Calling His Disciples (part 2)

Looking at the first chapter of John then for the initial calling of disciples, an observer finds himself in the setting of the event of Jesus’ baptism by John the Baptist.  On the day after the baptism, “John was standing there with two of his disciples.  Gazing at Jesus as He walked by, he said, ‘Look, the lamb of God!’  When John’s two disciples heard him say this, they followed Jesus” (1:35-37).  Momentarily, it is learned that one of these disciples was Andrew, though Jesus is not heard calling him to follow.  Instead, the author reports that “Jesus turned around and saw them following and said to them, ‘What do you want?’  So they said to Him, ‘Rabbi’ (which is translated Teacher), ‘where are you staying?’  Jesus answered, ‘Come and you will see.’  So they came and saw where He was staying, and they stayed with Him that day.  Now it was about four o’clock in the afternoon” (1:38-39).  The use of “they stayed with Him that day” seems to convey a double meaning, indicating that they stayed with Jesus at the place where He was staying, while also indicating the fact that they stayed with Jesus from that point forward. 

Immediately after that, one goes on to learn that “Andrew, the brother of Simon Peter, was one of the two disciples who heard what John said and followed Jesus.  He first found his own brother Simon and told him, ‘We have found the Messiah!’ (which is translated Christ).  Andrew brought Simon to Jesus.  Jesus looked at him and said, ‘You are Simon, the son of John.  You will be called Cephas’ (which is translated Peter).  On the next day Jesus wanted to set out for Galilee” (1:40-43a).  It should be noted that in contrast to Mark, Matthew, and Luke, there is no mention whatsoever of fishing, Andrew and Simon are not together, Jesus does not explicitly call either to follow Him, and they are not even in the region of Galilee.

In Mark, Matthew, and Luke, Jesus moves directly from calling Andrew and Simon, to calling James and John, who, according to Luke, are all partners in the fishing business.  The fishing motif is strong.  In John, the story moves from the non-call of Andrew and Simon, who are not portrayed as fishermen, to the very first overt call by Jesus, which is to Philip.  The story of this call is completely absent from the other three Gospels.  Having learned that Jesus wanted to set out for Galilee, it is reported that “He found Philip and said to him, ‘Follow me.’  (Now Philip was from Bethsaida, the town of Andrew and Peter.)  Philip found Nathanael and told him, ‘We have found the one Moses wrote about in the law, and the prophets also wrote about---Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Joseph.’  Nathanael replied, ‘can anything good come out of Nazareth?’  Philip replied, ‘Come and see.’” (1:43b-46) 

So rather than moving from calling Andrew and Simon to calling James and John, the story of Jesus’ gaining of disciples moves to Philip and Nathanael.  Expanding on a previous notation and emphasizing that the calls of Philip and Nathanael are to be found only here in John’s Gospel, one could surmise that this probably serves as an indication that they were somehow connected to the community for which this record of Jesus is composed.  It is also worth noting that it is Philip, in fact, who is the one that calls Nathanael, rather than Jesus, which will be reinforced momentarily. 

Moving along to that instance then, “Jesus saw Nathaniel coming toward Him and exclaimed, ‘Look, a true Israelite in whom there is no deceit!’  Nathanael asked Him, ‘How do you know me?’  Jesus replied, ‘Before Philip called you, when you were under the fig tree, I saw you.’  Nathanael answered him, ‘Rabbi, you are the Son of God; you are the king of Israel!’  Jesus said to him, ‘Because I told you that I saw you under the fig tree, do you believe?  You will see greater things than these.’  He continued, ‘I tell all of you the solemn truth---you will see heaven opened and the angels of God ascending and descending on the Son of Man.’” (1:47-51) 

Thus ends the record, in John, of Jesus’ “calling” of disciples (“calling” is in quotes because only Philip is explicitly commanded to follow).  So not only does John not provide a record of the calling of James and John, there is no forsaking of occupation (fishing) or of family (James and John leaving their father), as is to be found in the rest of the Gospels, which simply serves as a reminder that John’s Gospel is quite unique in many ways.  

Raising Lazarus For Glory (part 8)

To this point, this study has traversed a chapter and a half of the Gospel of John, with the bulk of the trek related in some way to the death and raising of Lazarus.  On two occasions, mention has been made of the glory of the Creator God in connection with the raising.  The first mention of the Creator God’s glory was upon Jesus’ hearing about Lazarus’ sickness.  The second time was in response to Martha’s insistence that Lazarus would stink, having already been in the tomb for four days.  Both times would lead the reader to believe that Lazarus’ raising itself was that which would reveal the glory of the covenant God, but further observation will allow one to conclude that such was not necessarily the case. 

Immediately after the Pharisees can be heard saying, “Look, the world has run off after Him” (John 12:19b), in reference to the welcome of Jesus into Jerusalem as King, one goes on to read, “Now some Greeks were among those who had gone up to worship at the feast.  So these approached Philip, who was from Bethsaida in Galilee, and requested, ‘Sir, we would like to see Jesus.’  Philip went and told Andrew, and they both went and told Jesus” (12:20-22). 

It can be presumed that the Greeks that were in Jerusalem for Passover had seen (or at least heard about) this rousing welcome of Jesus, having also, along with the teeming masses, learned at least some information about the raising of Lazarus and the growing number of people that were, because of that raising, looking to Jesus as the Messiah.  It can also be imagined that these Greeks, in making inquiries about this Jesus fellow, who was now being loudly hailed as Messiah, had learned about some of His rather strange practices of regularly interacting with Gentiles.  Though they were Greeks, since they were in Jerusalem for Passover, it is likely that they had adopted the covenant markers (the works of the law), and were justified (saved, righteous, part of the covenant people).  It is the combination of a number of factors that most likely served to induce these Greeks to ask Jesus’ disciples for an audience with Jesus. 

Because they were in Jerusalem for Passover, and therefore in recognition of the Creator God’s covenant and His covenant people, which was likely indicated by their adoption of covenant markers themselves, it can also be deduced that they were aware of what were taken to be the prophecies of messiah, and would have been especially keyed in on those prophecies which clearly showed forth the messiah as so much more than a messiah for ethnic and national Jews alone, but which, according to some readings, announced a messiah for all peoples and all nations. 

It is worthwhile to attempt an examination of the scenario, in an attempt to determine why it was that they would want to see Jesus.  What was their peculiar motivation?  It is quite possible that, even though they were Greeks (Gentiles) that recognized the covenant and the covenant people, and even though they were in Jerusalem to recognize the Creator God’s saving deliverance in association with the Passover, that they were systematically excluded from full fellowship with those of ethnic and national Israel, even if they kept to the covenant marker of circumcision, along with the food and Sabbath laws. 

With the “Jesus situation,” combined with their understanding of a presumed understanding of the messiah as a figure that would transcend the traditional covenant boundaries, they desired to see Jesus.  A direct audience with the one being hailed as messiah could certainly put these controversial issues to rest.  The question was, with the knowledge that they were Gentiles, would He see them or would He rebuff them---putting them off as unworthy, regardless of potential bearing of covenant markers, because they were not of Israelite descent?