JAMES AND JOHN: EXCLUSIONIST SONS OF THUNDER

There is no need for me to invent a nickname for James and John (other than my added adjective above) since Jesus himself labeled them sons of thunder, “evidently because of their sometimes impetuous personalities.” (Schnabel) See the incident recorded in Luke 9:51-56 where they wanted to send down fire on a Samaritan village which had rejected them. They were both sons of Zebedee, and since James is always listed before John, it is assumed that James is the older of the two.

We really don't know much about James alone since in the gospel accounts he is either accompanied by his brother John or by both John and Peter. The latter three constitute Jesus' inner core of believers, and according to Luke 5:10, they were partners in their fishing business. It is interesting that all of them had the reputation for being impetuous. Apparently, men of action were the type of followers that Jesus especially valued.

Because this trio was especially close to Jesus, they were privileged to witness several key events and teachings in Jesus' ministry:

    The Transfiguration (Matthew 17:1; Mark 9:2)

    The raising of Jairus' daughter back to life (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:49-56)

    Jesus' “Little Apocalypse” discourse (Matthew 24-25; Mark 13:1-37; Luke 21:5-36)

    Jesus' Prayer in the Garden of Gethsemane (Mark 14)

The two times in the gospels when James and John act by themselves throw a somewhat negative light on these apostles. But the fact that they were chosen for Jesus' inner circle and remained there should cause us to re-investigate those actions. For one thing, in both incidents we see that they were careful to approach Jesus and request permission from him, unlike Peter who was more likely to charge ahead on his own and even to argue back at Jesus. Secondly, note that in the incident mentioned above they do not ask Jesus to rain down fire on the village, but to just say the word and they would do it. This shows a tremendous amount of faith not only on Jesus' ability to do it himself, but also to give them the same heavenly power.

And then there is the embarrassing account of James and John asking for unique places in heaven. Granted that it demonstrated a notable lack of tact to do so in the hearing of the other apostles. But the way Jesus had granted them special privileges in the past make this not that unreasonable a request. In addition, there is some doubt in the gospel record as to exactly who made that request since Matthew 20:20-28 says that it was their mother. Perhaps the truth is somewhere in between. Was their mother the ultimate “stage mother” or “helicopter parent” who was interested in promoting their careers even in the afterlife? If so, either she could have made the request supposedly in their name, or they may have made the request only after constant nagging from her. We will never know.

However, Jesus only gives them a very mild rebuke, and they agree to “drink the cup” that he will drink instead. It is unclear whether they understood what they had actually agreed to do. However, in James' case in meant that he would be martyred under Herod Agrippa I, an action which pleased the Jews. (Acts 12:12-13)

Turning next to the apostle John, most of us would immediately think of him as the “beloved disciple” who was Jesus' favorite. And the fact that John was one of the three in the inner circle would seem to confirm that fact. Although I personally feel that he was the person the Gospel of John designates in that way, there is still some doubt as to that identification. For more on the subject, see my post “The Beloved Disciple.”

So if we for convenience sake eliminate from consideration what the Gospel of John has to say, we end up with a somewhat negative portrait of the apostle John. Besides the two incidents already mentioned in which he and his brother were involved, we have the episode recorded in both Mark 9:38-43 and Luke 9:49-50 in which John complains to Jesus that there is a man casting out demons in Jesus' name but he “is not following us.” John wants Jesus to stop the man, but Jesus puts John in his place. Note that in the episodes where the Samaritan village rejects him and where he and his brother request special positions in heaven, there is a consistent picture of John. He is clearly exclusionary in his psychological make-up, someone who is always drawing the distinction between us and them.

There is one additional place in which we see this basic tendency of John, and that is found in his letters. Scholars have noted the definite dualistic outlook expressed in I John where everything is seen in either black or white, with no grays. Similarly, in II John 7-10 John warns his audience concerning heretics and tells them not to even associate with them in any way.

But let us end up on a positive note regarding John's basic personality because he was always open to changing his mind. So that whereas he was more than willing to destroy a Samaritan village because they hadn't accepted their message to them, just look at the time recorded in Acts 8 when he and Peter are present to confirm the fact that the gospel has actually been accepted to the hated Samaritans. The two apostles then proceed to travel through Samaria evangelizing the people. And although his command in II John was to shun those with heretical ideas, in III John he actually criticizes the self-appointed church leader Diotrephes for going around ostracizing any of the believers who do not totally agree with him. These two facts should go a long way in demonstrating that even such an apparently close-minded person as John could be transformed by the Holy Spirit. And furthermore, it shows how that very trait could be used to advantage in those situations where distinctions between truth and error need to be upheld.