Let us look at references to the beloved disciple in John’s Gospel where he appears. I say ‘him’, but in Dan Brown’s famous book, ‘The Da Vinci Code’, he takes a look at Leonardo’s painting of the Last Supper and declares that sitting on Jesus’ right is the Beloved Disciple, and it looks like a woman.
So from this he concludes that Leonardo is secretly suggesting that this is the Magdalene and it is she whom Jesus loved, and Leonardo has sacrilegiously put her in the Last Supper painting. This idea is easily dispelled by John’s statement at the Crucifixion.
‘When Jesus saw his mother there, and the disciple whom he loved standing nearby, he said to her, “Woman, here is your son.” (John 19:25)
So the beloved disciple is clearly male. Furthermore, if you suggest the Magdalene is one of the people in Leonardo’s ‘Last Supper’, that leaves only eleven disciples in the painting. Of course you could say that this painting is after Judas has left, but Judas is in the picture, and anyway it is not so sacrilegious to paint the Magdalene at the Last Supper; Fra Angelico painted one such Last Supper with the Magdalene and Martha present.
Let us look at the first reference to the ‘beloved disciple’ in the Gospels. This occurs during the Last Supper, where our young man sits next to Jesus, reclining on his bosom, fielding questions from the other disciples, suggesting a somewhat higher status.
‘Jesus said, “Most assuredly, I say to you, one of you will betray me.” Then the disciples looked at one another, perplexed about whom He spoke. Now there was leaning on Jesus’ bosom one of His disciples, whom Jesus loved. Simon Peter therefore motioned to him to ask who it was of whom He spoke. Then, leaning back on Jesus’ breast, he said to Him, “Lord, who is it?” (John 13:22)
I have lots of fun looking at paintings trying to depict this odd situation. It is so difficult to place the beloved disciple that does not look awkward, leaning on Jesus’ bosom.
This painting looks like the beloved disciple has either dropped his fork or is doing something rude to Jesus. Sometimes the beloved disciple is shown asleep, which is rather strange, as he is chatting to Peter; other paintings show him as a small boy sitting on Jesus’ lap. I love this one where he is both a boy and asleep.
So this sleeping boy, who is supposed to be chatting to Peter, is said by the academic world to be the disciple, John. They come to this conclusion from the last lines of John’s Gospel:
‘This is the disciple who testifies to these things and who wrote them down. We know that his testimony is true.’ (John 21:20)
Right, this is clearly saying that whoever wrote this Gospel is the ‘beloved disciple’. So the answer should be John, and most Christians say John is the beloved disciple. But the problem is that all the earliest evidence indicates that none of the four canonical Gospels originally had author names attached. The titles “Gospel according to Matthew”, “according to Mark”, “according to Luke”, and “according to John” were added later, likely in the late 2nd century, when the fourfold collection of Gospels began to circulate together
And take biblical expert Professor Elaine Pagels’ rhetorical question:
‘Could a fisherman from Galilee have written the elegant, spare, philosophically sophisticated prose of this Gospel?’
And, add to this what other commentators have said about John’s Gospel – that the author knew Jerusalem well, as is evident from the geographic and place name information throughout the book. He mentions, among others, the Sheep Gate Pool (Bethesda), the Siloam Pool and Jacob’s Well. So the writer knows Jerusalem well. But what about Galilee? He hasn’t got a clue about the area and the fishermen there. In John’s first verse we read of Jesus claiming Phillip lives in Bethsaida, the city of Andrew and Peter. Yet Andrew and Peter are from Capernaum, not Bethsaida. (Mark 1:21) Then in John 12:21 we are told that Philip was of Bethsaida of Galilee. Yet Bethsaida is not in the province of Galilee! Is the writer then John, a Galilean fisherman, or a man from Bethany, the suburbs of Jerusalem? The same man who Jesus is said to love?
‘Now Jesus loved Martha and her sister and Lazarus.’ (J. 11:5)
And later in the same story:
“Where have you laid him?” Jesus asked. “Come and see, Lord,” they replied. Jesus wept. Then the Jews said, “See how he loved him!” (John 11:36)
Is it becoming obvious who the beloved disciple is? If you are still unsure, then Jesus actually tells us!
‘Now a man named Lazarus was sick. He was from Bethany, the village of Mary and her sister Martha. [This Mary was the same one who poured perfume on the Lord and wiped his feet with her hair]. So the sisters sent word to Jesus, “Lord, the one you love is sick.” (John 11:2)
Let me repeat that last statement.
‘The sisters sent a letter to Him saying, “Lord, behold, he whom you love is sick.”
Who is sick? ‘The one whom you love.’ And who could that be? No name or other clue of any sort is given. So tell us, Jesus, in your own words, who is this sick person who you love?
Then Jesus said to them plainly, Lazarus is dead. (John 11:14)
Now one of the great mysteries in Biblical research is ‘who was the Disciple Jesus loved?’ And the usual answer is the disciple, John. While in Dan Brown’s book ‘The Da Vinci Code’, he comes up with the answer, Mary Magdalene. Why are they guessing? Surely Jesus has just told us in his own words it is Lazarus. Case solved! If there was an attempt to conceal Lazarus’ name, it has not worked very well, as it is plain as day that Lazarus is the beloved disciple and therefore the original writer of John’s Gospel, which is why John’s Gospel has intimate stories about Jesus in Bethany.
But that still does not tell us why all the machinations around concealing his name because Lazarus has been totally cut from the synoptic Gospels (yes, you heard that right), and taking his name off John’s Gospel and replacing it with the mouthful, ‘the disciple Jesus loved’! Surely if they put Lazarus’s name into the Synoptic Gospels and called John’s Gospel ‘The Gospel of Lazarus’, it would be fine. Or is there something more important that is being covered up?
But if you are still not convinced that Lazarus was cut from the synoptics, look at this from Luke:
‘Jesus went to the Pharisee’s house and reclined at the table…’
Now Mark:
‘While Jesus was in Bethany, reclining at the table…’
So, we have Jesus reclining at the table, but then add the Gospel of John, and we find:
‘Martha served, while Lazarus was among those reclining at the table with Him.’
So, we see the word ‘recline’ used in all four, but in the three synoptics the person Jesus is reclining with has disappeared! Surely, we are either looking at collusion between the witnesses to remove Lazarus, or one of the synoptic writers has doctored the other two.
I want you to look at the stained glass window in the mysterious church at Rennes-le-Chateaux. Look at Lazarus, who the text says is reclining next to Jesus:
That position is exactly where the paintings of the Last Supper place the ‘Beloved Disciple’. Does this suggest that the two events are actually happening at the same meal? Let me remind you of the quote from John about the anointment of Jesus.
‘Six days before the Passover, Jesus came to Bethany, where Lazarus lived, whom Jesus had raised from the dead. Here a dinner was given in Jesus’ honour. Martha served, while Lazarus was among those reclining at the table with him.’ (John 12:1)
Now, I want you to again notice the word ‘reclining’ used here. Remember this same word is used in the Last Supper.
‘There was reclining on Jesus’ bosom one of his disciples, whom Jesus loved. So Simon Peter gestured to him and said to him, “Tell us who it is of whom he is speaking.” He, leaning back thus on Jesus’ bosom, said to him, “Lord, who is it?” (John 13:23)
So we have Lazarus reclining at the table with Jesus in John 12:1 when he is anointed; then Jesus goes away, does nothing, and then returns in John 13:23 to recline again but now with the person titled ‘the disciple Jesus loved’. Does that make the recliner the same person? Either Jesus is reclining at a lot of suppers, with two different people, or there is only one, the ‘Last Supper’, with Lazarus reclining with him.
Also, both Lazarus, in this event, and the ‘Beloved Disciple’ at the Last Supper are not just sitting; they are reclining, and actually, in the Last Supper, reclining on Jesus’ bosom. What is all this reclining anyway? We are about to destroy the logic of nearly all paintings of the ‘Anointing’ and the ‘Last Supper’. Remember the statement:
‘She stood behind him at his feet, weeping, and began to bathe his feet with her tears and to dry them with her hair. Then she continued kissing his feet and anointing them with the ointment.’ (Luke 7:38)
Paintings always show Jesus sitting down with Magdalene kneeling in front of him dealing with his feet.
But it clearly says she stood behind him! This is where you need to put on your detective’s hat, because there is only one way she can be standing behind him yet wipe his feet with her hair. Do away with chairs and you have the answer. They are lying down like our image of a Roman banquet. This detail suggests it was the feet being anointed, not the head, as that would be from the front, which makes it clear now that this was not the anointing of a king, as the two later Gospels try to suggest. This also explains how Lazarus happens to be lying on Jesus’ breast, which is such a mess in paintings when seated on chairs.
Now sadly maybe we won’t have any more of these wonderful attempts with chairs.
© Julian Doyle IOW 2025 – Any part can be reproduced so long as proper credit is given to the author.