If so please EMail us with your question to jonpartin@tiscali.co.uk and we will do our best to give you a satisfactory answer. EMailus.

Web site address http://www.oocities.org/Athens/Delphi/4027

John the Baptiser’s Testimony to Jesus and the Calling of Disciples

John 1.19 - 34 John the Baptiser’s Testimony to Jesus

As a popular and influential preacher John the Baptiser came under the scrutiny of the Jewish leaders (‘the Jews’). Notice that in John’s Gospel the term ‘the Jews’ does not refer to all Jews but to the Jewish religious authorities, such as the Sadducees and the more conservative Pharisees, and especially those who were antagonistic to Jesus (possibly it is better translated ‘the Judaisers’). These Jewish leaders sent selected Priests and Levites (temple servants) to interview John. It was their responsibility to check out anyone making special claims and they wanted to know what claims he was making for himself (v.19). They knew he was baptising people in the River Jordan and this suggested to them that he was claiming some special authority.

1.19 ‘And this is the witness of John when the Judaisers sent priests and Levites to him from Jerusalem to ask him, “Who are you?”

There were many ideas around at this time as to whom God would send to help His people. Some expected the return in bodily form of Elijah the Prophet himself (Malachi 4.5), remembering that he had never died but had been taken up by God (2 Kings 1.11), others expected a uniquely great prophet (Deuteronomy 18.15), others expected a Messiah (in Greek ‘Christos’ - ‘anointed one’) - or even more than one Messiah - who would, by God’s power, deliver Israel, popularly conceived as by raising up an army of God’s people (them). Thus they wanted to know exactly what John’s claim was.

1.20 ‘And he confessed and denied not, and he confessed, “I am not the Christ (Messiah)”. And they asked him, “What then. Are you Elijah?”, and he says, “I am not”. “Are you the prophet?”, and he answers, “No”.’

John immediately discounted any of these ideas. First he discounted the idea that he was the Messiah (v.20). The ‘Christ’ or ‘Messiah’ means ‘anointed one’. The idea behind it was mainly of a Davidic king empowered by God who would come and intervene on behalf of God’s people, freeing them from tyranny (especially that of the Romans), usually by force of arms. (Kings were anointed when they were crowned).

‘And he confessed and denied not’. He was true to his call to witness to Christ. He did not make great claims for himself but pointed away from himself to the ‘coming One’.

Then, when asked if he was Elijah, he emphatically replied ‘No’. This was because he wanted them to know that he was not in fact the original Elijah returned in the flesh. He rated himself in lowly terms. Nevertheless Jesus would point out that while he was not literally Elijah, he was the fulfilment of the one promised by Malachi, one who was like Elijah (Matthew 11.14; 17.12). John also stressed that he was not the great expected prophet (v.21). It is clear from all this that he wanted them to realise that he was ‘nothing special’. Like all great men of God he did not have an exalted opinion of himself.

The threefold question demonstrates the wide range of views, and they were often not ‘either/or’ but ‘both/and’. They did not conceive how one person could fulfil all the promises. Note how John’s replies become shorter and shorter. He does not want men to look at him.

1.22-23 ‘They therefore said to him, “Who are you, so that we may give an answer to those who sent us? What do you say about yourself?”.’ He said, “I am the voice of one crying in the wilderness - ‘Make straight the way of the Lord’ - as said Isaiah the prophet”.

On being pressed he connected himself with the words of Isaiah 40.3. He claimed not to be an important personage but only to be a voice, ‘the preparer of the way’, pointing to and making ready for the coming activity of God (v.23). This passage is applied to him in all four Gospels. Thus John is ‘the Voice’, the introducer, Jesus is ‘the Word’.

1.24 ‘And they had been sent from the Pharisees’.

The Pharisees were probably the most influential religious group among the common people. They had originated from the Hasidim, the ‘separated ones’ who during the time of fierce religious persecution of the Jews a century or two earlier had stood firm for the Law (the Torah - ‘instruction’ - which was composed of the books of Moses, the first five books in the Bible), for circumcision and for the Sabbath, all of which put them under sentences of death.

They were not a large group, possibly around six or seven thousand, but having become convinced that the only hope for the future, and for eternal life, lay in complete fulfilment of the Law of Moses, they set about that task, and in order to do so hedged it around with hundreds of other interpretations of that Law which they sought to fulfil, many of which were not moral but ceremonial. Thus they lay great emphasis on ceremonial washings in various circumstances, at all times of the day, and in avoiding uncleanness, which included avoiding contact with those who did not follow their ceremonial ideas.

As always when men become ‘over religious’ many of them became hypocritical, observing the outward requirements while failing in what mattered most, compassion and mercy. Many became censorious and ultra-critical, including, as was to be expected, many of their great teachers (later given the technical name of ‘the Rabbis’), although not all must be included in this description. Jesus’ attacks on ‘the Pharisees’ were against these particular ones for they were the ones who followed Him and sought to test Him out.

It was because of their intense interest in religious matters that they had come to test out John, and as proponents of ceremonial washings they were especially interested in his baptism which they failed to understand.

1.25 ‘And they asked him and said to him, “Why then are you baptising if you are not the Christ, or Elijah, or the prophet?”

The question was, why, if he was not the expected Messiah, or Elijah or the great Prophet, he was baptising. They almost certainly saw his baptising as another aspect of ceremonial washing, and wanted to know his credentials for introducing such an idea. To bring about such a new approach he had to be someone of outstanding importance.

1.26-27 ‘John answered them, saying, “I baptise with water. Among you stands one whom you do not know, even He who comes after me, the clasp of whose sandal I am unworthy to unloose”.’

His reply was that he was baptising with water in preparation for the coming of another, someone who was already standing among them, and was yet unknown to them, someone so great that he, John, was not worthy to untie His sandals.

The writer does not here bring out the significance of John’s baptism, for he says little about the teaching of John, (although he does bring out its significance later in, for example, the visit of Nicodemus - chapter 3). He is aware that it is well known from elsewhere, and he leaves that to others and does not consider it necessary. But it is so important for the meaning behind the Gospel that we must consider it briefly.

John proclaimed a ‘baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins’ (Mark 1.4: Luke 3.3), and the connection between repentance from sin and his baptism is made clear by John himself. However, he also goes on to declare that his baptism is a precursor to the age of the Spirit (Mark 1.8; Matthew 3.11; Luke 3.15-16; John 1.30-34), and he specifically parallels his baptism with water with Jesus’ coming ‘baptism with the Holy Spirit’. It is this fact which makes clear the significance of John’s baptism.

He constantly uses harvest imagery. The Pharisees and Sadducees are like snakes fleeing from the burning cornfields (Matthew 3.7; Luke 3.7) and should rather ‘bear fruit’ (Matthew 3.8). The judgment is like the axe laid to the root of the trees that do not bear fruit (v.10). The One who is coming comes with a winnowing fork in His hands to gather the wheat into the granary and to cast the chaff into the fire (v.12). So John has in mind all the time pictures of fruitfulness and harvest, of the threshingfloor and overflowing barns, and the clearing of chaff and of ‘dead’ trees. This powerfully suggests that when he speaks of his baptism in the light of the coming of the Spirit he has in mind the pictures common in the Old Testament prophets of fruitfulness and blessing caused by the coming of the rains, which are constantly connected with the coming of the Spirit.

Then, says the prophet Isaiah, the Spirit will be ‘poured out from above’, the land will flourish and the desert will become fruitful, and justice and righteousness, peace and confidence will abound (Isaiah 32.15-18). It is clear here that the pouring out of the Spirit includes the pouring out of rain producing fruitful harvests, although there is no doubting that it also includes a life changing activity in the hearts of men.

This is confirmed by Isaiah 44.4-5. “I will pour water on him who is thirsty, and floods upon the dry ground. I will pour My Spirit upon your children, and my blessing upon your offspring”. The people will flourish “like the grass at the coming of the rainy season, like willows planted by flowing rivers”. Once again we have the life-giving rain, but here the pouring out of the Spirit is on the people, who will thus each say ‘I am the Lord’s’ (v.6). Compare Isaiah 35.6-7; 41.17-20; 55.10-13; Joel 2.23-29; Ezekiel 34.26-27 which all see the future blessing in terms of rain pouring down, floods of water, abundant fruitfulness, and so on.

We vaguely recognise the importance of rain to our lives but it is not hugely important. However, that is because we do not benefit from it directly. To people who lived in a land where their very lives depended on the sequence of the rains it was very different. No rain meant famine and hardship, even starvation and death. Rain was the source of life, the life-giver, the greatest of all boons to man, so the prophetic words touched a deep chord in all their hearts.

John clearly has these Scriptures in mind when he preaches, and it is surely beyond all doubt that this is what his baptism signified, the drenching with life-giving rain that produces fruitfulness and blessing. We can compare how Jesus must also surely have these Scriptures in mind when He speaks of being ‘born from above’ (John 3.6). Thus John’s baptism is a picture of the coming of the life giving Spirit in terms of rain, and he is seeking to prepare the way for this by bringing the people to repentance from sin and baptising them as a symbol of what God is about to do on those who responded to Him. The idea is not of washing but of life-giving and transforming. This is why he baptised with water. And it pointed ahead to, and prepared the way for, the coming outpouring of the Holy Spirit.

But the writer here is more concerned with the fact that John is a witness to Jesus, and his emphasis is more on ‘there stands One among you whom you do not know, even He who comes after me, the straps of whose sandals I am not worthy to untie’. He wants it to be clear that John simply prepares the way for another, for the Word of God, Who is so far superior to him that he is not even fit to unfasten His sandals.

1.28 ‘These things were done in Bethany beyond Jordan where John was baptising’.

We are now told that this took place in ‘Bethany, beyond Jordan’ (v.28). The appellation is to distinguish the village from the better known Bethany, and indeed ‘Bethany beyond Jordan’ was so little known that it was soon changed in manuscripts to the better known Bethabara to indicate where it was. This is one indication of the familiarity of the author with Palestine. These things were rooted in history as the use of an insignificant place name confirms.

1.29 ‘On the morrow he sees Jesus coming to him and says, “Behold, the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world”.’

‘The morrow, the next day’. This passage links a number of events over a period of days. The writer could never forget those never to be forgotten days at which he was present, during them John sees Jesus coming towards him and declares to the people who He was. ‘See’, he says, ‘the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world’. Here John is connecting Jesus with the suffering servant and prophet spoken of in Isaiah, the lamb (amnos, as here) who was led to the slaughter, who was wounded for our transgressions, and bruised for our iniquities, and who bore our sins and carried our sorrows - Isaiah 53.7 with verses 4 & 5 in context). He would suffer for the sins of his people.

The writer also often centres on the Passover, although he nowhere in fact mentions the Passover lamb, but it might be argued that this was because he saw Jesus as replacing the Passover lamb. Certainly it is difficult to avoid the implication that the One Who died at the Passover was the Passover lamb. And while that lamb was initially not specifically propitiatory, it now had to be offered in the Temple through the priests, and therefore included propitiatory elements. Nor should we overlook the daily sacrifice, which was propitiatory and was an important part of the Passover. But whatever was most directly in his mind it is clear that he was thinking in terms of a sacrificial offering. Thus he saw Jesus as One Who would be in some way a sacrifice for the sins of the world, and this could only link back to Isaiah 53, while indirectly including the Passover lamb and the daily offering.

It should be noted that in the Septuagint (LXX - an important Greek version of the Old Testament) the Passover lamb is not ‘amnos’ but ‘probaton’, but it is taken from among the ‘amnoi’ (e.g. Exodus 12.5), and the words are paralleled in Isaiah 53.7. (And John is thinking in Hebrew and Aramaic not Greek).

1.30 ‘This is He of whom I said, after me comes a man who is become before me, for He was before me.’

John the Baptiser now expands on what he has said. Here was the One for whom he was preparing the way, the One who ranked before him because of His inherent superiority and who by right of that superiority would take over - ‘who is become before me’. The One Who is placed ‘before him’ by inherent right. And this right lies in His total superiority and pre-existence - ‘for He was before me’.

1.31 ‘And I did not know Him, but that he would be revealed to Israel. This was why I came baptising with water.’

He admits that he had not realised at first who Jesus was (Jesus was John’s cousin), but he had come to realise at Jesus’ baptism that He was the One for Whom he was preparing, for he had seen the Holy Spirit descending and remaining on Him, and had realised from this that He was the One Who would baptise (baptizo = drench, inundate) in the Holy Spirit as promised by the prophets.

This stresses the significance of John’s baptism. It was a message in picture form illustrating the future work of Jesus. In the Old Testament the coming of the Spirit in the new age is regularly depicted in terms of rain pouring from the heavens, of floods of water, and of new fruitfulness (e.g. Isaiah 32.15-18; 44.4-5). Thus John’s baptism declares the near approach of this coming age of the Spirit, present in the coming of Jesus. It is an acted out parable in line with those of previous prophets.

‘But that He would be revealed to Israel’. John had begun to preach knowing that ‘the coming One’ was to follow him, and that he himself was preparing the way. What he had not known was who He was.

1.32-33 ‘And John bore witness saying, “I have beheld the Spirit descending as a dove out of Heaven, and it abode on Him. And I did not know Him. But He Who sent me to baptise with water, He said to me, on whoever you shall see the Spirit descending and abiding on Him, the same is He who baptises with the Holy Spirit”.’

In accordance with the writer’s principle to emphasise spiritual meaning rather than physical events he does not describe the baptism of Jesus. He rather depicts it through the mouth of John.

‘John bore witness’. This is the writer’s constant emphasis, John is a witness not the Person Himself. But as such his credentials are from God. He is a reliable witness sent by God.

‘The Spirit descending as a dove from Heaven.’ This confirms the accounts in the other Gospels where the descent is ‘like a dove’. Some visible manifestation was observed when the Spirit came on Jesus which reminded people of a dove. The dove was a symbol of purity and gentleness.

‘It abode on Him’. This was no temporary blessing, it remained on Him. In contrast with those who were at times ‘filled (pimplemi) with the Holy Spirit’ for specific purposes, He was ‘full of the Holy Spirit’ continually (Luke 4.1). The word ‘abide’ is found constantly throughout the Gospel to indicate the relationship between Jesus and the Father, and the relationship His people can have with Him.

‘He Who baptises with the Holy Spirit’. The coming of the Spirit promised in the prophets would take place through the authority and power of Jesus. He had the Holy Spirit within His gift, and through Him the Holy Spirit would drench (baptizo) His people.

1.34 “And I have seen and have borne witness that this is the Son of God.”

What he has seen now enables him to bear witness that ‘this is the Son of God’. It is possible that the Baptiser did not realise the full significance of his own words. He is probably thinking more of Jesus as the coming Messiah, the great future king (as did Nathaniel later in the chapter), for the kings of Israel were looked on as ‘sons of God’ by adoption (Psalm 2.7; 2 Samuel 7.14), but the writer means the term to be taken in its full significance.

So John the Baptiser sees Jesus as the Suffering Servant of Isaiah 53 (the Lamb of God) and the coming Spirit filled king of Isaiah 11.1-3. This ties in with the voice at Jesus’ baptism, ‘this is my beloved son (Psalm 2.7), in whom I am well pleased (Isaiah 42.1)’ which may well be where John the Baptiser realised the full significance of Jesus.

In Matthew’s Gospel we learn that John had not wanted to baptise Jesus because he felt he (John) was unworthy (Matthew 3.14). It was Jesus Who should baptise him. But Jesus replies that it was becoming for Him to ‘fulfill all righteousness’. He wishes to identify Himself with the people of God and do all that is right for them, even though He has no need to repent. This further stresses that that baptism was not one of ‘cleansing’ but rather indicating reception of the times of the Holy Spirit.

John 1.35-51. Disciples Begin to Gather to Jesus.

The great teachers of Israel would often have bands of ‘disciples’ who gathered round them to learn from them, and then to pass on their teaching. Here we learn that Jesus also begins to attract disciples. This passage is a deliberate way of stressing that here is a greater than John. John’s disciples leave him to follow Jesus, (and that is how he wanted it). It is interesting in that it indicates almost casually the time when certain events took place (v.39, 43) suggesting that they sprang to mind readily, showing that its source was close to the events when they occurred. Time references like this keep occurring in these passages.

1.35-37 ‘Again on the next day John was standing, and two of his disciples, and he looked on Jesus as he walked and says, “Behold, the Lamb of God”. And the two disciples heard him speak and they followed Jesus.’

The section begins with John reiterating that Jesus is ‘the Lamb of God’. Two of John’s disciples heard this and immediately left John to follow Jesus. One of these was Andrew (verse 40) and the other is unnamed. It is extremely likely that the other was the writer, who never refers to himself by name, which explains why he knew the time when it occurred. So it is John who has established the nucleus for the twelve Apostles, and he gladly sends them to Jesus.

The interchange between Jesus and the two is full of subtlety and meaning. At the time it was commonplace, but now the writer sees a deeper significance in the questions and answers.

1.38a ‘And Jesus turned and saw them following, and says to them, “What are you looking for?” ’ The question, apparently casual, goes in fact to the very depths. What do they really want? Do they know what they are committing themselves to?

1.38b ‘And they said to him, “Rabbi, (which means, being interpreted, ‘Master’), where do you abide?” It is probable that the writer, who has thought about it for many years, intends this too to have a deeper meaning. ‘Where are you staying’, yes, but also ‘where do you continually dwell?’, the answer to the latter being, with the Father, in His love (15.10) and in His presence.

At this time the address ‘Rabbi’ could be given to any respected teacher. Later it would become a technical term for official Jewish teachers.

1.39a ‘He says to them, “Come, and you will see.” The subtle interchange continues, but while at the time its meaning was casual it is now more subtle. They will go with Him and see. But later they will follow Him all the way and will see clearly where He abides and will go with Him and to Him.

1.39b ‘They came therefore and saw where he dwelt, and they remained with him that day. It was about the tenth hour.’

They spend the day with Jesus, presumably being taught by Him. But behind it lies the idea that they also where enlightened by Him as to His eternal dwelling place to which, on that first day, they became entitled.

1.40 ‘One of the two who heard John speak and followed Him, was Andrew, Simon Peter’s brother.’ In a passage where names are continually given the total silence as to the name of the other is profoundly significant. It cannot have been forgotten. Too many remembered that day. The silence is therefore deliberate, and in the face of the fact that the name of the Apostle John is never mentioned in the Gospel the inevitable conclusion is that it was the writer himself, and that he was the Apostle John.

1.41 ‘He first finds his own brother Simon and says to him, “We have found the Messiah (which is being interpreted ‘the Christ’)”. Andrew then seeks out his brother Simon (Peter) and declares that they had found ‘the Messiah’. Once someone has truly found Christ they cannot help but seek to tell others. That is a proof of their genuineness.

At this stage, in their first enthusiasm, it is clear that they consider Jesus to be the expected Messiah. But as time goes by that belief fades, for as they go about with Him He does not behave as they expect the Messiah to behave. He does not even claim to be the Messiah when speaking to Jews. Indeed everyone is puzzled. Even John the Baptiser will begin to have his doubts (Luke 7.19-20). It is thus not surprising that less enlightened men (at the time) will have the same.

But Jesus is aware that He has to re-educate them. He has not come with force of arms but with force of words. He has not come to achieve earthly success but to gain a heavenly victory. Thus He will continue on His way and let them watch Him and gradually come to an understanding of Who and What He is. The Messianic claim in the way they understand it is dangerous and it is wrong. He is not an enemy of Rome. In His purposes Rome is an irrelevance, and He will not die for a cause He does not seek to win. He has come to seek and to save the lost and to establish a heavenly kingdom. But they cannot understand this yet

The final certainty that Jesus is the Messiah will in fact come later, when Jesus will redefine the term in terms of the suffering Son of Man (Matthew 16 .16 and parallels and John 6.69). In the same way His response here is to speak of Himself as ‘the Son of Man’, stressing His oneness with humanity (v.51). But the writer brings in Andrew’s use of the term Messiah because he wants his readers to know that Jesus is indeed the Messiah. (In fact even after Peter’s confession of Jesus as Messiah his disciples are having difficulty with the subject (Mark 10.35). They still have the wrong idea).

‘First finds’. Does this mean ‘first’ before doing anything else? Or first before finding others? It is probably the former. (There are variant readings, but the differences are not really important).

1.42 ‘He brought him to Jesus. Jesus looked on him and said, “You are Simon, the son of John, you will be called Cephas (which is by interpretation, Peter)”.’

Simon comes to see for himself, and on seeing Simon, Jesus declares that one day he will be renamed Peter (petros in Greek, cephas in Aramaic - meaning a stone). Already He sees in Simon the raw material of an effective leader. This renaming is mentioned again in Matthew 16.18, but Jesus never actually addresses him as Peter by name until Peter’s acts of betrayal, when He wishes both to warn him and to encourage him (Luke 22.34; Mark 16.7). His becoming ‘the rock’ is yet a long way off.

When we remember how Peter so often got things wrong, and how he failed Jesus at the last, it is an encouragement to us all to know that God knew what he would become in the end. In the same way God knows too what we will become. Once we are in Christ He does not judge us as we are, but as what He knows we will become.

1.43-44 ‘On the next day he determined to go forth into Galilee, and he finds Philip, and Jesus says to him, “Follow me”. Now Philip was from Bethsaida, of the city of Andrew and Peter.’

‘The next day’ they go to Galilee and there Jesus calls Philip to follow Him (this seems the most likely meaning). Here now Jesus is claiming the authority to ‘call’ disciples, for Philip is the first one Jesus calls in this way. Is it significant that He does not make this open statement of His intentions until He goes to Galilee? While Jesus is always forthright when it is necessary He does not openly court trouble. Andrew, Peter and John have only expressed interest. They will receive their defining call later. Again the author shows his familiarity with the personal details. Philip is from Bethsaida, the city of Andrew and Peter.

‘He determined’. He had a specific plan in mind. Now He must commence His ministry and He chooses to do it in Galilee.

It is significant that He does not ‘call’ any disciples of John at this stage. What exquisite tenderness. Andrew, Peter and John will be called later, but only when they are no longer recognised as ‘John’s disciples’. John must be allowed his day.

1.45 ‘Philip finds Nathaniel and say to him, “We have found Him of whom Moses, in the Law, and the prophets wrote, Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Joseph”.’

Philip then seeks out Nathaniel (probably the same as Bartholomew, who is elsewhere linked with Philip (Matthew 10.3)) and tells him that they have found the One of Whom Moses and the prophets spoke, ‘Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Joseph’. It is clear that Nathaniel assumes he means the Messiah (see verse 49). The full title of Jesus is given to stress his royal descent through Joseph.

‘the Law and the prophets’ - the Old Testament Scriptures. (Strictly the definition does not include ‘the holy writings’, the third part of the Old Testament canon, but they may well have been caught up in the term. But compare Luke 24.44. In fact in this case Philip may have specific Scriptures in mind and thus be defining specifically).

1.46. ‘And Nathaniel said to him, “Can any good thing come out of Nazareth?”. Philip says to him, “Come and see”.’

Nathaniel replies with what was possibly a well known joke in Bethsaida, ‘can anything good come out of Nazareth?’. It may, however, have been a popular proverb. Alternately it may be that Nathaniel is thinking of the fact that no prophecy known to him has forecast a ‘coming one’ from Nazareth. Nazareth was a very small town in the hills. The phrase emphasises that Jesus has come in lowliness and humility. Philip’s reply is simple. ‘Come and see’. He is confident that Nathaniel will be impressed.

1.47 ‘Jesus saw Nathaniel coming to him and says to him, “Look, an Israelite indeed in whom is no guile”.’

When Jesus sees Nathaniel He declares, ‘See, a true Israelite who is without guile’. The idea is taken from Psalm 32.2 - ‘blessed is the man --- in whose spirit there is no guile’ - the epitome of the true Israelite. This impresses Nathaniel, who was clearly a very pious man, and he is curious to know how Jesus knows about him.

1.48 ‘Nathaniel says to him, “From where do you know me?” Jesus answered and said to him, “Before Philip called you, when you were under the fig tree I saw you”. Nathaniel is puzzled by the reply. ‘From where (or how) do you know me?’ Jesus is claiming knowledge about him. He wonders what the source is.

Jesus replies, ‘Before Philip called you, when you were under the fig tree, I saw you’. This must be significant for Nathaniel is even more impressed. Perhaps he had just been meditating on Psalm 32 himself, or thinking of Jacob and Esau (see Genesis 27.35) or perhaps what he had been thinking to himself while under the fig tree was of great religious importance, and related to thoughts about the coming king and the days of deliverance (compare Simeon in Luke 2.25). Whatever it was he wonders how Jesus could have known it. Indeed he considers that there can be only one explanation, this man has extraordinary powers.

1.49 ‘Nathaniel answered him, “Rabbi, you are the Son of God. You are King of Israel”.’

This awareness of Jesus convinces Nathaniel that his friend Philip is right. ‘Rabbi,’ he says in awe, ‘you are the Son of God, you are the King of Israel’ (v.49). Notice the juxtaposition of the two phrases. To him the one equates with the other. The promised king has come.

At this point in time reference to ‘the Son of God’ has usually in mind the ‘coming king’ as God’s adopted son, but its deeper significance, which will dawn on them later, is what the writer wishes to bring out.

1.50 ‘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.” And he says to him, “In very truth I say to you, you will see the Heaven opened, and the angels of God ascending and descending on the Son of Man”.’

Jesus reply is, ‘Does your faith rest on the fact that I saw you under the fig tree (‘and knew what you were thinking’ is implied)? Then he tells him that more wonderful things are yet in store. ‘You will see Heaven opened, and the angels of God ascending and descending on the Son of Man’.

This is a reference back to Jacob’s dream at Bethel (Genesis 28.12). Perhaps this had been included in Nathaniel’s earlier thoughts under the fig tree, as he pondered Jacob’s experience and connected it with his guile. Now he learns that a greater than Jacob is here.

Jacob received his vision when he had left home and was about to enter a strange and foreign land. It was a confirmation that God was with him and was watching over him wherever he went. The message Jesus is conveying is that He too is leaving home, aware of the period of hardship that lies ahead, and that He too will know the presence of His Father watching over Him, and will have special heavenly connections. It will be a period that will stress the closeness of His relationship with the Father, and will result in a new period of fulfilment of the promises of God, and He is indicating that Nathaniel will have a part in that future, and will come to recognise His unique relationship with the Father, and share in its blessing.

Notice again Jesus’ reference to Himself as the Son of Man. This is the title under which he constantly reveals Himself. Others have declared Him ‘the Lamb of God’, ‘the Son of God’, the King of Israel’, ‘the Messiah’, the ‘Baptiser with the Holy Spirit’, but He wishes to link Himself closely with mankind as the son of man. However, later in the Gospels the title will be seen as having greater significance as referring to the heavenly Son of Man in Daniel 7.13, and is thus a title including humiliation and glory.

Someone may still ask, how does all this fit in with the later calling of the disciples as described in the other Gospels? The answer is that this is an initial connection made with these disciples who are still disciples of John. As we have seen it is only to Philip, who had not been following John, that He says ‘follow me’ at this point. Others who are disciples of John will be called to follow later, but Jesus ever has in mind a desire not to push John to one side (see John 4.1-3). Once they have left John and returned to their businesses it will be a different matter.