Why does Jesus grieve for Lazarus’s death?

[SLD]

So the story of Lazarus is only told in John. It’s a sign of his miracles.

But Jesus tarries for two days after he hears that he’s sick. Then he says he’s going to wake him as a sign. So he knows that Lazarus has died. So he goes to Lazarus and being informed that Lazarus has been buried for four days, and by this time he stinks. And then he weeps.

Why? In John, Jesus is god. Just bring his soul to heaven. Death makes no difference after John’s Jesus is done. So why does he weep?

 

[Tigers!]

Death is considered to be an enemy. It was not part of the original creation (getting ready to duck counter barrage).
Jesus is acknowledging death's intrusion and the effect it has on people.

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

Death is considered to be an enemy. It was not part of the original creation (getting ready to duck counter barrage).
Jesus is acknowledging death's intrusion and the effect it has on people.

Death may the enemy to someone secular. Followers of the Jesus religion were going to the mansion that was prepared for them, escaping the vicissitudes and pain of their earthly bodies. Paradise and the original creation were history, no more magic garden where everybody was happy all the live long day.

Jesus should rejoice but he wept. Doesn't wash.

 

[Tigers!]

Death is considered to be an enemy. It was not part of the original creation (getting ready to duck counter barrage).
Jesus is acknowledging death's intrusion and the effect it has on people.

Death may the enemy to someone secular. Followers of the Jesus religion were going to the mansion that was prepared for them, escaping the vicissitudes and pain of their earthly bodies. Paradise and the original creation were history, no more magic garden where everybody was happy all the live long day.

Jesus should rejoice but he wept. Doesn't wash.

Why should Jesus rejoice? Death brings sorrow and loss to those who are left. He had just lost a friend on this earth.

All very true but that does not remove the sense of pain and loss felt by us as we attend a funeral or remember someone who is no longer with us. We acknowledge the separation and the consequent loss of fellowship.

 

[Politesse]

So the story of Lazarus is only told in John. It’s a sign of his miracles.

But Jesus tarries for two days after he hears that he’s sick. Then he says he’s going to wake him as a sign. So he knows that Lazarus has died. So he goes to Lazarus and being informed that Lazarus has been buried for four days, and by this time he stinks. And then he weeps.

Why? In John, Jesus is god. Just bring his soul to heaven. Death makes no difference after John’s Jesus is done. So why does he weep?

Because his friend died? Grief is a pretty normal human reaction to death, even for people who believe in an afterlife.

Jesus is not in fact portrayed as being God in the book you're discussing, so that's not relevant to the discussion of that text, though it might be relevant to a critique of that kind of christology.

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

Why should Jesus rejoice? Death brings sorrow and loss to those who are left. He had just lost a friend on this earth.

All very true but that does not remove the sense of pain and loss felt by us as we attend a funeral or remember someone who is no longer with us. We acknowledge the separation and the consequent loss of fellowship.

If a person weeps because their friend is gone it proves that their religion is pious fraud because their religion changed nothing. That reaction of course is normal and makes sense and has nothing to do with religion.

 

[Politesse]

Why should Jesus rejoice? Death brings sorrow and loss to those who are left. He had just lost a friend on this earth.

All very true but that does not remove the sense of pain and loss felt by us as we attend a funeral or remember someone who is no longer with us. We acknowledge the separation and the consequent loss of fellowship.

If a person weeps because their friend is gone it proves that their religion is pious fraud because their religion changed nothing. That reaction of course is normal and makes sense and has nothing to do with religion.

Why do you believe this is true? I'm not aware of any religious traditions that forbid grieving for the dead. The occasional wacky cult here and there, perhaps, but they are already associated with pious fraud.

 

[SLD]

So the story of Lazarus is only told in John. It’s a sign of his miracles.

But Jesus tarries for two days after he hears that he’s sick. Then he says he’s going to wake him as a sign. So he knows that Lazarus has died. So he goes to Lazarus and being informed that Lazarus has been buried for four days, and by this time he stinks. And then he weeps.

Why? In John, Jesus is god. Just bring his soul to heaven. Death makes no difference after John’s Jesus is done. So why does he weep?

Because his friend died? Grief is a pretty normal human reaction to death, even for people who believe in an afterlife.

Jesus is not in fact portrayed as being God in the book you're discussing, so that's not relevant to the discussion of that text, though it might be relevant to a critique of that kind of christology.

John 10:30 “I and the father are one.” That‘s the same book as the Lazarus story. Again, this is Jesus, who knew he was going to raise him, which regardless is irrelevant since Lazarus dies eventually a second time at some later point not in the story. Since they’re such buds, I presume he goes to heaven. Even if Jesus isn’t declaring himself god, he is undeniably opening heaven for all the believers in him. Which means Lazarus gets to go there and have fun instead of suffering and toiling on earth for many more years. What’s to grieve from Jesus’s perspective?

 

[Politesse]

So the story of Lazarus is only told in John. It’s a sign of his miracles.

But Jesus tarries for two days after he hears that he’s sick. Then he says he’s going to wake him as a sign. So he knows that Lazarus has died. So he goes to Lazarus and being informed that Lazarus has been buried for four days, and by this time he stinks. And then he weeps.

Why? In John, Jesus is god. Just bring his soul to heaven. Death makes no difference after John’s Jesus is done. So why does he weep?

Because his friend died? Grief is a pretty normal human reaction to death, even for people who believe in an afterlife.

Jesus is not in fact portrayed as being God in the book you're discussing, so that's not relevant to the discussion of that text, though it might be relevant to a critique of that kind of christology.

John 10:30 “I and the father are one.” That‘s the same book as the Lazarus story. Again, this is Jesus, who knew he was going to raise him, which regardless is irrelevant since Lazarus dies eventually a second time at some later point not in the story. Since they’re such buds, I presume he goes to heaven. Even if Jesus isn’t declaring himself god, he is undeniably opening heaven for all the believers in him. Which means Lazarus gets to go there and have fun instead of suffering and toiling on earth for many more years. What’s to grieve from Jesus’s perspective?

The fact that his friend died? I don't see why this is such a mystery.

Why do atheists grieve when their friends die? It's not as though they're suffering, they just blinked into the void, right? But you still miss them. And Jesus missed his friend. Whatever else he may have been, he was human.

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

The fact that his friend died? I don't see why this is such a mystery.

It isn't a mystery. It's just more wacky religious claims and behaviors. I can appreciate a religious person not recognizing the contradiction. If said person could recognize the contradiction they wouldn't be making the goofy religious claims. It's simple, not mysterious at all, simply persons lacking self awareness with regards to behavior. That's pretty common.

Aside from that no one has magic powers that can make people come back to life. The fact that lots of humans believe these fables literally, believe that they don't actually die but rather go on to live a magical second life, yet grieve over death, is further proof of what I just said.

 

[James Brown]

Why do atheists grieve when their friends die? It's not as though they're suffering, they just blinked into the void, right? But you still miss them. And Jesus missed his friend. Whatever else he may have been, he was human.

But I don't cry when a friend goes to sleep, or when he leaves to go back home, because I'm reasonably sure that I'll see my friend again. Death is forever, unless I know that in my friend's case death is only temporary. I'm human too. Do I miss my friend when he's asleep, be it for an hour's nap or a long sleep of about four days?

Didn't Jesus scold the mourners of Jairus' daughter who had died, saying she wasn't dead but just asleep? And then he raised her from the dead? Why is it acceptable for Jesus to mourn the temporary death of Lazarus but not for Jairus to do so?

 

[Politesse]

Why do atheists grieve when their friends die? It's not as though they're suffering, they just blinked into the void, right? But you still miss them. And Jesus missed his friend. Whatever else he may have been, he was human.

But I don't cry when a friend goes to sleep, or when he leaves to go back home, because I'm reasonably sure that I'll see my friend again. Death is forever, unless I know that in my friend's case death is only temporary. I'm human too. Do I miss my friend when he's asleep, be it for an hour's nap or a long sleep of about four days?

Didn't Jesus scold the mourners of Jairus' daughter who had died, saying she wasn't dead but just asleep? And then he raised her from the dead? Why is it acceptable for Jesus to mourn the temporary death of Lazarus but not for Jairus to do so?

I never read that passage as scolding (doesn't the crowd rather mock Jesus than the other way around, for that pronouncement?), but if it was, perhaps Jesus seems hypocritical in that respect when that book is compared to this one. I still don't think it is unreasonable, or anything other than human, to mourn our dead. Whatever hopes we may have for an eternal future, that doesn't change the fact that they are gone from us. Lazarus is raised in the story, yes, but can Jesus necessarily have known that this would be so? And even if his confidence in Lazarus' return were absolute, his dear friends Mary and Martha were weeping for their dead brother, and I don't think it would be unreasonable for him to weep with them in sympathy even if he knew with certainty that they were weeping needlessly.

It's funny, all these atheists complaining about one of the single most humanizing moments in all the Gospels. Would you really prefer that Jesus were cold and heartless as a stone? Would the world be better off if he had never shown a moment of fear, grief, or anger? A perfect alabaster monolith whose pronouncements are absolute and unquestionable?

 

[James Brown]

Perhaps "scolding" was the wrong term. The NASB has it (Mark 5):

They *came to the house of the synagogue official; and He *saw a commotion, and people loudly weeping and wailing. 39 And entering in, He *said to them, “Why make a commotion and weep? The child has not died, but is asleep.” 40 They began laughing at Him.

I still don't think it is unreasonable, or anything other than human, to mourn our dead. Whatever hopes we may have for an eternal future, that doesn't change the fact that they are gone from us.

Completely agree.

Lazarus is raised in the story, yes, but can Jesus necessarily have known that this would be so?

Well, that's one of the questions raised in this thread, isn't it? Would Mr. "I and the Father are one" have necessarily known that he was about to invoke a divine miracle to raise a person from the dead? If he did, then why weep? If he didn't, then what does that say about his claims of divinity?

And even if his confidence in Lazarus' return were absolute, his dear friends Mary and Martha were weeping for their dead brother, and I don't think it would be unreasonable for him to weep with them in sympathy even if he knew with certainty that they were weeping needlessly.

So Jesus is a sympathetic crier? (I am too, by the way.) I raised the issue because we have two identical situations: a dead person that Jesus intends to resurrect. In one scenario, he weeps with the mourners. In the other, he dismisses the mourners' emotions.

Would you really prefer that Jesus were cold and heartless as a stone? Would the world be better off if he had never shown a moment of fear, grief, or anger?

Well, I would claim that a person not mourning when a friend is only "mostly dead" is not equivalent to "cold and heartless as a stone." More like, "doesn't mourn when there's nothing to mourn about." Why didn't he tell Mary and Martha, "Lazarus isn't dead; he's just talking a very long nap." How hard did he cry over Jairus' daughter? Mark doesn't say, but I get the sense he didn't mourn at all because there was no need to, even in the presence of truly mournful friends and family.

Or perhaps Mark and John fundamentally disagree over the nature of Jesus. That seems like a more likely way to square the circle.

 

[Politesse]

Perhaps "scolding" was the wrong term. The NASB has it (Mark 5):

They *came to the house of the synagogue official; and He *saw a commotion, and people loudly weeping and wailing. 39 And entering in, He *said to them, “Why make a commotion and weep? The child has not died, but is asleep.” 40 They began laughing at Him.

I still don't think it is unreasonable, or anything other than human, to mourn our dead. Whatever hopes we may have for an eternal future, that doesn't change the fact that they are gone from us.

Completely agree.

Lazarus is raised in the story, yes, but can Jesus necessarily have known that this would be so?

Well, that's one of the questions raised in this thread, isn't it? Would Mr. "I and the Father are one" have necessarily known that he was about to invoke a divine miracle to raise a person from the dead? If he did, then why weep? If he didn't, then what does that say about his claims of divinity?

And even if his confidence in Lazarus' return were absolute, his dear friends Mary and Martha were weeping for their dead brother, and I don't think it would be unreasonable for him to weep with them in sympathy even if he knew with certainty that they were weeping needlessly.

So Jesus is a sympathetic crier? (I am too, by the way.) I raised the issue because we have two identical situations: a dead person that Jesus intends to resurrect. In one scenario, he weeps with the mourners. In the other, he dismisses the mourners' emotions.

Would you really prefer that Jesus were cold and heartless as a stone? Would the world be better off if he had never shown a moment of fear, grief, or anger?

Well, I would claim that a person not mourning when a friend is only "mostly dead" is not equivalent to "cold and heartless as a stone." More like, "doesn't mourn when there's nothing to mourn about." Why didn't he tell Mary and Martha, "Lazarus isn't dead; he's just talking a very long nap." How hard did he cry over Jairus' daughter? Mark doesn't say, but I get the sense he didn't mourn at all because there was no need to, even in the presence of truly mournful friends and family.

Or perhaps Mark and John fundamentally disagree over the nature of Jesus. That seems like a more likely way to square the circle.

Well, I'm not the one who brought the Synoptics into this. Whatever else may be true, it is certain beyond any reasonable doubt that the four gospel writers had different perspectives on Jesus, his personality, and his career. Otherwise, the Gospels would have been synthesized into a single document by the end of the 2nd century.

Whether Jesus is a sympathetic crier or not is beyond our scope of reasonable speculation. We are after all discussing two stories about people being raised from the dead, so treating other parts of the same story as factual windows into an ancient man's pscyhology seems a bit like building a suspension bridge out of toothpicks and Elmer's glue. My point is more that there are a lot of reasons to cry, and inventing this precept that only faithless people would ever cry upon hearing of the death of a friend is an absurd starting point from my point of view.

 

[Ruth Harris]

his dear friends Mary and Martha were weeping for their dead brother, and I don't think it would be unreasonable for him to weep with them in sympathy even if he knew with certainty that they were weeping needlessly.

This

That was always my understanding of this passage of scripture. In the NIV, John 11:33 says "When Jesus saw her weeping, and the Jews who had come along with her also weeping, he was deeply moved in spirit and troubled." Seems pretty clear that his tears were in sympathy with his friends, who he knew were suffering.

Ruth

 

[SLD]

Why do atheists grieve when their friends die? It's not as though they're suffering, they just blinked into the void, right? But you still miss them. And Jesus missed his friend. Whatever else he may have been, he was human.

But I don't cry when a friend goes to sleep, or when he leaves to go back home, because I'm reasonably sure that I'll see my friend again. Death is forever, unless I know that in my friend's case death is only temporary. I'm human too. Do I miss my friend when he's asleep, be it for an hour's nap or a long sleep of about four days?

Didn't Jesus scold the mourners of Jairus' daughter who had died, saying she wasn't dead but just asleep? And then he raised her from the dead? Why is it acceptable for Jesus to mourn the temporary death of Lazarus but not for Jairus to do so?

I never read that passage as scolding (doesn't the crowd rather mock Jesus than the other way around, for that pronouncement?), but if it was, perhaps Jesus seems hypocritical in that respect when that book is compared to this one. I still don't think it is unreasonable, or anything other than human, to mourn our dead. Whatever hopes we may have for an eternal future, that doesn't change the fact that they are gone from us. Lazarus is raised in the story, yes, but can Jesus necessarily have known that this would be so? And even if his confidence in Lazarus' return were absolute, his dear friends Mary and Martha were weeping for their dead brother, and I don't think it would be unreasonable for him to weep with them in sympathy even if he knew with certainty that they were weeping needlessly.

It's funny, all these atheists complaining about one of the single most humanizing moments in all the Gospels. Would you really prefer that Jesus were cold and heartless as a stone? Would the world be better off if he had never shown a moment of fear, grief, or anger? A perfect alabaster monolith whose pronouncements are absolute and unquestionable?

It is indeed unreasonable to mourn the non-dead. and that's what lazarus was. So also are all who believe in Jesus, they're forever not dead. So why does he weep at all?

I do expect him to weep if death were in fact final as we atheists believe. This isn't a humanizing moment at all. It's another, in a long line, of glitches in the Gospel that make no sense. I'm not the first to raise this question. Enlightenment critics also raised this troublesome passage.

And the world would have been much better off if we didn't turn this man into a god figure and put stupid fantastical stories that don't make any sense about him. If there's a kernel of truth in the story, it was that Lazarus was dead and as a result Jesus wept because he knew he couldn't raise him and didn't in fact raise him. The real story ends with him showing up too late for the funeral. If anything.

It's just another nail in the coffin of Christianity as a bullshit story.

 

[Keith&Co.]

But I don't cry when a friend goes to sleep, or when he leaves to go back home, because I'm reasonably sure that I'll see my friend again.

What if you just heard a really good joke?
Tom: "Oh, hey! Where's Steve? I just found a Trump-shitting-his-pants meme i gotta show him."
Harry: "He went home to Provo, for Kwanza."
Tom: "FUCK! Now he's gonna see it somewhere else, first. I wanted to be the one to show him...."

And verily Tom's biographer, Dick who to be honeft tends to overdramatize, did record Tom as wailing in grief for the loft opportunity.

 

[Ruth Harris]

It is indeed unreasonable to mourn the non-dead. and that's what lazarus was. So also are all who believe in Jesus, they're forever not dead. So why does he weep at all?

Really, you are making this much more difficult than it actually is. The statement that Jesus cried has nothing to do with faith at all.

When my son moved into his first home of his own, I cried. Sure, I knew I would see him again – but it still hurt because he wasn’t going to be with me all the time anymore. My sister cried with me – not because it hurt her like it hurt me, but because she empathized with my pain.

That is all that happened here. Jesus empathized with people he loved because he knew they were grieving their loss, be it temporary or not. Just as I grieved the temporary loss of my son's presence.

Ruth

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

So Jesus' weeping has nothing to do with the greater lesson of the Lazarus story? That's an interesting contention.

 

[SLD]

It is indeed unreasonable to mourn the non-dead. and that's what lazarus was. So also are all who believe in Jesus, they're forever not dead. So why does he weep at all?

Really, you are making this much more difficult than it actually is. The statement that Jesus cried has nothing to do with faith at all.

When my son moved into his first home of his own, I cried. Sure, I knew I would see him again – but it still hurt because he wasn’t going to be with me all the time anymore. My sister cried with me – not because it hurt her like it hurt me, but because she empathized with my pain.

That is all that happened here. Jesus empathized with people he loved because he knew they were grieving their loss, be it temporary or not. Just as I grieved the temporary loss of my son's presence.

Ruth

But in John, Jesus is god. John is the source for the doctrine of the trinity. In Mark, Jesus explicitly denies being god. If the story appeared in Mark, I might understand it. But why would any god weep? Immortality and omnipotence would imply no need for such an emotion. Thus Jesus is faking it. He’s basically lying to them instead of cheering them up. Hundreds of millions if not billions had died since Adam was thrown out of Paradise 4000 years prior. Billions more if you are an old earth creationist. Does god weep for them? Were none worth weeping for? Not even the great prophets and kings of Israel? If god weeps for the dead, why did he create death? If there is eternal life in heaven, there‘s no need for a god to weep, and on the contrary, he should rejoice and be happy about it.

If you’re saying that this just shows Jesus’s humanity, I’d be OK with it, but then you are denying one of the major tenets of Christianity, i.e. his divinity. Maybe that‘s a good UU argument against the Trinity. Jesus is just another great prophet like Elijah.