---
title: Improvement Era
description: Monthly periodical of the Mormon church, 1897 onward. This library holds the issues of November 1897 to December 1930.
authors:
  - Done, Willard
collections:
  - periodicals
tags:
  - magazine
  - improvement-era
periodical: Improvement Era
volume: 2
number: 4
published: 1899-02
publisher: Young Men’s Mutual Improvement Associations
publisher_place: Salt Lake City
language: en
type: magazine
reference: 'Done, Willard, "Lives of the Apostles: James and John," *Improvement Era* 2, no. 4 (February 1899): 281–289.'
source:
  url: https://archive.org/details/improvementera24unse
  transcription: Transcribed from the Internet Archive scan of each issue (the item for each issue is named in the issue's own source); unnumbered advertising leaves are omitted, printed page numbers are kept as page markers.
  identifier: improvementera24unse
start_page: 281
end_page: 289
rights:
  status: public-domain
  basis: US publication 1930 or earlier (published 1899-02)
  source: https://archive.org/details/improvementera24unse
  publication_year: 1899
  note: The Internet Archive item metadata carries a blanket "© Copyright by Intellectual Reserve, Inc." notice. The library owner judged it inapplicable because this issue was published in 1899, before 1931; a scan-level notice does not restore copyright.
---

# Lives of the Apostles: James and John

<!-- page:281 -->

LIVES OF THE APOSTLES.
II.
JAMES AND JOHN.
BY PROFESSOR WILLARD DONE, PRESIDENT OF LATTER-DAY SAINTS'
COLLEGE, SALT LAKE CITY.
The two sons of Zebedee were so closely associated during
the life of Christ, and one of them, James, met a martyr's death
so early in the ministry of the Apostles that it seems permissible
to combine their lives into one account.
Like Peter, they were fishermen on the Sea of Galilee, and,
no doubt, natives of the same village, Bethsaida. Like Peter, too,
they first came into prominence in connection with their discipleship to John the Baptist, at the time of the baptism of Christ.
That John is "that other disciple" referred to in his own account
of that event, there can be little doubt. From this time he and
his brother, together with Peter and Andrew, were devoted followers of Christ. Their call to the active ministry occurred simultaneously with that of Peter and Andrew, all four, indeed, being
called through the same miracle. From thenceforth the lives of
Peter, James, and John were indissolubly united. These three
were present at the raising of the daughter of Jairus from the
dead, the transfiguration, and the silent vigil in Gethsemane.
James and John, however, did not come into quite the prominence attained by the bolder and more assertive Peter. Hence
their names are not so often particularized by the evangelists.
But we are not to make the mistake of concluding from this cir-

<!-- page:282 -->

cumstance that these two were lacking in force and fire. The
title applied to them, "Boanerges," (sons of thunder,) would indicate the contrary. Two incidents which occurred during the life
of Jesus illustrate this forcefulness. On one occasion, while the
Lord and the Apostles were traveling through Samaria, a request
was sent ahead for entertainment at one of the small villages. To
the intense surprise and indignation of the disciples, this entertainment was refused. In the eyes of the Apostles a double
offense was committed by those Samaritans. They had broken the
strict rule of eastern hospitality, which demands food and shelter
for the traveler, no matter how poor and mean. They had also
shown disrespect for the Messiah, whom his followers had learned
by infallible signs and testimonies, to regard as of higher authority
than any of the prophets who had preceded him. Since, therefore,
doubtless in this very region, Elijah had called down fire from
heaven by which one hundred and two men were consumed, (II.
Kings 1: 10-12,) James and John thought the present case even
more deserving of punishment. Hence their indignant question,
"Lord, wilt thou that we command fire to come down from heaven,
and consume them, even as Elias did?" The answer of our Lord,
dissuading and rebuking them, is characteristic of his love and
forgiveness.
According to some authorities it was a short time after this
event that James and John again came into prominence on account
of the ambition of their mother, Salome. The manner of Christ's
approaching death, and the nature of the kingdom into which he
was about to enter, had doubtless become quite well known to his
disciples. V/hether or not Salome was acquainted with these
points is not known. There is no doubt, however, that she knew
the greatness of his destiny, and how desirable it would be to be
associated with him therein. Therefore she came to him and
preferred the ambitious request, "Grant that these my two sons
may sit, the one on thy right hand, and the other on the left, in
thy kingdom." When the two men assured him that they would
be able to endure the drinking of his cup and the partaking of his
baptism, he dismissed them with the assurance that only the
Father could decide who should exercise authority in the kingdom.
He assuaged the rising indignation of the other ten by showing

<!-- page:283 -->

them the difference between his kingdom and those of the gentiles,
the ruler in the latter exercising dominion, while those in the
former were to be servants of all. Surely there could be no more
effectual cure for ambition than this.
After this event, James fell into obscurity, being no more
mentioned by name by any of the evangelists, except in connection
with the prediction of the fall of Jerusalem and with the agony in
Gethsemane. Of course, he was with Jesus and the other Apostles
in all the transactions of the eventful week preceding the crucifixion, and on the occasion of the various appearances of the Savior
to the Apostles. In fact, one of these appearances was to James
individually, as testified by Paul (I. Cor. 15: 7.) James is next
mentioned in the list of Apostles in the first chapter of Acts, and
then he is spoken of no more until brief mention is made of his
martyrdom. "And he [Herod] killed James, the brother of John,
with the sword," (Acts 12: 2.) This event occurred probably as
early as 44 A. D. James therefore has the distinction of being the
first Apostolic martyr. It is unfortunate that so notable an event
should receive such brief treatment at the hands of the historian.
Tradition, however, has attempted to fill in the details. It is
asserted that the officer who had the distinguished martyr in
charge, was so impressed with his dignified fortitude that he was
converted to Christianity, and was beheaded at the same time as
James. The legend is related by Clement of Alexandria, and preserved by Eusebius in these words: "The accuser of the Apostle,
beholding his confession and moved thereby, confessed that he
too was a Christian. So they were both led away to execution
together, and on the road the accuser asked James for forgiveness.
Gazing on him for a little while, he said, 'Peace be with thee,' and
kissed him. And then they were both beheaded together."
This martyrdom of James is one of the strongest testimonies
to his prominence and importance among the Apostles, and does
much to correct the impression naturally formed by the lack of
prominent mention of him by the evangelists. Surely, since Herod
undertook this persecution for the sake of gaining the favor of
the Jews, and since, no doubt, he could choose the victim, he would
surely select one of the most influential and prominent of the

<!-- page:284 -->

Apostles. His selection of James, therefore, is a high tribute to
the Apostle's worth and dignity.
Considerable prominence is given to John in connection with
the closing events of the life of Jesus, and also the labors of the
Apostles. At the last supper he reclined next to Jesus, and heard
some details of the conversation which no doubt escaped the ears
of the other Apostles. Prominent among these was the reference
to the betrayal wrought by Judas of Kerioth. We cannot help
thinking that if the head-strong, self-assertive Peter had heard
Christ's injunction to Judas, "That thou doest, do quickly," and
had understood its import as John seems to have done, there might
have been an interference with the traitor's carefully laid plan of
betrayal. We are also very much interested in the record John
has kept of the wonderful discourse and impressive prayer of our
Lord on that solemn occasion.
When Jesus was taken and led away to his trial, John was
the only one of the Apostles to remain in his immediate company.
Being, as he himself says, "known to the high priest," he was
admitted to the house of that officer, where the first stage of the
trial took place. From there John followed the Master through the
tragic events of that forenoon, to Calvary. He stood within earshot with the women, probably his own mother, the mother of
Jesus, Mary, the wife of Cleophas, and Mary Magdalene, during the
awful agony of the cross. It was here that the touching incident
occurred of Jesus consigning his heart-broken mother to John's
care. His impressive words to his mother, "Woman, behold thy
son," and to John, "Son, behold thy mother," seem to have been
the signal for John to lead Mary away, so that she might not witness the death struggle. It is supposed that John immediately
took Mary to his own house in Jerusalem, and remained in close
attendance upon her until her death, leaving his home for no great
length of time during that period.
Together with Peter, John visited the sepulchre just after the
resurrection of Jesus, and was therefore one of the first witnesses
of that event. He was also in company with Peter, John, Thomas
and Nathanael on the sea of Galilee, when the notable appearance
of the resurrected Lord occurred there. John comes into special
prominence in connection with this event, because of the predic-

<!-- page:285 -->

tion that he should remain upon the earth until Christ's second
coming.
The next personal mention of John is in connection with the
healing of the lame man by Peter, at the "Beautiful Gate" of the
temple. John witnessed this miracle, went with Peter into the
temple, and endured, with him, the taunts and abuse heaped upon
them by the Jews, joining with him in the determination to "obey
God rather than men," in preaching Christ. John accompanied
Peter to Samaria, to confer the Holy Ghost on those whom Philip
had baptized. This is the last mention of John in the Acts,
although Paul refers to him as one of the three " pillar Apostles"
at Jerusalem (Peter, James and John) on the occasion of his visit
there. (Gal. 2: 9.)
For information regarding the subsequent life of John we are
entirely dependent upon tradition. It is, necessarily, difficult to
determine what legends out of the many clustering about his name
are based on fact, and what ones on imagination. The only safe
course to follow is to accept, conditionally, those which are supported by the greatest mass of evidence, and reject, also conditionally, the others. In pursuance of this plan, those traditions
which are most worthy of belief will be named first, the less likely
ones being afterwards particularized.
He is said to have remained at Jerusalem until about the year
68 B. C, or about eighteen years after the visit of the Apostle
Paul above referred to. What the motive was for his leaving
Jerusalem is not conjectured. It is even uncertain where he went.
Some authorities are of opinion that he went to Rome, others, to
Ephesus. The main reason for supposing that he went to Rome is
the graphic description he gives of the Neronic persecutions of
the Christians, (Rev.) which argues strongly for his having witnessed those cruelties. It is supposed, too, that he resided at
Ephesus before his removal to Patmos, this latter event occurring,
according to the general presumption, soon after the year 68. As
to the reason for his being at Patmos, we are left somewhat in
doubt. There is reason, however, for inclining to the belief that
he was banished thither for the testimony of the Gospel. The
existence on that island of mines, or quarries, in which prisoners
were wont to labor, is a strong presumption for that belief. His

<!-- page:286 -->

stay on this rocky island was immortalized by his writing the
Apocalypse, or Revelation. In spite of hostile criticism, the fact
that this grand book was written by John the Apostle, stands well
attested.
We are almost sure that he spent a great portion of his life
toward the close of the first century, in Ephesus, and probably
presided over the church there, being possibly, in charge of all the
branches situated in Asia Minor. We are safe in supposing that
he occupied this responsible position before, as well as after his
residence on Patmos, from the tone of authority he assumes in
addressing the seven churches in Asia, in the book of Revelation.
If this supposition is correct, the importance of John as the last
of the Apostles to survive, is clearly shown. Indeed, we may be
sure that he exercised a presidential authority over all the churches,
at least in Asia, that still remained true to the faith. In consideration of the fact that the quorum of Apostles was not perpetuated, we are not surprised that the last surviving member of the
quorum was looked upon with so much reverence by the decaying
church.
All that is further known about the history of John is that
he grew old in the Ephesian community. A tradition which shows
a striking characteristic of the Apostle, is to the effect that when
he was so old as to be unable to walk to the church, he caused
himself to be carried in by some young men. Being unable to
talk at any length, he merely greeted the members of the community with the words, "Little children, love one another." When
asked why he was so persistent in repeating this admonition, he
replied, "Because it is the command of the Lord, and if this is
done it is enough." Nor, according to the tradition, did he confine
this precept to theory. He applied it in his intercourse with his
brethren. It is related that he took a fancy to a young man, and
placed him in the care of a bishop, while he (John) was attending
to some of his pastoral duties, with the admonition that he should
look carefully after the training of the youth. When John returned
to the place after a prolonged absence, he inquired after the young
man, and found to his sorrow that he had become a bandit chief.
Without any hesitancy, the aged Apostle sought him out, and was
taken captive by the band. At his own request he was brought

<!-- page:287 -->

into the presence of the chief, and, by his nobility and self-sacrifice in looking after the souls of others, he rescued the bandit
from his downward course.
The doubtful legends will be briefly mentioned. One is to the
effect that while he was in Rome, he was doomed to martyrdom,
his end to be accomplished by his being boiled in oil. But instead
of the oil producing any harmful effect, it only served to make
him more youthful and vigorous. This tradition is seriously
doubted becase it is mentioned by only one writer, Tertullian, who
was rather undiscriminating, and for the further reason that boiling in oil was an unusual, not to say unknown, method of execution. There is another tradition, equally doubtful, to the effect
that he was given the poisoned hemlock, as in the case of Socrates,
but escaped unharmed after drinking it. The last tradition to be
referred to, has to do with the death of the Apostle. It relates
that John died at Ephesus in the hundredth or one hundred and
twentieth year of his life, and that his grave was often pointed
out by his followers, to wondering visitors. It was distinguished
from the surrounding sepulchres, by the alternate rising and falling
of the ground above the Apostle's breast, occasioned by his breathing as he lay in immortal sleep. It is also stated that the grave
was opened at a later period and found empty, the body having been
raised and immortalized. For the traditions last named there is
scarcely a shred of authority.
With reference to the death of John. It was a common belief
during the early Christian century, that he did not die, but that he
was given the privilege of remaining on the earth until the second
coming of the Savior. This opinion had its rise from the passage
which occurs in the last chapter of the Gospel of John, where the
Messiah, in answer to the question of Peter, "What shall this man
do?" said, "If I will that he tarry till I come, what is that to thee?
Follow thou me." The next verse says, "Then went this saying
abroad among the brethren, that that disciple should not die."
From that time until the present, some Bible authorities have been
of the opinion that John did not die, while others are of opinion
that the legend of his death is true. All doubt is set at rest, however, by the unequivocal testimony of Jesus when speaking to his
Nephite disciples, and by the word of the Lord to the Prophet

<!-- page:288 -->

Joseph Smith. In both these passages it is clearly stated that
John was permitted to remain on the earth until the second coming of Christ should occur.
It now remains only to give a brief estimate of the character
of John. We would first say that he was quick to respond to
the influence of good. On this account, perhaps as much as on
any other, his Master loved him especially. In at least three
instances this quickness of response is illustrated. One was where
he followed the Savior so closely on the way to the final agony of
the cross, his natural feeling of reverence overcoming the tendency
toward fear. The next incident was when he first heard of the
resurrection of the Lord. With his usual quick response, he ran
at full speed to the sepulchre, his youth and his zealous responsiveness enabling him to distance Peter and arrive first at the
tomb. But the difference between the two characters is well
illustrated in the fact that although John first arrived at the tomb,
his awe restrained him from entering at once, while the bold,
impetuous Peter rushed past him into the tomb without a moment's
hesitation. The third occasion was when Jesus appeared to the
Apostles on the shore of the Sea of Galilee, after the resurrection.
Peter, James, John, and some others of the disciples had gone
back to their nets, and had toiled all the night without taking any
fish. In the morning Jesus appeared on the shore, and asked them
if they had any meat. On their answering in the negative, he
told them to cast their nets on the right side of the ship. They
did so, and were unable to draw the net on account of the great
multitude of fishes. With his usual quickness of impression, John
recognized Jesus, and exclaimed, "It is the Lord." But if John
was the first to recognize him, Peter was was the first to supplement thought with action. He immediately girt his fisherman's
cloak about him, cast himself into the sea, and swam to the shore.
In John's case impulsiveness was the outcome of reverent
love for his Master. This love was mutual, and the proudest title
that John gives himself throughout his Gospel, is "that disciple
whom Jesus loved." Nor do we think that this is said boastingly
but with the conviction that the love of such a One was enough to
satisfy the most holy yearnings of the human heart. It was ;this
mutual love which prompted John to show devotion where the

<!-- page:289 -->

other disciples failed in the supreme test. For what stronger
incentive can one have than love?
The tenderness and gentleness which John displayed in his
old age may be considered the direct outcome of the affectionate
disposition he manifested toward the Savior and his associates. It
became mellowed and ripened with age, without sinking into the
weakness and effeminacy so often displayed by people of this disposition. Surely the opposite from effeminacy is shown in his
resistance to the demands of the Jewish and Roman officers, in his
endurance of pains and banishment, and in his strong and wise
administration of the affairs of the churches evidently under his
presidency. Briefly, therefore, his nature may be summed up in
the two words, strength and sweetness.
It is fitting to close this brief account with the estimate
placed on the character and disposition of John given by Canon
Farrar in his Life of Christ
:
"The character of St. John has been often mistaken. Filled as he
was with a most divine tenderness,—realizing as he did to a greater
extent than any of the Apostles the full depth and significance of our
Lord's new commandment—rich as his epistles and his gospel are with
a meditative and absorbing reverence—dear as he has ever been in consequence to the heart of the mystic and the saint—yet he was something
indefinitely far removed from that effeminate pietist that has furnished
the usual type under which he has been represented. The name Boanerges, or "Sons of Thunder," which he shared with his brother James,
their joint petition for precedence in the kingdom of God, their passionate request to call down fire from heaven on the offending village of
the Samaritans, the burning energy of the language in which the Apocalypse is written, the impetuous horror with which, according to tradition,
St. John recoiled from the presence of the heretic Cerinthus, all show
that in him was the spirit of the eagle, which, rather than the dove, has
been his immemorial symbol. And since zeal and enthusiasm, dead as
they are, and scorned in these days by an effete and comfortable religionism, yet have ever been indispensable instruments in spreading the
Kingdom of heaven, doubtless it was the existence of these elements in
his character, side by side with tenderness and devotion, which endeared
mm so greatly to his Master, and made him 'the disciple whom Jesus
loved.' The depth and power of his imagination, the rare combination
of contemplativeness and passion, of strength and sweetness, in the same