The significance of the Resurrection of Lazarus lies not only in the fact that it symbolically expresses the content of John's speeches throughout the entire first part of the Gospel. Our latest observations show that it is directed towards the future and directs the reader's attention to the inevitability of the Passion. And this applies equally to theological teaching and to the facts of history.

But there is more than that. The reader's attention dwells on the details of the description of the burial of Lazarus. His tomb is a cave covered by a stone (ό λίθος, v. 38). When the stone was taken and the Lord commanded Lazarus to come out, it was found that his body was bound "with burial bands, and his face was wrapped in a cloth" (σουδαρίω, cf. v. 44). The narrative of Christ's Resurrection also speaks of the stone (λίθος) with which the entrance to the tomb was closed (cf. XX. 1) and of the cloth (σουδάριον) that was on Jesus' head (cf. XX. 7). These details are etched into the memory of the reader, who sees a certain parallelism between the burial of Lazarus and the burial of Christ. It is difficult to think that this parallelism is accidental. If the Evangelist understood the Resurrection of Lazarus as a symbol that expressed the essential content of Christ's speeches in Jerusalem and Galilee, recent observations allow us to assert that the Resurrection of Lazarus was for the Evangelist not only a symbol turned to the past, but a type turned to the future.

In this second meaning, the death of Lazarus, his burial and resurrection prefigure the Passion of Christ. From the dialogue with Martha follows the symbolic meaning of the Resurrection of Lazarus, which is expressed in the fact that it is a symbol of the future general Resurrection according to faith in Jesus. Understanding the Resurrection of Lazarus as a prototype allows us to assert that the beginning of this general resurrection is the Resurrection of Christ. It is no accident that the Church sings in the troparion of the feast: "Assuring the general resurrection before Thy passion, Thou didst raise Lazarus from the dead." According to the words of the Apostle Paul, Christ is the firstfruits of the dead. But the Resurrection of Christ is prefigured by the resurrection of Lazarus. The liturgical tradition of the Orthodox Church confirms this understanding also by the fact that the Church commemorates the resurrection of Lazarus on the eve of the Lord's Entry into Jerusalem, which is the Forefeast of Pascha. In this way it clearly violates history, because the Lord's Entry into Jerusalem is separated from the Resurrection of Lazarus of indefinite duration by Jesus' sojourn with His disciples "in a country near the wilderness, in a city called Ephraim" (cf. XI.54). Liturgical tradition leaves no room for this break. But the violation of the Gospel chronology emphasizes the inner connection between the two events, one of which, the Triumphal Entrance, is the Forefeast of the Resurrection of Christ, and the other, the Resurrection of Lazarus, is a prototype of it.

XI. 45-57. Decision of the bosses.

As already mentioned, in historical terms, the Resurrection of Lazarus was the final impulse that led to the Passion. The Jewish leaders saw a political danger in the person of Jesus: "... if we leave Him thus, all will believe in Him, and the Romans will come and destroy our Temple and the people" (v. 48). The rupture between Jesus and the world has already been completed. Bosses are the world. They think of worldly things. But they cherish the Temple, and Caiaphas, in his high priestly dignity, is able to utter prophecy. He said, "It is better that one man should die for the people, and not that the whole nation should perish" (v. 50). For the evangelist, in this word of the high priest who was in power in that year,65 there was revealed a prophecy (έπροφήτευσεν) that "Jesus had to die for the people." Without thinking about it himself, he spoke about the substitutionary death of Christ. The Evangelist adds: "And not only for the people, but in order that the scattered children of God may also be gathered together" (cf. vv. 49-52). In the interpretation of this involuntary prophecy, we also recognize Christ's word about "the sheep of this fold" (cf. X. 16): the fullness of salvation through the Passion of Christ.

Chapter XII

XII. 1-19.

The next chapter (XII), at least in its first part (vv. 1-19), also stands under the sign of the Resurrection of Lazarus.

Already in the first verse, Bethany is defined as the village "where Lazarus was, whom Jesus raised up from the dead." In v. 2, Lazarus reclines with Jesus at the table. Many came "not only for Jesus' sake, but also to see Lazarus, whom he raised up from the dead" (v. 9). The persecution of the chief priests extends to Lazarus, because for his sake many believed in Jesus (vv. 10-11). In vv. 17-18, the Triumphal Entry is explained by the Resurrection of Lazarus. And the Pharisees confess their impotence: "... behold, the world has followed Him" (v. 19). This stress on Lazarus is the stress on the Passion. We have seen that both theologically and historically the narrative of Lazarus is addressed to the Passion.

There are other signs that allow us to assert that the Evangelist's thought from the very beginning of Chapter XII is focused on the coming Passion. Whatever the original form of v. 7, which is not without influence on the modern translation, one thing is clear: the connection between the Bethany anointing and the burial of Jesus is expressed in Jn. no less clear than that of the weather forecasters. The idea of the coming Passion is also heard in v. 16, after the repeated prediction of the Passion. The ceremonial Entrance was an incomprehensible surprise for the disciples. They were preparing for something else. They understood the meaning of the Entrance "when Jesus was glorified." We remember that both the cleansing of the Temple and what the Lord said about cleansing became clear to the disciples only in the experience of the Resurrection (cf. II.22), as well as in Jn. understanding in the future, of what is incomprehensible in the present, invariably presupposes the experience of the Passion (cf., e.g., XIII. 8). And finally, the last thing. To the question of the Greeks who wanted to see Jesus, He answered with a solemn testimony: "... the hour has come for the Son of man to be glorified" (v. 23). These brief words say it all: we already know that throughout the Gospel the hour of Jesus is the hour of His Passion, and He invariably calls His Passion glorification.

This shows that the seal of the impending Passion lies in Jn. on the narration of both the Bethany anointing and the Triumphal Entrance. In this respect, John's assessment coincides with the assessment of the synoptics: the anointing of Bethany is an anointing for burial. The Triumphal Entrance is the Entrance of the King on the Passion. A certain deviation from the synoptic chronology (the anointing of Bethany before the Triumphal Entrance!) is one of those corrections that the Evangelist allows himself, relying on his memoirs, and perhaps on independent sources that he had at his disposal. This discrepancy in chronology does not affect the interpretation of the Gospel.

XII. 4-6.

The incident with Judas (vv. 4-6) deserves our attention in the account of the anointing. In Mk. anointing evokes the condemnation of "some" (τινές, XIV. 4). In Matt. the disciples condemn (cf. XXVI. 8). In John, quite understandably, Judas Iscariot condemns. The Evangelist prepares the reader for the betrayal of Judas gradually. At first it is a general indication of VI. 64, then, a few verses later, it gives its name (VI. 71). Even in chapter XIII, when Judas leaves for the work of betrayal (cf. v. 30), we see several preludes: in v. 2, in v. 10 and 11, in vv. 18 and 19. The last of these instructions (vv. 21 and 22) prompts Peter to ask a question of the disciple whom Jesus loved. He asks Jesus, and Jesus answers him (cf. vv. 23-30). In the story of the anointing, Judas is characterized. He condemned anointing, not for the poor, but "because he was a thief, and had a money-chest, and took what was put into it" (v. 6). This characterization should enable the reader to better understand the cause of Judas. But if the name of Judas is given here, then the name of Mary who anointed Jesus is also given, and that for the first time. In the light of these observations, we are entitled to understand the Johannine account of the anointing as an opposition between Mary and Judas. On the one hand, there is a sacrificial love for Jesus that knows no bounds. On the other hand, there is the devil (cf. VI. 69-70), who puts on the guise of piety and concern for the poor. For the understanding of the Johannine narrative of the Passion, this opposition is of essential importance.

XII. 20-22.