Expository Thoughts (continued)
circumcision in the spirit as well as in the letter—an Israelite in heart, as well as a son of Jacob in the flesh.
Let us pray that we may be of the same spirit as Nathanael. An honest, unprejudiced mind—a child-like willingness to follow the truth, wherever the truth may lead us—a simple, hearty desire to be guided, taught, and led by the Spirit—a thorough determination to use every spark of light which we have—are a possession of priceless value. A man of this spirit may live in the midst of much darkness, and be surrounded by every possible disadvantage to his soul. But the Lord Jesus will take care that such a man does not miss the way to heaven. "The meek will he guide in judgment—and the meek will he teach his way." (Psalm 25:9.)
Technical Notes:
43. The day following Jesus would go forth to Galilee, and he found Philip and said to him, Follow me. 44. Now
Philip was from Bethasaida, the city of Andrew and Peter.
45. Philip found Nathanael and said to him, We have found him of whom Moses in the law, and the prophets, wrote, Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Joseph. 46. And Nathanael said to him, Can any good thing come out of Nazareth?
Philip said to him, Come and see. 47. Jesus saw Nathanael coming toward him and said of him, Behold an Israelite indeed, in whom is no guile! 48. Nathanael said to him, How do you know me? Jesus answered and said to him, Before Philip called you, when you were under the fig tree, I saw you. 49. Nathanael answered and said to him, Rabbi, Thou art the son of God! Thou art the King of Israel! 50.
Jesus answered and said to him, Because I said to you, I saw you under the fig tree, do you believe? You shall see greater things than these. 51. And he said to him, Verily, verily, I say to you, Hereafter ye shall see heaven open, and the angels of God ascending and descending upon the Son of man.
43.—[The day following.] This is the fourth successive day which is specially named by St. John, and its events described. The first contained John the Baptist's reply to the priests and Levites—the second, his public announcement of our Lord as the Lamb of God— the third, the calling of Andrew and his companion, and Peter—the fourth describes the calling of Philip and Nathanael.
[Would go forth.] The Greek word rendered "would," signifies that our Lord "willed," or had a will.
[Found Philip.] It does not appear where Philip was when Jesus called him. He must either have been at Bethabara among John's hearers, or at some place on the road from Bethabara to Galilee, or at his own native place, Bethsaida. The last is perhaps the most probable idea. [Follow Me.] This simple sentence describes the direct quickening voice of an almighty Savior. It is evident that the power of the Holy Ghost accompanied our Lord's words, and that as soon as they were spoken, Philip, like Matthew the publican, arose, left all, and became a disciple. In conversion God acts as a sovereign. One is called in one way, and another in another. Rollock observes on this verse, "This teaches us that Christ is able to call anyone whom He pleases into the kingdom of heaven, without the ministry either of angel or man."
44.—[Philip...of Bethsaida...city... Andrew... Peter.] This verse seems to make it probable that Philip's conversion and calling took place at Bethsaida. Andrew and Peter, having been converted and become companions of Jesus on His way to Galilee, would appear to have taken Him to their own native place, Bethsaida.
45.—[We have found Him.] Philip, like his fellow-citizen Andrew, seems to have expected the appearance of Messiah.
Chrysostom remarks, "See what a thoughtful mind he had, how assiduously he meditates on the writings of Moses, and expected the advent? The expression, 'We have found,' belongs always to those who are in some way seeking."
[Him... Moses...prophets wrote.] Here, as in the case of Andrew, we should notice the familiarity with the general contents of Scripture which a poor Jew like Philip possessed. He thoroughly understood that "Moses and the prophets" held forth the promise of a coming
Redeemer, and that a better Priest, Prophet, and King were foretold in their writings. "The Old Testament," as the Church of England
Article wisely declares, "is not contrary to the New; for both in the Old Testament and New, everlasting life is offered to mankind by Christ." We must beware in these latter days of despising the Old
Testament. It is one by-path to infidelity.
[Jesus of Nazareth...son of Joseph.] Philip here describes our Lord according to the common report about Him, and in all probability according to his own present knowledge. His heart was at present better than his head. The miraculous conception of Christ was hidden from him. Yet it is not unworthy of remark, that this ignorant account of our Lord was very likely the cause of Nathanael's doubt and prejudice, exhibited in the next verse. The mistakes of young converts are often mighty stumbling blocks in the way of other people's souls. We must not, however, despise Philip because of his mistake. Rollock remarks, "I had rather a man should stammer and babble about Christ, providing he does it sincerely and from his heart, and has before him as an object the glory of God and salvation of men, than say many things eloquently about Christ for ostentation and vain glory."
46.—[Can any good thing...Nazareth?] This question shows the low estimate in which Nazareth, where our Lord had been brought up, was held. It was an obscure town in a corner of Galilee, not far from the borders of the province, and its reputation seems to have been very bad. Nathanael could not remember any prophecy about Messiah coming out of Nazareth, and at once stumbled at the idea of Him whom "Moses and the prophets" had described belonging to such a contemptible place. The condescension of our Lord in living thirty years in such a place as Nazareth is strongly brought out by Nathanael's question. Augustine, Cyril, Origen, and others thought that the sentence before us ought not to be interpreted as a question, but as a simple affirmation: "Some good thing may come out of Nazareth." Wycliffe's version also takes this view. The sentence would then be the expression of a calm and unprejudiced mind acknowledging the possibility of good coming from Nazareth. Musculus thinks it possible, in this view of the expression, that Nathanael might have had in his mind the remarkable prophetical saying quoted in St. Matthew, "He shall be called a Nazarene!" The judgment of the great majority of interpreters agrees with our own translation, that it is a question and not an assertion, and it is by far the more probable view of the text.
[Come and see.] How common this expression was among the Jewish religious teachers has been already noticed. Philip's wisdom in not arguing and reasoning with Nathanael should be observed.
Ford gives a good quotation from Adam: "Little good comes by disputing. Pride is generally at the bottom of it, and not charity or love of truth; and it is seldom managed with decency or candor enough to produce any good effect. Let fall a word in season, and wait in patience till the rain drops on it from heaven." 47.—[In whom is no guile.] It is very likely that in using this expression our Lord referred to the 32nd Psalm, where the character of the godly man is described. He is not only one whose iniquities are forgiven, but one "in whose lips there is no guile." The expression implies a true heart, a really converted man, a genuine son of Abraham by faith, as well as a son according to the flesh.
Hutcheson observes, "The true mark of a true Israelite in spirit, is not sinlessness or perfection, but sincerity."
48.—[How do you know me?] This question implies Nathanael's surprise that Jesus should exhibit any knowledge of his character.
[When...fig tree, I saw you.] The common opinion about this expression is that Nathanael was praying or holding communion with God under the fig tree. It may be so. We are told nothing about it and are entirely left to conjecture. If it had been good for us to know, it would have been told us. Sufficient for us to understand that when Nathanael thought he was alone and no eye upon him, the Lord Jesus, by His divine power of seeing and knowing all things, was perfectly acquainted with all that Nathanael said, thought, and did. His "eyes are in every place." (Prov. xv.3.) Chrysostom and Theophylact think that the expression only refers to the conversation between Philip and Nathanael about Jesus, which had taken place under a fig tree. Grotius takes the same view. Gill mentions a tradition in the Syriac dictionary, "that Nathanael's mother had laid him under a fig tree when the infants were slain at Bethlehem by Herod" (Matt. ii.16), and that our Lord showed His perfect knowledge by referring to this fact.
Heinsius thinks there is a reference to the prophecy of Zechariah: "In that day ye shall call every man his neighbor, under the vine and under the fig tree" (Zech. iii.10), and that hence Nathanael drew the inference that Messiah's days were come, and Messiah before him.
Augustine sees an allegory in the fig tree, and gravely says that "as Adam and Eve, when they had sinned, made themselves aprons of fig leaves, fig leaves must signify sins. Nathanael therefore being under the fig tree signifies being under the shadow of death!"
49.—[Thou art... Son of God... King of Israel!] These words are the outburst of a heart convinced at once that Jesus was the Messiah.
They are a noble confession that our Lord was that divine Person who was promised to come into the world to redeem sinners, and that King who was prophesied of as the future Gatherer and Ruler of the tribes of Israel. Whether Nathanael clearly understood the nature of our Lord's kingdom at this time, may be reasonably doubted. But that he saw, like Peter, that He was the Christ, the Son of the Blessed, we cannot doubt. The restoring of the kingdom to Israel was a subject which we know, from other passages of Scripture, was one of the last which the first disciples were able to understand aright. (Acts i.6.)
The history of Nathanael's calling at this point should be compared with that of the woman of Samaria, in the fourth chapter of this Gospel. It is striking to observe that a discovery and conviction of our Lord's perfect knowledge of the most secret things was in both cases the turning point. It should not be forgotten that the title "King of Israel," was one which our Lord never refused during His ministry, though He never took to Himself His great power and actually reigned. The angel Gabriel foretold that the "Lord God would give unto Him the throne of His father David, and that He would reign over the house of Jacob, and that of His kingdom there would be no end." (Luke i.32,33.) When the wise men came from the East, they inquired for him who was born "King of the Jews." (Matt. ii.2.) When our Lord was crucified, the title over His head was "King of the Jews." All this shall yet be literally true. Christ shall yet be King in Zion and reign over the gathered and restored tribes of Israel at His second coming. And then the words of Nathanael shall be seen completely fulfilled. He shall be acknowledged by all as the "Son of
God, and King of Israel."
[Do you believe?] It admits of a question whether this expression would not be better rendered, as it might be with perfect grammatical correctness, "you believe." It would then be very like our Lord's words to Thomas, "Because you have seen Me, you have believed." (John xx.29.) The sense would be, "Because I said I saw you under the fig tree, you believe. It is well. Great is your faith. But I tell you for your comfort and encouragement, that you shall one day see far greater proofs of my divinity and Messiahship than these."
Wycliffe's, Tyndale's, and Cranmer's versions all render the expression as an affirmation and not as a question. Aretius maintains the same view.
[Verily, verily I say.] This expression is peculiar to St. John's Gospel, and very remarkable. It is the word which is familiar to all
Christians: "Amen," twice repeated. It is found twenty-five times in this Gospel, always at the beginning of a sentence, and always used by Christ. In every place it implies a very solemn, emphatic assertion of some great truth or heart-searching fact. No writer in the New
Testament, except St. John, ever gives the double "Amen."
[Hereafter you shall see heaven...angels... Son of man.] This prediction is very remarkable. It should be carefully observed that it is not addressed to Nathanael alone. The preceding verse says, "thou shalt see." The present verse says, "ye shall see,"—that is, "thou and all my other disciples."
About the true meaning of the prediction, commentators differ exceedingly. Arguing, as nearly all do, that the words plainly refer to Jacob's vision of the ladder reaching from heaven to earth (Gen. xxviii.12), they disagree about the way in which the prediction is fulfilled. Some think, as Stier, that the prediction must be interpreted figuratively, and that it was fulfilled when our Lord was upon earth.
They think it only means that Nathanael and the other disciples would see a still fuller revelation of Christ and the Gospel by and by.
They would see a figurative fulfilment of Jacob's vision, and a way opened from earth to heaven for all true Israelites, or believers. They would see still greater proofs in the shape of miracles and signs that Jesus was the Son of God. Heaven, in a spiritual sense shut by the sin of the first Adam, would be opened by the obedience of the second
Adam. "The heavenly ladder," says Bonaventura, quoted by Calovius, "was broken in Adam and repaired in Christ." According to this view, "the angels of God" in the text mean nothing in particular, which, to say the least, seems a very loose and unsatisfactory explanation.
Others think, as Rollock, that the prediction must be interpreted literally, and that it was fulfilled while our Lord was on earth. They think it was accomplished when our Lord was transfigured—when an angel appeared in the garden of Gethsemane—and when our Lord ascended on the Mount of Olives. This view also seems very unsatisfactory. The transfiguration and the agony in the garden were not seen by Nathanael at all. There is nothing whatever said about angels appearing, either at the transfiguration or the ascension. And as to "angels ascending and descending," there is nothing at any period of the Gospel history at all answering to the expression.
The only true and satisfactory view, I believe, is that which makes the whole prediction apply to events which are still future. Our Lord spoke of His second coming and kingdom. When He comes the second time to take His great power and reign, the words of this text shall be literally fulfilled. His believing people shall see heaven open and a constant communication kept up between heaven and earth, the tabernacle of God with men, and the angels visibly ministering to the King of Israel and king of all the earth. The context confirms me in this view of the text. Nathanael believed Jesus to be the Messiah when He was lowly and poor. Jesus rewards his faith by assuring him that, lowly as He now seems, He shall one day come in the clouds of heaven and reign as a King.
I am further confirmed by the striking likeness between our Lord's words here and those He addressed to the chief priests, in the day that He was arraigned as a prisoner before them: "Hereafter ye shall see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven." (Matt. xxvi.64.)
This view of the prediction is maintained by Gomarus. I am aware that some maintain, in opposition to the view I support, that the Greek word rendered "hereafter" must mean "from henceforth: i.e. immediately after the present time, and ever hereafter," and does not imply a distant event. In reply, I would have it specially noted that the Greek word here translated "hereafter" is the very same that is used by our Lord in the solemn words, just quoted, which He addressed to the chief priests when He was arraigned. (Matt. xxvi.69.) In that case there cannot be any reasonable doubt that He spoke of a far distant event and time. I believe, that in like manner, He speaks of a far distant event and time in this place.
As to the nature of Christ's future kingdom, and the intercourse which shall then be kept up by angels between earth and heaven, this is not the place to speak. I only remark that the words before us will probably receive a far more real and literal accomplishment than many of us are expecting.
It is worthy of remark that Nathanael calls our Lord "the Son of God." Jesus, in His prediction, tells him he shall see angels ascending and descending on the "Son of man." He whom Nathanael now saw as a man would yet appear as man glorified in the heavenly kingdom.
He would even then be God-man. The expression "Son of man," here first used by St. John, seems derived, as Chemnitius says, from Daniel's words in a prophecy about Messiah. (Dan. vii.13,14.) It is never applied to our Lord by any but Himself, except by Stephen.
(Acts vii.56.) Lightfoot thinks that "it is used so often by our Savior about Himself, as intimating that He is the second Adam, the true seed of the woman."
In leaving this passage, the question naturally arises, Who was Nathanael? How is it that we hear so little afterwards of so good a man and so clearsighted a believer? Some think, as Augustine and others, that Nathanael was purposely not placed among our Lord's immediate companions and apostles because he was a man of learning and knowledge, lest any should say that our Lord chose learned men to be His first ministers. I can see nothing in this argument. There is no evidence to my own mind that Nathanael was more learned than other Jews of humble birth in our Lord's time.
Moreover he was a friend of Philip, one of our Lord's apostles, and most probably a man of similar position and attainments. In fact, we are told elsewhere that he lived at "Cana of Galilee." (John xxi.1.)
Some think, because Nathanael lived at Cana, that he was the same person as the apostle Simon the Canaanite. (Matt. x.4; Mark iii.18.)
Some think that he was Stephen the martyr, because Stephen saw the heavens opened in a vision. (Acts vii. 56.)
The most probable opinion to my own mind is that Nathanael was the apostle who is called elsewhere Bartholomew, and who, like others of the apostles, had two names. In favor of this opinion there are three remarkable facts. The first is that in three lists of the twelve apostles out of four, the names of Philip and Bartholomew are always found together. (Matt. x.3; Mark iii.18; Luke vi.14.) The second is that Nathanael is specially mentioned after our Lord's ascension as a companion of Peter, Thomas, James, John and two other disciples.
The third is that St. John never once mentions the name of Bartholomew in his Gospel. The objection that Nathanael's name is never mentioned by Matthew, Mark, or Luke is of no weight. No one of the three, it may be replied, tells us that Peter was called Cephas.
Only Matthew gives Jude, the brother of James, the name of Lebbæus. The point happily is not one of any particular importance.
I only say that the conjectural probability that Nathanael was an apostle and was the same as Bartholomew, seems to me very strong and well founded. In leaving this chapter, the observation of Aretius is worth quoting. He remarks that the chapter is singularly rich in names or epithets applied to the Lord Jesus Christ. He numbers up the following twenty-one. 1. The Word. 2. God. 3. Life. 4. Light. 5.
The true light. 6. The only begotten of the Father. 7. Full of grace and truth. 8. Jesus Christ. 9. The only begotten Son. 10. The Lord. 11. The Lamb of God. 12. Jesus. 13. A Man. 14. The Son of God. 15. Rabbi. 16.
Teacher. 17. Messiah. 18. Christ. 19. The Son of Joseph. 20. The King of Israel. 21. The Son of man.
John – Chap. 2
JOHN 2:1-11
Turning Water into Wine
Now on the third day there was a wedding at Cana in Galilee.
Jesus' mother was there, and both Jesus and his disciples were also invited to the wedding. When the wine ran out, Jesus' mother said to him, "They have no wine left." Jesus replied, "Woman, why are you saying this to me? My time has not yet come." His mother told the servants, "Whatever he tells you, do it."
Now there were six stone water jars there for Jewish ceremonial washing, each holding twenty or thirty gallons. Jesus told the servants, "Fill the water jars with water." So they filled them up to the very top. Then he told them, "Now draw some out and take it to the head steward," and they did. When the head steward tasted the water that had been turned to wine, not knowing where it came from (though the servants who had drawn the water knew), he called the bridegroom and said to him, "Everyone serves the good wine first, and then the cheaper wine when the guests are drunk.
You have kept the good wine until now!" Jesus did this as the first of his miraculous signs, in Cana of Galilee. In this way he revealed his glory, and his disciples believed in him.
These verses describe a miracle which should always possess a special interest in the eyes of a true Christian. It is the first, in order of time, of the many mighty works which Jesus did, when He was upon earth. We are distinctly told, "This beginning of miracles did Jesus in Cana of Galilee." Like every other miracle which John was inspired to record, it is related with great minuteness and particularity. And, like every other miracle in John's Gospel, it is rich in spiritual lessons.
We learn, firstly, from these verses, how honorable in the sight of Christ is the estate of matrimony. To be present at a "marriage" was almost the first public act of our Lord's earthly ministry.
Marriage is not a sacrament, as the Church of Rome asserts. It is simply a state of life ordained by God for man's benefit. But it is a state which ought never to be spoken of with levity, or regarded with disrespect. The Prayerbook service has well described it, as "an honorable estate, instituted of God in the time of man's innocency, and signifying unto us the mystical union that is between Christ and his Church." Society is never in a healthy condition, and true religion never flourishes in that land where the marriage tie is lightly esteemed. They who lightly esteem it have not the mind of Christ. He who "beautified and adorned the estate of matrimony by His presence and first miracle that He wrought in Cana of Galilee," is One who is always of one mind. "Marriage," says the Holy Spirit by Paul, "is honorable in all." (Heb. 13:4.)
One thing, however, ought not to be forgotten. Marriage is a step which so seriously affects the temporal happiness and spiritual welfare of two immortal souls, that it ought never to be taken in hand "unadvisedly, lightly, wantonly, and without due consideration." To be truly happy, it should be undertaken "reverently, discreetly, soberly, and in the fear of God." Christ's blessing and presence are essential to a happy wedding. The marriage at which there is no place for Christ and His disciples, is not one that can justly be expected to prosper.
We learn, secondly, from these verses, that there are times when it is lawful to be merry and rejoice. Our Lord Himself sanctioned a wedding-feast by His own presence. He did not refuse to be a guest at "a marriage in Cana of Galilee." "A feast," it is written, "is made for laughter, and wine makes merry." (Eccles.
10:19.) Our Lord, in the passage before us, approves both the feast and the use of wine.
True religion was never meant to make men melancholy. On the contrary, it was intended to increase real joy and happiness among men. The servant of Christ unquestionably ought to have nothing to do with races, balls, theaters, and such-like amusements, which tend to frivolity and indulgence, if not to sin. But he has no right to hand over innocent recreations and family gatherings to the devil and the world. The Christian who withdraws entirely from the society of his fellow-men, and walks the earth with a face as melancholy as if he was always attending a funeral, does injury to the cause of the Gospel. A cheerful, kindly spirit is a great recommendation to a believer. It is a real misfortune to Christianity when a Christian cannot smile. A merry heart, and a readiness to take part in all innocent mirth, are gifts of inestimable value. They go far to soften prejudices, to take up stumbling-blocks out of the way, and to make way for Christ and the Gospel.
The subject no doubt is a difficult and delicate one. On no point of Christian practice is it so hard to hit the balance between that which is lawful and that which is unlawful, between that which is right and that which is wrong. It is very hard indeed to be both merry and wise.
High spirits soon degenerate into levity. Acceptance of many invitations to feasts soon leads to waste of time, and begets leanness of soul. Frequent eating and drinking at other men's tables, soon lowers a Christian's tone of religion. Going often into company is a heavy strain on spirituality of heart. Here, if anywhere, God's children have need to be on their guard. Each must know his own strength and natural temperament, and act accordingly. One believer can go without risk where another cannot. Happy is he who can use his Christian liberty without abusing it! It is possible to be sorely wounded in soul at marriage feasts and the tables of friends.
One golden rule on the subject may be laid down, the use of which will save us much trouble. Let us take care that we always go to feasts in the spirit of our divine Master, and that we never go where He would not have gone. Like Him, let us endeavor to be always "about our Father's business." (Luke 2:49.) Like Him, let us willingly promote joy and gladness, but let us strive that it may be sinless joy, if not joy in the Lord. Let us endeavor to bring the salt of grace into every company, and to drop the word in season in every ear we address. Much good may be done in society by giving a healthy tone to conversation. Let us never be ashamed to show our colors, and to make men see whose we are and whom we serve. We may well say, "Who is sufficient for these things?" But if Christ went to a marriage feast in Cana there is surely something that Christians can do on similar occasions. Let them only remember that if they go when their Master went, they must go in their Master's spirit.
We learn lastly, from these verses, the Almighty power of our Lord Jesus Christ. We are told of a miracle which He wrought at the marriage feast, when the wine failed. By a mere act of will He changed water into wine, and so supplied the need of all the guests.
The manner in which the miracle was worked deserves especial notice. We are not told of any outward visible action which preceded or accompanied it. It is not said that He touched the waterpots containing the water that was made wine. It is not said that He commanded the water to change its qualities, or that He prayed to His Father in Heaven. He simply willed the change, and it took place.
We read of no prophet or apostle in the Bible who ever worked a miracle after this fashion. He who could do such a mighty work, in such a manner, was nothing less than very God.
It is a comfortable thought that the same almighty power of will which our Lord here displayed is still exercised on behalf of His