Why did Jesus weep when he was going to raise Lazarus up anyway?

[tonychanyt]

Jesus let Lazarus die and waited before visiting Mary and Martha. John 11:

28b [Martha] went and called her sister Mary, saying in private, “The Teacher is here and is calling for you.” 29 And when she heard it, she rose quickly and went to him. 30 Now Jesus had not yet come into the village, but was still in the place where Martha had met him. 31 When the Jews who were with her in the house, consoling her, saw Mary rise quickly and go out, they followed her, supposing that she was going to the tomb to weep there. 32 Now when Mary came to where Jesus was and saw him, she fell at his feet, saying to him, “Lord, if you had been here, my brother would not have died.” 33 When Jesus saw her weeping, and the Jews who had come with her also weeping,

Everyone was weeping. Jesus felt compassion.

he was deeply moved in his spirit and greatly troubled. 34 And he said, “Where have you laid him?” They said to him, “Lord, come and see.” 35 Jesus wept.

As a human, Jesus wept in empathy with Mary and Martha. It was an occasion for weeping.

36 So the Jews said, “See how he loved him!”

The Jews interpreted Jesus' tears as tears of love.

37 But some of them said, “Could not he who opened the eyes of the blind man also have kept this man from dying?”

Good question. Vertically, Jesus knew that he was about to raise Lazarus. Horizontally, he felt the pain of others and wept in sympathy and compassion of love for Lazarus. He showed his love for Lazarus and his family. He identified himself with fellow human beings.

Jesus wept at Lazarus’ tomb not because He was powerless or uncertain, but because He was deeply moved by the pain of those He loved and the devastating effects of sin and death. His tears revealed His compassion, humanity, and love, while His subsequent miracle demonstrated his divine power and authority. This moment encapsulates the tension between the present reality of suffering and the future hope of resurrection, pointing to the ultimate victory over death that Jesus would accomplish through His own death and resurrection.

 

[Mark Quayle]

Jesus let Lazarus die and waited before visiting Mary and Martha. John 11:


Everyone was weeping. Jesus felt compassion.


As a human, Jesus wept in sympathy for others. It was an occasion for weeping.


The Jews interpreted Jesus' tears as tears of love.


Good question. Vertically, Jesus knew that he was about to raise Lazarus. Horizontally, he felt the pain of others and wept in sympathy and compassion of love for Lazarus.

Do you think your assessment is more than just speculation?

I tend to think the fact he wept was due to much more than just simple sympathy and compassion. Consider, for example, the emotions raised in him at the mental comparison of Lazarus' death and resurrection (for, I'm guessing, Jesus knew he was going to raise Lazarus from the dead), and his own, yet to come. Or consider, the pain of the effects of sin upon life —pain he knew would be laid upon himself.)

But, yeah, I can only speculate, like all of us.

 

[tonychanyt]

Do you think your assessment is more than just speculation?

I am always speculating in the sense of weighing. Some speculations weigh more, some less

But, yeah, I can only speculate, like all of us.

Right, as long as one knows that he is speculating, it is okay. The problem comes when one speculates but insists on having the absolute truth.

 

[KevinT]

The Jews interpreted Jesus' tears as tears of love.

Good question. Vertically, Jesus knew that he was about to raise Lazarus. Horizontally, he felt the pain of others and wept in sympathy and compassion of love for Lazarus.

Take a look at this link. It shows that many translations don't say that he wept. Some even say that he was angry.

But if one were to think that weeping was the better translation, I would wonder if there is a connection between him weeping here and weeping during the triumphant entry. At that time I think He was weeping over the upcoming destruction of Jerusalem.

Kevin

 

[public hermit]

Jesus let Lazarus die and waited before visiting Mary and Martha. John 11:


Everyone was weeping. Jesus felt compassion.


As a human, Jesus wept in sympathy for others. It was an occasion for weeping.


The Jews interpreted Jesus' tears as tears of love.


Good question. Vertically, Jesus knew that he was about to raise Lazarus. Horizontally, he felt the pain of others and wept in sympathy and compassion of love for Lazarus.

I think he wept with the heart of God(too).. It has to be heartbreaking, in a divine way, to be that connected (identified with) pure goodness and then watch the foibles of humanity. We will never be fit for God until we love the good more than ourselves. Death is simply a sign that letting go is essential to us. That's hard for humans and it's sad. Jesus crying at his friend's death tells us that human tears and divine tears are coming from the same place. Jesus was crying his own tears.

 

[tonychanyt]

Take a look at this link. It shows that many translations don't say that he wept. Some even say that he was angry.

See Was Jesus feeling deep anger near Lazarus' tomb? and follow up there.

I would wonder if there is a connection between him weeping here and weeping during the triumphant entry.

Verse? Note the bold.

 

[Grafted In]

This came up long ago and I wrote then that He may in part be crying for Lazarus because he was comforted in Abraham‘s bosom and Jesus had to bring him back into this world of pain and heartache knowing full well those watching would not only disbelieve, but be all the more motivated to have Jesus killed.
Just one possibility among perhaps many.

 

[David Lamb]

Take a look at this link. It shows that many translations don't say that he wept. Some even say that he was angry.

But if one were to think that weeping was the better translation, I would wonder if there is a connection between him weeping here and weeping during the triumphant entry. At that time I think He was weeping over the upcoming destruction of Jerusalem.

Kevin

Your link covers the wrong verse. If you follow this link: John 11:35 - Jesus Comforts Martha and Mary it will take you to that very short verse, where all the translations say "wept" or "cried" or a phrase using "tears".

 

[KevinT]

Your link covers the wrong verse. If you follow this link: John 11:35 - Jesus Comforts Martha and Mary it will take you to that very short verse, where all the translations say "wept" or "cried" or a phrase using "tears".

Very good point. Thanks for clarification.

KT

 

[KevinT]

Verse? Note the bold.

Luke 19:39-44
39 Some of the Pharisees in the crowd said to him, “Teacher, order your disciples to stop.” 40 He answered, “I tell you, if these were silent, the stones would shout out.”

Jesus Weeps over Jerusalem​

41 As he came near and saw the city, he wept over it, 42 saying, “If you, even you, had only recognized on this day the things that make for peace! But now they are hidden from your eyes. 43 Indeed, the days will come upon you when your enemies will set up ramparts around you and surround you and hem you in on every side. 44 They will crush you to the ground, you and your children within you, and they will not leave within you one stone upon another, because you did not recognize the time of your visitation from God.”[a]

Best wishes,

KT

 

[tonychanyt]

I would wonder if there is a connection between him weeping here and weeping during the triumphant entry.

I don't see much connection. On the one hand, he wept for Lazarus's personal situation, and on the other, he wept over the city of Jerusalem.

 

[Grafted In]

i think instead of Jeruselum the city, He was crying for the Jews as a whole because of their unbelief.

 

[Garrett.theo]

I appreciate your take on the story of Lazarus, and thought I'd share with you an article I wrote about this very topic. It's called Jesus Cried for You, and it offers a deeper insight on this passage.

 

[tonychanyt]

I appreciate your take on the story of Lazarus, and thought I'd share with you an article I wrote about this very topic. It's called Jesus Cried for You, and it offers a deeper insight on this passage.

Thanks for the reference. Can you quote some relevant points from it? Thanks.

 

[Garrett.theo]

Thanks for the reference. Can you quote some relevant points from it? Thanks.

Sure, the article revolves around the significance of the iconic verse "He wept." and how it relates to us as individuals. The article begins with an introduction to the matter which is followed by a retelling of the story of Lazarus. This is done to show how it parallels to the story of Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden, so the reader can achieve a well-rounded understanding of the depth and weight behind the shortest sentence in the Bible while also attaining new understanding on the Creation story. The article ends with a reflection on our personal lives in correlation to the previous subject matter to drive home the depth of God's love for us!

 

[tonychanyt]

Sure, the article revolves around the significance of the iconic verse "He wept." and how it relates to us as individuals. The article begins with an introduction to the matter which is followed by a retelling of the story of Lazarus. This is done to show how it parallels to the story of Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden, so the reader can achieve a well-rounded understanding of the depth and weight behind the shortest sentence in the Bible while also attaining new understanding on the Creation story. The article ends with a reflection on our personal lives in correlation to the previous subject matter to drive home the depth of God's love for us!

Can you quote the actual words from the article?

 

[Garrett.theo]

Can you quote the actual words from the article?

Unfortunately, I will refrain from doing that. The reason being is because I don't want to detract from the overall message and value it provides by posting snippets of it across the web. Such would be an injustice to the reader. I posted it on Medium to offer a sense of professionalism and accessibility to readers, while providing it to them in a format that is comfortable to read. Font type and spacing make a world of difference in helping to convey a message! If my article was written in plain text formatting it would, like any other text, be less desirable to read.

 

[tonychanyt]

Unfortunately, I will refrain from doing that. The reason being is because I don't want to detract from the overall message and value it provides by posting snippets of it across the web. Such would be an injustice to the reader. I posted it on Medium to offer a sense of professionalism and accessibility to readers, while providing it to them in a format that is comfortable to read. Font type and spacing make a world of difference in helping to convey a message! If my article was written in plain text formatting it would, like any other text, be less desirable to read.

This is how to do referencing in a scholarly manner:

1. Give the source/citation.
2. Provide the URL link to the source if available.
3. Indent the quoted text.
4. Bold the relevant keywords that are important to the point that you are making.
5. Be concise and to the point.

I do this for others who read my posts. It is a standard high-school scholarship. If you practice this, I guarantee it will sharpen your analytical thinking. In any case, no one is required to do it. I prefer to interact with people who do.

This is the 3rd time I have asked.

 

[Garrett.theo]

This is how to do referencing in a scholarly manner:

1. Give the source/citation.
2. Provide the URL link to the source if available.
3. Indent the quoted text.
4. Bold the relevant keywords that are important to the point that you are making.
5. Be concise and to the point.

I do this for others who read my posts. It is a standard high-school scholarship. If you practice this, I guarantee it will sharpen your analytical thinking. In any case, no one is required to do it. I prefer to interact with people who do.

This is the 3rd time I have asked.

I find your persistence humorous. In the time it took for us to go back and forth, you could have read the article.

Don't treat me as if I'm subordinate to you. I shared my article with you for the same reason you made this thread in the first place--to strengthen others faith and encourage them to grow deeper in their relationship with God!

You don't have to read the article if you don't want to, but if you did I'm sure it would be a blessing to you!

 

[tonychanyt]

I find your persistence humorous.

I find people who justify themselves against high-school standard referencing humorous. Occupation hazard: I was a professor

In the time it took for us to go back and forth, you could have read the article.

1. If you practice scholarly referencing, I guarantee it will sharpen your analytical thinking.

2. It is not just for me. Others who read your posts will appreciate your proper referencing and logic.

It is up to you whether you do it or not. Do you value points 1 and 2?