was frequently a guest in their home when he visited Jerusalem (cf. Mk 11:11). Of Lazarus, however, nothing is known apart from John. The identification of Mary by the action recorded later in this gospel (12:1–10) is unusual, unless the author presupposed some knowledge of her action on the reader’s part. John mentions it in order to identify Lazarus and to indicate Jesus’ relations with the family.

3 Knowing Jesus’ interest in them and the power of God to heal the sick, the sisters sent for him when Lazarus became ill. The malady must have been serious, for they were sufficiently alarmed to call Jesus back to the area where a price had been set on his head. The appeal was on the basis of love, and they felt confident that he would be prompt.

4–6 Jesus’ reaction was optimistic and purposeful. He gave assurance to the disciples that Lazarus’s illness would not terminate in death, and stated that Lazarus’s illness would be an important aspect of his own glorification. Having said that, he deliberately stayed in Perea two more days. His action may have appeared to the disciples, and almost certainly to the sisters, as unfeeling and selfish. Since he had the power to heal Lazarus, why should he not reply instantly (cf. Lk 7:11–16; 8:41–42, 49-56)? Perhaps the disciples were not particularly puzzled, for their subsequent remarks indicated that they were well aware of the danger that threatened him in Jerusalem.

7–8 His proposal to the disciples that they should return to Judea was not welcomed with enthusiasm. They remembered the previous conflicts with the rulers and feared for Jesus’ life, and possibly for their own as well.

9–10 Jesus countered the disciples’ objection with this most enigmatic statement. That expression may have been a current proverb, perhaps similar to his remark in 9:4. In both instances, Jesus was thinking of his obligation to perform the work the Father had committed to him. Realizing that he was acting in accord with that purpose, Jesus resolutely decided to return to Jerusalem in spite of the peril. To digress from God’s purpose is to walk in darkness; to remain in fellowship with God is to walk in the light (cf. 1Jn 1:6).

11–13 In order to explain his action, Jesus decided to educate his disciples by informing them that Lazarus was asleep and that he intended to wake him. Their interest and loyalty were plainly revealed by their willingness to listen to him and to move back into the area of danger if he so desired. The disciples, however, lacked imagination and took literally Jesus’ announcement that Lazarus had fallen asleep. Assuming that “sleep” would mean that the fever had passed its crisis, they expressed their hope for Lazarus’s recovery. But Jesus was using the word “sleep” (GK 5678) in a figurative sense, meaning “death.” This does not mean that the dead are in a state of total unconsciousness, for Jesus’ illustration of the rich man and the beggar predicates consciousness after death (Lk 16:19–31). It does show that Jesus looked on the death of Lazarus as a parenthesis after which there would be an awakening, not as a permanent removal from life.

14–15 Jesus’ rejoinder to the disciples’ comment made Lazarus’s state unmistakable: “Lazarus is dead, and for your sake I am glad I was not there, so that you may believe.” These words seem strange. Why should Jesus be glad that he was not present to save Lazarus from death or to comfort the sisters, and why should Lazarus’s death bring any benefit to the disciples? Jesus considered this an opportunity for a supreme demonstration of power that would certify the Father’s accreditation of him as the Son and confirm the faith of the sisters and the disciples. He was certain of the outcome.

16 Thomas’s comment marks his first appearance in this book. John’s gospel does not contain a complete list of the Twelve, though they are mentioned as a group on two occasions (6:67, 70–71; 20:24). Generally they are presented only as individuals and once in the Epilogue as a smaller group (21:1–2). Thomas appears four times: here, once in the discourse in the upper room (14:5), once after the Resurrection (20:24–29), and finally with the group described in the Epilogue (21:1). His attitude here is paradoxical: “Let us also go, that we may die with him [Jesus].” Thomas expected that Jesus would be seized and executed and that his disciples would suffer with him. Notwithstanding this unhappy prospect, Thomas’s loyalty is revealed by his readiness to share Jesus’ peril. The skepticism that he later evinced regarding the Resurrection was probably prompted by grief over Jesus’ death rather than by disillusionment because of apparent failure.

b. The conversation with Martha and Mary (11:17–37)

17–18 The time between Lazarus’s death and Jesus’ arrival at Bethany was four days. Two full days had intervened between the arrival of the messengers and Jesus’ departure for Bethany (v.6). The trip to Bethany would have taken at least a day, since Bethany was more than twenty miles distant from Jesus’ refuge in Perea (10:40–42). So the death of Lazarus must have occurred not long after Jesus was first informed of his illness. After three days all hope of resuscitation from a coma would be abandoned; and in the hot Palestinian climate, decay would have begun.

19 The family at Bethany must have been well known in Jerusalem, since many “Jews” came to comfort Martha and Mary over the loss of Lazarus. A procession composed of relatives, friends, and sometimes hired mourners accompanied a body to the grave; and mourning usually lasted for several days afterward.

20 Martha, the more aggressive sister, went to meet Jesus, while quiet and contemplative Mary stayed home. This portrayal of the sisters agrees with that found in Lk 10:38–42.

21–22 The words Martha addressed to Jesus express both a repressed reproach and a persistent faith. She was disappointed that Jesus had not responded to the first news of Lazarus’s illness, but that did not lead her to break her relationship with him. Despite her remorse, she was confident that God would grant Jesus’ desire in this matter.

23–26 Martha interpreted Jesus’ promise (v.23) that her brother would rise again in terms of the expectation of a general resurrection. She may have taken his words as a conventional expression of comfort; he intended them to describe what he would do. In his reply, Jesus turned Martha’s acceptance of a dogma into faith in his person. In what is surely one of his most majestic and comforting utterances, Jesus said that he embodied the vital power to bring the dead to life (vv.25–26). The one who believes in Christ has eternal life that transcends physical death. Those who live and believe will never die but will make an instant transition from the old life to the new life (cf. 1Th 4:16–17). On this basis, he asked her directly whether she believed.

27 Martha’s commitment reveals a firm belief that Jesus was the Messiah, the Son of God, as preached by John the Baptist (1:34) and accepted by the disciples (1:49; 6:68), and the deliverer foretold by the prophets. Her language is emphatic.

29–30 Martha told Mary that Jesus was asking for her. To Mary, this was equivalent to a command to come. Her subsequent actions, though less assertive, reveal a trust in Jesus similar to Martha’s. Jesus was waiting for her outside the town.

31 The Jews knew something was afoot when Mary left so hastily. Since they had come to mourn with the sisters, they thought it only fitting to follow her, supposing that she was going to the tomb.

32–35 Mary’s greeting to Jesus was similar to Martha’s. The response of Jesus to this calamity illustrates his human and divine natures. Up to this point he had been perfectly calm, assuring Martha that her brother would rise and asserting that he was the resurrection and the life. He was completely in command of the situation and challenged Martha’s faith. But when Mary appeared, crushed with sorrow and accompanied by the waiting mourners, Jesus was moved with deep emotion.

His feeling is expressed by three words: “deeply moved” (GK 1839), “troubled” (v.33; GK 5435), and “wept” (v.35). The first of these connotes anger. Perhaps Jesus was expressing his resentment against the ravages of death that had entered the human world because of sin. The second word expresses agitation. That is, Jesus was not apathetic or unnerved by the prevailing mood of sorrow. Lazarus had been a beloved friend, and Jesus shared in the common feeling of grief over his death. Overcome by emotion, he spontaneously burst into tears.

36–37 Jesus’ true humanity was emphasized by the response of the people at Lazarus’s tomb. Some were impressed by Jesus’ open show of emotion and took it as an evident token of his love for Lazarus. Others, perhaps not so lovingly, wondered why Jesus had not prevented Lazarus’s death by one of his miracles. The reference to the healing of the blind man again (Cf. 10:21) shows that it must have created a sensation in Jerusalem since it was remembered several months after it had occurred.

c. The raising of Lazarus (11:38–44)

38 The repetition of “deeply moved” from v.33 shows that Jesus was still under the same emotional tension that his first contact with the mourners had aroused. He planned to fulfill his prediction to the disciples that the outcome of Lazarus’s death would be to the glory of God, as well as keep his promise to Martha that her brother would rise again. The burial place was a chamber cut in limestone rock and closed by a stone laid over the entrance.

39–40 Having challenged Martha’s faith, Jesus now faced a challenge of his own. He ordered the covering stone to be removed. Martha’s protest was natural, for it would seem improper to expose a decaying corpse. Such an act would demonstrate her faith and remove her uncertainty and hesitancy so that the glory of God might be revealed to her and all present. To Jesus the raising of Lazarus presented no problem.

41–42 When Martha met his condition, which was the last step of faith she could take, Jesus took the next step. He did not ask God to raise Lazarus; he thanked him for having already answered his prayer. So great was Jesus’ faith in the Father that he assumed that this miracle, so necessary to his mission, was as good as done. His main reason for raising Lazarus was to convince the assembled people that he had been sent by the Father.

43–44 Having uttered this prayer, Jesus addressed the dead man. He had said on a previous occasion that a time would come when all who were in their graves would hear his voice (5:28). This occasion was a remarkable demonstration of that authority. The words spoken were brief and direct, and can be paraphrased, “Lazarus! This way out!” as if Jesus were directing someone lost in a gloomy dungeon. The creative power of God reversed the process of corruption and quickened the corpse into life. The effect was startling. The dead man appeared at the entrance to the tomb, still bound by his graveclothes. Jesus then ordered that he be released from the wrappings and returned to normal life. It was a supreme demonstration of the power of eternal life that triumphed over death, corruption, and hopelessness.

5. The decision to kill Jesus (11:45–57)

45–46 The response to the sign was twofold. “Many” of the Jews believed on the basis of the evidence they had seen, for the fact of Lazarus’s restoration was incontrovertible. In contrast, others went to inform the religious leaders of Jesus’ action, apparently as a gesture of disapproval. It seems unlikely that any of the believing Jews made up the delegation that went to the Pharisees.

47–48 As a result of Jesus’ miracle in Bethany, a meeting of the Sanhedrin was called. The council expressed not only disapproval but also frustration. They anticipated that the miracles of Jesus would bring such a wave of popular support that the Romans, fearing a revolution, would intervene by seizing complete authority, thus displacing the Jewish government and destroying the national identity. Their fears revealed a complete misunderstanding of the motives of Jesus, who had no political ambitions whatever. He had already indicated by his refusal to be made king that he had no intention of organizing a revolt against Rome (Cf. 6:15).

49–50 Caiaphas, the high priest, was the son-in-law of Annas, who is mentioned later in the account of Jesus’ trial (18:12–14). Annas had been high priest from A.D. 7 to 14 and was succeeded by three of his sons and finally by Caiaphas from A.D. 18 to 36. The utterance of Caiaphas reveals his cynicism and duplicity. He was contemptuous of the indecisive attitude of the Pharisees and recommended the elimination of Jesus rather than risking the possibility of a long contest with Rome.

51–52 John takes Caiaphas’s statement as a kind of double entendre, an unconscious and involuntary prophecy that Jesus would become the sacrifice for the nation so that it might not perish. The irony of the statement is paralleled by the record of the rulers’ mockery of Jesus at the Crucifixion (see Mk 15:31). In both instances a sneering remark expressed an unintended truth. The statement of Caiaphas is applied by the author not only to the nation of Israel, but also to the “children of God” who have been scattered throughout the world. These words might apply to the Jews of the Dispersion. But in the light of the universalism of this gospel, they probably refer to the future ingathering of the Gentiles, who become the children of God when they acknowledge Jesus as Savior (1:12; 10:16).

53 The growing hostility of the Pharisaic party and of the Sadducean priesthood had developed into a settled decision to do away with Jesus. Although the hierarchy feared a popular uprising in his support, they were resolute that he should die.

54 For this reason Jesus left Bethany, where danger threatened him, and removed to Ephraim, a village north of Jerusalem. This town was on the edge of the Judean desert, into which Jesus could flee if necessary.

55–56 Just before the Passover, pilgrims from distant parts of the country began to assemble in Jerusalem. Ceremonial cleansing would take considerable time when a large crowd was involved, and the people wanted to be ready to participate in the sacred feast. Jesus had been present in Jerusalem at the Feasts of Tabernacles and Dedication and had been regularly engaged in teaching. Since the Passover would bring an even larger crowd to Jerusalem, the populace expected that Jesus would be there also. His previous visits had been accompanied by much controversy, and there had been several futile attempts to arrest or stone him (Cf. 5:18; 7:30, 44; 8:20, 59; 10:38). On each occasion, however, he had eluded his enemies, for “his time had not come.”

57 The high council of Judaism had issued a warrant for Jesus’ arrest and had ordered that anyone who knew of his whereabouts should declare it. In the light of this situation, one can conclude that Judas was a messianist loyal to his nation and that his loyalty to the ruling priesthood took precedence over his personal loyalty to Jesus.