"Every story needs a great villain because without one, the hero can't shine".


It is commonly believed that Jesus had deep affection for all his disciples, yet there was one among them whom he held in particularly high regard.
This disciple is known as the one identified five times in the Gospel of John as 'the disciple whom Jesus loved' (John 13:23; 19:26; 20:2; 21:7, 21:20). Sometimes, this anonymous disciple is addressed as 'the other Disciple' in other chapters of the book (John 18:16, similarly used in John 20:2 & 8 and also as 'the disciple who leaned on the bosom of Jesus' (John 21:20).

All These phrases were used to refer to the same person, as seen in John 21:20. The other three Gospels, Matthew, Mark, and Luke, never mentioned these phrases. Nowhere in the Bible were these phrases mentioned, except in the Book of John.

Don't believe me when I say, this anonymous disciple is right in front of us in the book of John. I am convinced that most Christians don't read their Bible, even if it's just reading it like a storybook. Leave the 'spiritual' reading aspects aside and just read it YOURSELF. Reading the book of Mark in its entirety will take less than an hour, there is no excuse!

Some have claimed that this 'other disciple' is John, and they even gave it the title 'John the beloved.' Interestingly, John is never named as such in the Gospel, that has traditionally been attributed to him. There is no concrete evidence to support that John was the beloved disciple.

So, who is this disciple? Before unveiling that, we should know that this "not so anonymous disciple" was the one who wrote and provided detailed information about the events that took place inside the palace and at the courtyard. We also know he was the one who wrote the 'Gospel'. John Zebedee himself and the other disciples openly testified to the accuracy written by this disciple.

The history of this disciple whom Jesus loved started in John 1:35-37 (although the phrase 'whom Jesus loved' started being used in John (13:23). He was one of the disciples of John the Baptist who later became a disciple of Jesus. John 1:40 mentions Andrew, Simon's brother, as one of the disciples, but the 'other disciple' was not named.

In John 13:18 (KJV), Jesus said, 'I speak not of you all; I know whom I have chosen, but that the scripture may be fulfilled, He that eateth bread with me hath lifted up his heel against me.'

In this verse, Jesus first indicated he was not speaking to everyone, but he knew whom he had CHOSEN to "betray" him, and the sign of this person was the one who ate his bread. The original verb translated as 'betray' in the Gospels is 'парadiбшui' (paradidomi). The translation is an anachronism, as the verb 'парadiбшui' did not acquire the meaning 'betray' until after the first century, the century in which the Gospels were written. The idea expressed by the author's use of the word 'napadiówμl' is 'deliver' or 'hand over.' The words of Jesus, as reported by the author, did not convey the idea of treachery.
So, this is what the Author wrote:
"As they were eating, he said, 'Truly I tell you, one of you Shall Deliver me.'" (Matthew 26:21)

Now, using a little common sense, John 13-22 talked about the disciples being in disarray about who this chosen person would be. In verse 23, we have 'the disciple whom Jesus loved' chilling, lying close to jesus. Simon motioned to him and asked him to inquire about this person from Jesus. In verse 25, he is 'LEANING BACK' as he asked Jesus about it. Notice the word I capitalized; it is meant to emphasize that this conversation was just a quick one between the disciple whom Jesus loved and Jesus himself. Only these two were talking among themselves. This disciple had to LEAN to whisper to Jesus, and Jesus whispered back to him. So, only this disciple knew the answer to the question Simon asked. So, what did Jesus whisper back? In verse 13:26, "Jesus answered, 'It is the one to whom I will give this piece of bread when I have dipped it in the dish.' Then, dipping the piece of bread, he gave it to JUDAS, the son of Simon Iscariot. As soon as Judas took the bread, Satan entered into him."

Also Jesus simply repeated what he said In John 13:18.
I speak not of you all: I know whom I have chosen: but that the scripture may be fulfilled, He that eateth bread with me hath lifted up his heel against me.

Furthermore, in John 13:27, Jesus told him, 'What you are about to do, do quickly.' Because ONLY Judas, the beloved disciple, was privy to what Jesus had told him earlier, others were confused about what Jesus meant (John 13:28).

As soon as Judas ate the bread and left, Jesus again confirmed the ordeal which he had orchestrated with Judas would happen NOW (John 13:31). When he was gone, Jesus said, 'NOW the Son of Man is glorified, and God is glorified in him.'

The story continues, describing how Judas came back with the guards to arrest Jesus in John 18:3. In John 18:15-16, it mentions how Peter and 'the other disciple' followed Jesus. Even though only this 'other disciple' was initially allowed into the courtyard because he knew and was known by the high priest, this 'other disciple' is also the same as 'the disciple whom Jesus loved,' as seen in John 20:2 and 20:8.

Now, out of the 12 disciples, who knew the high priest, Or rather, among the 12 disciples, which one did the high priests know?
In John 11:57, the chief priests gave orders to anyone with information about Jesus whereabouts.
Judas was the only disciple among the twelve who was known to the Chief Priests because of their plan to capture Jesus (Matthew 26:14; Mark 14:10, 43; Luke 22:3, 4; John 18:3). Not only did Judas know them, but he was also the only disciple given full authority over a band of men and officers from the temple (John 18:3). No other disciple had this privilege except for Judas. It was this privilege that allowed him to enter and enable Peter to enter as well.

Besides, Matthew 26:56 mentioned how all disciples fled and forsook Jesus. It's logical to think that Judas, who had arranged for the soldiers, couldn't have fled with the other disciples. He was a major player and had no reason to run, which connects to John 18:15, where only this 'other disciple' and Peter followed Jesus.
Like I said earlier, Judas was the one who wrote and provided detailed information about the events that took place inside the palace, at the courtyard, and the Praetorium.

Moving forward, in John 19:26-27, when Jesus was dying on the cross, he entrusted his mother, Mary, to the disciple he loved, Judas. When Mary went to check Jesus' tomb and found it empty, she went to meet this 'other disciple' and Simon. Also, in John 21:7, it was the disciple whom Jesus loved that first identified Jesus and called the other disciple's attention to it. In John 21:20-22, Peter asked what they should do with this 'disciple whom Jesus loved.'

There is subtle information here. Out of all the disciples, Why did Peter single out this beloved disciple to ask Jesus that WEIRD question?
In verse 23, we also see that the disciples 'abroad' said among themselves that he should not die.
This seems like the other disciples were plotting to kill 'the disciple whom Jesus loved' because of his supposed betrayal, but on Jesus' command, he was spared.

Judas wrote the sequence of events that happened before, during, and after the crucifixion of Jesus. All the information gathered in the Book of John and by the other disciples came from the written testimony of Judas. He was the only eyewitness among all the disciples who can accurately provide a full account of all the events and sufferings that Jesus went through (John 21:24).

There is still much to write about Judas Iscariot; even his name is a topic in itself.
For those who want to study or just ordinarily read the Book of John, a point to note is that when the Book of John uses the term "the Jews" it generally refers to the high-level political and religious leaders. Specifically, in verse John 1:19, these are the high ranked Pharisees (John 1:24).
And if you've read the Book of John, you'll know that the Jewish people loved him and wanted to make him a King, John 6:15. Even some of the Pharisees were amazed by him, as mentioned in John 10:21 and John 7:50-51. So the idea that Jewish people killed Jesus is incorrect. Instead, it was the chief priests and some other Pharisees('jews'), led by Ca'iaphas, the high priest, who planned the death of Jesus, as described in John 11:49-53.

Interesting.. I've always thought the betrayal of Jesus to be an orchestra of Jesus and Judas.

However, I don't agree that the "Jews" were the ones with the intent to kill Jesus.. Given that they didn't have power in the conquered region, I'm on the stance that the romans also had interest in killing Jesus.

kkins25:

However, I don't agree that the "Jews" were the ones with the intent to kill Jesus.. Given that they didn't have power in the conquered region, I'm on the stance that the romans also had interest in killing Jesus.

You'll have to read the book of john.
John 19:7-8
The Jewish leaders insisted, “We have a law, and according to that law he must die, because he claimed to be the Son of God.” 8 When Pilate heard this, he was even more afraid.

John 19:21-22
21 The chief priests of the Jews protested to Pilate, “Do not write ‘The King of the Jews,’ but that this man claimed to be king of the Jews.”

22 Pilate answered, “What I have written, I have written.”

In a nutshell, Jesus Christ of Nazareth actually walked this earth and was killed.

Good to know this!

Emusan:
In a nutshell, Jesus Christ of Nazareth actually walked this earth and was killed.

Good to know this!

More like Judas of Galilee, a Gnostic.
The book of john mentions "logos", one of the main theme of the gnostics.
All what you have in the Canonical gospel about "Jesus Christ' is a composite character.
To know more about The gnostic teaching, I'd advise you start first with the "gospel of Judas" and the other books in the Nag hammadi collection.

Just like Jesus, you are also one with the father. The Autogenes.

Maynman:

More like Judas of Galilee, a Gnostic.
The book of john mentions "logos", one of the main theme of the gnostics.
All what you have in the Canonical gospel about "Jesus Christ' is a composite character.
To know more about The gnostic teaching, I'd advise you start first with the "gospel of Judas" and the other books in the Nag hammadi collection.

Just like Jesus, you are also one with the father. The Autogenes.

And you are very serious and focus to do this lengthen copy and paste about a "COMPOSITE CHARACTER"

Genius!

Emusan:


And you are very serious and focus to do this lengthen copy and paste about a "COMPOSITE CHARACTER"

Genius!

I enjoy doing this, it's Fun.

Jesus Christ is a composite character, what you are looking for outside is right within you.
John 3:8---The wind blows wherever it pleases. You hear its sound, but you cannot tell where it comes from or where it is going. So it is with everyone born of the Spirit.

Maynman:

I enjoy doing this, it's Fun.

Jesus Christ is a composite character, what you are looking for outside is right within you.
John 3:8---The wind blows wherever it pleases. You hear its sound, but you cannot tell where it comes from or where it is going. So it is with everyone born of the Spirit.

And you call this fun

Emusan:


And you call this fun

I'm enjoying it.
Hope you also know the concept of trinity was taken from the gnostics, as in Homoousion.

Maynman:

I'm enjoying it.
Hope you also know the concept of trinity was taken from the gnostics, as in Homoousion.

Trinity is in the Bible.

Maynman:

You'll have to read the book of john.
John 19:7-8
The Jewish leaders insisted, “We have a law, and according to that law he must die, because he claimed to be the Son of God.” 8 When Pilate heard this, he was even more afraid.

John 19:21-22
21 The chief priests of the Jews protested to Pilate, “Do not write ‘The King of the Jews,’ but that this man claimed to be king of the Jews.”

22 Pilate answered, “What I have written, I have written.”

We can't use this for historical context. The method in which jesus was killed hints at his threat to the Pilate. In fact, I heard, barabas, was actually someone Pilate thought to be Jesus. Jesus grew up with the priest, and his family will most likely be known. Afterall, his uncle is a chief priest too.

Kingsnairaland:


Trinity is in the Bible.

Nope!

kkins25:


We can't use this for historical context. The method in which jesus was killed hints at his threat to the Pilate. In fact, I heard, barabas, was actually someone Pilate thought to be Jesus. Jesus grew up with the priest, and his family will most likely be known. Afterall, his uncle is a chief priest too.

There's nothing historical going on.

I'd advise you to read the Book of John. In it, you'll find that Jesus was crucified on a Friday. Saturday is the Jewish Sabbath when they are not allowed to do anything, which is why the JEWS (chief priests and Pharisees) had to expedite Jesus's death through Crucifracture (breaking the legs below the knees)

The funny thing is I was actually writing something on "Barabbas" before I had to move to another topic.
What's Barabbas? It is an Aramaic name, combining two nouns: bar, meaning son, and abba, meaning father. So he is “the son of the father”.
What's more surprising is that Barabbas's full name was "Jesus bar Abbas", and he was the son of Abbas, one of the sons of Judas of Gamala.

Pilate was asking them to choose between Jesus son of the father or Jesus son of the father, nice play of words by the writers.