The phrase "the disciple whom Jesus loved" () or, in John 20:2; "the other disciple whom Jesus loved" (), is used six times in the Gospel of John, but in no other New Testament accounts of Jesus. John 21:24 states that the Gospel of John is based on the written testimony of this disciple.
Since the end of the first century, the beloved disciple has been commonly identified with John the Evangelist. Scholars have debated the authorship of Johannine literature (the Gospel of John, Epistles of John, and the Book of Revelation) since at least the third century, but especially since the Enlightenment. The authorship by John the Apostle is rejected by many modern scholars, but not entirely. There is a consensus among Johannine scholars that the beloved disciple was a real historical person, but there is no consensus on who the beloved disciple was.
Sources
The disciple whom Jesus loved is referred to, specifically, six times in the Gospel of John: It is this disciple who, while reclining beside Jesus at the Last Supper, asks Jesus who it is that will betray him, after being requested by Peter to do so. Later at the crucifixion, Jesus tells his mother, "Woman, here is your son", and to the beloved disciple he says, "Here is your mother." When Mary Magdalene discovers the empty tomb, she runs to tell the beloved disciple and Peter. The two men rush to the empty tomb and the beloved disciple is the first to reach it. However, Peter is the first to enter. In John 21, the last chapter of the Gospel of John, the beloved disciple is one of seven fishermen involved in the miraculous catch of 153 fish. Also in the book's final chapter, after Jesus implies the manner in which Peter will die, Peter sees the beloved disciple following them and asks, "What about him?" Jesus answers, "If I want him to remain until I come, what is that to you? You follow Me." Again in the Gospel's last chapter, it states that the very book itself is based on the written testimony of the disciple whom Jesus loved.
The other Gospels do not mention anyone in parallel circumstances who could be directly linked to the beloved disciple. For example, in Luke 24:12, Peter runs to the tomb. Matthew, Mark, and Luke do not mention any one of the 12 disciples having witnessed the crucifixion.
The New Testament also makes two references to an unnamed "other disciple" in John 1:35–40 and John 18:15–16, which may be to the same person based on the wording in John 20:2.
Identity
John the Apostle
The closing words of the Gospel of John state explicitly concerning the beloved disciple that "It is this disciple who testifies to these things and has written them, and we know that his testimony is true."
Eusebius, writing in the fourth century, recorded in his Church History a letter which he believed to have been written by Polycrates of Ephesus () in the second century. Polycrates believed that John was the one "who reclined upon the bosom of the Lord", suggesting an identification with the beloved disciple:
Augustine of Hippo (354–430 AD) also believed that John was the beloved disciple, in his Tractates on the Gospel of John.
The assumption that the beloved disciple was one of the Apostles is based on the observation that he was apparently present at the Last Supper, and Matthew and Mark state that Jesus ate with the Twelve. Thus, the most frequent identification is with John the Apostle, who would then be the same as John the Evangelist. Merril F. Unger presents a case for this by a process of elimination.
Nevertheless, while some modern academics continue to share the view of Augustine and Polycrates, a growing number do not believe that John the Apostle wrote the Gospel of John or indeed any of the other New Testament works traditionally ascribed to him, making this linkage of a 'John' to the beloved disciple difficult to sustain.
Some scholars have additionally suggested a homoerotic interpretation of Jesus's relationship with the beloved disciple, although such a scriptural reading is disputed by others. Tilborg suggests that the portrait in the Gospel of John is "positively attuned to the development of possibly homosexual behaviour". However, he cautions that "in the code[...] such imaginary homosexual behaviour is not an expression of homosexuality." Meanwhile, theologian Ismo Dunderberg has also explored the issue and argues that the absence of accepted Greek terms for "lover" and "beloved" discounts an erotic reading.