John 11:1

This entire chapter deals with the resurrection of Lazarus, the seventh of the great signs. We do not wish to accommodate with those who deny this miracle as a historical event, such denials being satanic in origin, unsustained by historical refutation, and so contrary to all reason as to require greater faith in believing the denials than is required for believing the gospel record.

The resurrection of Lazarus is omitted from the synoptics; but if that is a reason for denying it, then the omission by John of the other two instances of Jesus' raising the dead is grounds for denying them! Why was this sign omitted from the other Gospels? (1) The synoptics reported the miracles done in Galilee. (2) Lazarus was still alive when the synoptics were written, and it would have endangered his life to have included this miracle, the Sanhedrin being determined to put him to death (John 12:10). (3) It might have endangered the soul of Lazarus. He had already won the crown of life but was recalled to all the dangers of mortal existence with potential consequences so grave that Jesus wept at the contemplation of his recall. Widespread publication of this miracle during Lazarus' second lifetime would have been an additional hazard to him. He is presumed to have been deceased at the time John wrote. (4) The most convincing reason of all was outlined by Ryle, thus:

Each evangelist was inspired to record what God saw to be best and most suitable. No one, I suppose, imagines that the evangelists recorded a tenth part of our Lord's miracles, or that there were not other dead persons raised to life, of whom we know nothing at all (John 21:25).[1]

The inspired writers were not governed by ordinary rules and were unaffected by considerations which uninspired men would have honored; and this is nowhere more evident, than in the selection of materials for their writings. It is a marvel that the inspired men would have recorded the martyrdom of the apostle James with only seven words (in the Greek) and devoted nine verses to the undisturbed grave-clothes. The Gospels defy the arrogance of men who seek to understand them apart from their inspired origin.

Another device for denying this miracle is that of making it a fiction, invented by John to make a point. Richardson wrote:

Luke related a parable of Jesus in which it was declared that, even if someone returned from the dead, the unbelieving Jews would not repent (Luke 16:19-31). John turns the saying into a story in which someone actually does return from the dead - and the Jews do not repent. Significantly, the name of the person who has died in each story is Lazarus![2]

Lazarus was a common name, then as now; and the device of supposing that John invented a fable based on Luke's parable, with the presumed PROOF of such a thing appearing in the name of Lazarus (common to both passages), is fantastic and preposterous. It is precisely this type of "explanation" which is the disgrace of some of the schools of Biblical interpretation. If Lazarus' resurrection was not historical, how does one explain the fact that the event has been commemorated for nineteen centuries and perpetuated in the name of the village where it happened? "Bethany is called `El Azeriyeh,' meaning `The Place of Lazarus.'"[3] If this memorializes nothing more than John's "drama," behold a greater than Shakespeare is here! To suppose that a fisherman of Galilee could have written any such drama requires more faith than believing the miracle.

All efforts to discredit this narrative perish in the overwhelming gospel history of the event, so complete, so thoroughly in balance, so exactly fitted to the historical matrix in which it is embedded, and so thoroughly believable. Nobody, but nobody, ever invented an event like this. As Dummelow said:

The last and greatest of the seven "signs" recorded in John is related with such photographic minuteness of detail, that it is clear that the evangelist was present. Three points about it are especially noteworthy: (1) that it was a physical miracle, which no ingenuity can reduce to a case of faith-healing; (2) that it was definitely worked to produce faith in Christ (John 11:42); and (3) that, more than any other miracle, it was performed under test conditions; - Lazarus was really dead (John 11:39), and hostile witnesses were present (John 11:42).[4]

Added to the logical reasons given by Dummelow is the logical progression of the entire Gospel to the climax of this seventh sign. Jesus had said that "greater things" than healing the invalid would be done by himself, and that such a "greater" work would be the occasion of those very men's marveling at it (John 5:20). Furthermore, that very promise was accompanied by a statement that the Son of God had power to raise all the dead who ever lived (John 5:25-29). Thus nearly two whole years previously to this, Jesus had announced what he would do and named the witnesses before whom it would be done (the Pharisees and priests) and that they would "marvel."

[1] J. C. Ryle, Expository Thoughts on the Gospels (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan Publishing House), II, p. 54.

[2] Alan Richardson, The Gospel according to St. John (London: SCM Press, 1959), p. 139.

[3] J. R. Dummelow, A Commentary on the Holy Bible (New York: The Macmillan Company, 1937), p. 793.

[4] Ibid., p. 792.

THE SEVENTH OF THE GREAT SIGNS

Now a certain man was sick, Lazarus of Bethany, of the village of Mary and her sister Martha. (John 11:1)

Specifics with reference to Lazarus were necessary due to the common nature of the name; therefore, members of his family were named to make identification certain and also in view of their own importance in the Gospel records.

Of Bethany ... distinguishes Lazarus from others of the same name; and "of the village of Mary and ... Martha ..." distinguishes which Bethany was meant. This one was less than two miles from Jerusalem; the other was fifty miles away beyond the Jordan River. Some see this and the next verse as certain proof that John was familiar with the text of Luke 10:38-42, where the two sisters are named together, and that of Mark 14:3-9, where the anointing is recorded.[5]