"JESUS WEPT." (JOHN 11:35)

A Palestinian friend of mine told me that as a boy, one of the things he had to do as part of his religious education was to memorize and recite a sura (chapter) from the Koran. Of course, he said that he and his friends all knew the shortest sura of all, and so they would pick it. My equivalent experience was an early Sunday school assignment to memorize a verse from the New Testament. At the time, I didn't know about this verse or I would certainly have chosen it.

In past posts I have purposely taken rather controversial passages from Scripture to discuss. So I thought I would for a change chose about the most simple and straightforward passage of all to see if it proved to be a little easier to interpret. After all,

    there are only two words in this verse;

    there are no parallel passages in the Synoptic Gospels with which to compare it;

    the key Greek word for “weep” only appears here in the NT;

    practically every English translation or paraphrase reads exactly the same;

    there is no uncertainty regarding the accuracy of the Greek text; and

    no important theological, historical, or ethical points appear to be involved.

Well, I proved to be mistaken since there is still quite a controversy regarding the actual implications of these two simple words, as you will see.

First to consider is the key word dakruo, almost universally translated as “weep.” Although this is the only time it appears in the New Testament, it is derived from the noun dakru, meaning “tears” (That noun does occur eleven times in the Greek NT.) Thus, The Living Bible can rightly say, “Tears came to Jesus' eyes.” Ellis is a little stronger in his own rendering: “Jesus shed tears.” And Morris feels that the aorist form of the verb “should probably be taken to signify 'burst into tears'.”

There is a much more common word, klaio, that is sometimes translated as “to cry, mourn.” That Greek root appears fifty times in the NT, and three of those occurrences are in this same passage (v. 31 and twice in v. 33) describing the actions of Martha and the (professional) mourners. Haarbeck states that klaio “expresses profound grief...violent emotion.” And Ellis states, “The Jews' weeping was not unlike the loud organized mourning of the East.” Many commentators rightly distinguish Jesus' weeping with the mourning of the others. Whereas Jesus showed an immediate and spontaneous response to a sad situation, the others carried out a more systematic and prolonged mourning:

    Ford: “In John 11:35 the weeping of Jesus, Gr. dakruo, stands in sharp contrast to the wailing, klaio, of those who mourn over the dead Lazarus (John 11:33).”

    Blum: “Jesus' weeping differed from that of the people. His quiet shedding of tears differed from their loud wailing.”

    Morris: “Jesus did not wail loudly but He was deeply grieved.”

    Borchert: “John carefully used a different word for Jesus' tears, a word that is not used elsewhere in the New Testament. It was almost as though the evangelist wanted to send a signal to his readers not to misinterpret Jesus' weeping. It is, I would argue, precisely what the Jews here did.”

Borchert's words provide an excellent segue for an examination of the main point of contention regarding John 11:35. If Jesus' weeping was a contrast to the crying of the others, why then was he weeping and did the onlookers actually misinterpret it? There have actually been a number of answers given to those questions:

    1. The most obvious answer is that expressed in John 11:36: “Look at how he loved him [i.e. Lazarus].” The Dictionary of Biblical Imagery summarizes, “Christ weeps for his dead friend Lazarus (Jn 11:35), for a spiritually unresponsive and therefore doomed Jerusalem (Lk 11:35), and in his own inner struggles (Heb 5:7, an allusion to Gethsemane and perhaps to other, unrecorded episodes)...His tears are a mark of his humanity, both part and symbol of his self-emptying.”

D.G. Miller also picks up on this fact of great theological significance: “Jesus' humanity was real.” And Bauckham adds that “Jesus' humanity in John is not just affirmed but stressed: it includes not only real flesh and blood (Jn 11:14; 19:34) but also genuine human emotions (Jn 11:3, 33, 35, 38; 12:27).” Note how many of those examples that he cites are found in John 11.

“Even in the most spectacular miracle – the raising of a dead man – Jesus is still a human who weeps, for he is 'the Word became flesh' (Jn 1:14).” (Twelftree)

    2. One reason for Jesus' tears that we can safely discard is that hinted at by the onlookers in v. 37 – Jesus' regret at not being there on time to save Lazarus.

    3. Guthrie says, “Her [Mary's] tears caused Jesus to be distressed and to weep.” If Guthrie is implying that Jesus began crying because he felt Mary's pain, that may be true. However, I have not seen any other commentators taking that particular approach to the subject.

    4. “His weeping was over the tragic consequences of sin [i.e. death].” (Blum) Other commentators have much the same read on the situation. Thus, R.E. Brown states: “The weeping is caused by the thought of Lazarus in the tomb.” But he adds that “the verse is primarily intended to set the stage for vs. 36.”

Kistemaker combines this interpretation with Option 1 above in stating that the two words “speak volumes about his sympathy on the one hand and his anger against the angel of death on the other. Jesus expressed his sympathy to the grieving sisters and his outrage against the power of death.”

    5. “Jesus' emotion rises again when he approaches the tomb and when he considers his own death...The pattern of these emotions suggests that it is the approach of his own death rather than death in general [Interpretation 4] or Mary's lack of understanding [Interpretation 6 below] which moves him so deeply.” (Culpepper)

    6. Borchert explains, “Of course Jesus loved Lazarus, but I doubt that death was the main reason Jesus wept...I would maintain that Jesus' weeping here is directly related to the failure of his followers to recognize his mission as the agent of God. God's son was in their midst.” Others point, in one way or another, to Jesus' disappointment with the lack of faith of those around him as the primary reason for his tears.

“As in v. 33 this will not be owing to the death of His friend, for He was about to raise him. We are reminded of that other occasion when Jesus wept over Jerusalem (Luke 19:41). There as here it was the wrong attitude of the Jews that aroused His deep emotion.” (Morris)

“Hoskyns and Bultmann are among the commentators who think that he was angry because Mary and the Jews showed lack of faith...But the weeping in vs. 33 scarcely indicates lack of faith, since Jesus himself cried. (Brown) Brown may be correct; however, since the two types of crying were different, that moderates the effect of his argument somewhat.

I would like to sum up this discussion with an authoritative view on the subject, but I don't really have one. But I do think that it goes a long way toward demonstrating that there is much of God's truth that we still don't completely understand, even the “simple” two-word sentences in the Bible. It should keep us very humble and less likely to be dogmatic on subjects on which even the experts can't manage to agree.