John 1:43-51

43 The next day Jesus decided to leave for Galilee. Finding Philip, he said to him, “Follow me.”

 44 Philip, like Andrew and Peter, was from the town of Bethsaida. 45 Philip found Nathanael and told him, “We have found the one Moses wrote about in the Law, and about whom the prophets also wrote—Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Joseph.”

 46 “Nazareth! Can anything good come from there?” Nathanael asked.

   “Come and see,” said Philip.

 47 When Jesus saw Nathanael approaching, he said of him, “Here truly is an Israelite in whom there is no deceit.”

 48 “How do you know me?” Nathanael asked.

   Jesus answered, “I saw you while you were still under the fig tree before Philip called you.”

 49 Then Nathanael declared, “Rabbi, you are the Son of God; you are the king of Israel.”

 50 Jesus said, “You believe because I told you I saw you under the fig tree. You will see greater things than that.” 51 He then added, “Very truly I tell you, you will see ‘heaven open, and the angels of God ascending and descending on’ the Son of Man.”

John 1:1-18, meet Philip, a very average man. Not much is known about Philip and he is only scarcely mentioned throughout the gospels. And when he does appear in the story his role is neither great nor terrible, mostly just forgettable. A good example of this is when some Romans come to him looking for Jesus. He doesn’t know what to do, semi-panics, and fetches another disciple, who, without thinking twice, brings the Romans to Jesus. But this is the man Jesus calls. In fact, in John’s gospel, Philip is the only man that Jesus calls. And Philip, having spent an unspecified amount of time with Jesus (though probably less than more) responds beautifully, as did the previous disciples. Having collided with John 1:1-18 Philip is compelled to tell somebody about what the heck he has just experienced, and the first person that comes to mind is Nathanael.

Nathanael, it seems, was at least a good friend to Philip and was likely well hearsed in Jewish scriptures, hence Philip’s description of the man he has just encountered as “We have found the one Moses wrote about in the Law, and about whom the prophets also wrote”. That’s quite a claim for a Philip of Bethsaida to make. But, then again, he just collided with John 1:1-18. And Nathanael, hitherto lacking the privilege of colliding with John 1:1-18, responds as anyone would who is told by average Joe not only that he’s just met the man predicted throughout all of the scriptures, but that this man is from Galilee, the Visalia of Fresno, the Bakersfield of San Luis Obispo, the Clippers of the Lakers, the Starbucks of Kean. Verse 46: “Can anything good come from Bakersfield?” A solid question in its own right, Philip doesn’t even blink. “Come and see”, he says. Philip- with a smirk? a big goofy grin? who knows- invites, welcomes, dares Nathanael to see for himself. Intrigued, Nathanael accepts the dare.

 Jesus saw Philip and Nathanael approaching. In the Greek the language here implies that Jesus looked searchingly, probingly at Nathanael before he speaks. The words he chooses are humorous yet profound in a way that fails to translate to English. The phrase “Here truly is an Israelite in whom there is no deceit” draws on the story of Jacob in Genesis, where he is described, before having his name changed to Israel, as having deceit or guile. Thus Jesus is introduces Nathanael to the other disciples with a word play: “Here truly is an Israelite in whom there is no Jacob”. But there is more than word play going on. Jesus’ introduction/description of Nathanael, viewed in its first century Jewish context, is also a supremely high compliment. The quality of having no deceit is ascribed in the Psalms to the one who is to liberate Israel in the last days, a fact that would not have been lost on Nathanael’s ears. And he replies, “how do you know me?”, a question which obviously implies his acceptance that Jesus does in fact know him.

Jesus’ response is interesting. “I saw you while you were still under the fig tree before Philip called you”. A seemingly normal response, Jesus probably saw Nathanael the day before under a tree and remembered his face. But if this is all Jesus is saying then why such an extravagant reaction on the part of Nathanael? Jesus has said about 20 words to Nathanael, who originally approached Jesus with skepticism and doubt, but Jesus already has him addressing him as “Rabbi” (master, teacher), “Son of God” (not yet understood as only begotten son of the father, but a person whose relationship to God is of unsurpassable intimacy and quality), and “the King of Israel” (self-explanatory, but means Nate has confessed this man to be his literal king). Though it’s true that all these categories that Nathanael is invoking will be redefined by the cross and resurrection, he is, nevertheless, using the very strongest language at his disposal to answer to the mysterious Galilean.

So what the heck did Jesus mean, or what the heck did Nathanael hear, when Jesus said he saw him under the fig tree before Philip brought him? Perhaps Jesus’ confession that he saw Nathanael before Philip brought him meant more than he remembered his face from the other day? Perhaps there is some significance to Jesus’ description of the tree Nathanael was under as a fig tree? At this point a level of caution is appropriate, as it always is when scripture takes us down mysterious roads with very few signposts. The reader is free to ride the symbols and metaphors as far as they like with the danger lying in their riding them right off the page, far beyond the scope of the author’s intention and the possibilities of the symbolic world. But reasonable exploration is healthy and in cases such as these, is encouraged by the text. The fig tree, used frequently throughout the Old Testament as a symbol for Israel, was also commonly used to study scripture under, meet with rabbis under, and pray and meditate under because of its broad leaves that provided shade on hot days. Looking at Jesus’ statement through the lens of Nathanael’s response, it’s possible that there is some correlation between what Nathanael was doing under the fig tree and Jesus’ confession of seeing him there. Remember, this Galilean is John 1:1-18. Anything is possible, though Jesus isn’t omnipresent, omniscient, or omnipotent (qualities he surrendered in the incarnation, i.e. Philippians 2). But it remains likely that Jesus saw, met, encountered Nathanael supernaturally while Nathanael was engaging with his Creator in one of the ways mentioned above. Of course, Jesus is Nathanael’s creator, and despite his incarnated state is capable of such an encounter, even though Nathanael is not capable of knowing such a fact at this point in time. It seems that Nathanael, upon his collision with John 1:1-18, is at least aware that he is encountering a person who stretches the linguistic categories available to him.  Nathanael has encountered- at least -transcendent, holy mystery.

And Jesus isn’t done. And that’s what he tells them (in the Greek it’s clear Jesus is now addressing multiple people, presumably disciples). They will see greater things than that (than his encounter with Nathanael). “Very truly I tell you”, emphasizing the truth and importance of what is about to be said, “you will see heaven open, and the angels of God ascending and descending on the Son of Man”. A loaded statement indeed, Jesus is combining two extravagant stories in the Old Testament to describe the significance of his life. The former image, of angels ascending and descending from earth and heaven, comes from Genesis 28. Jacob has a dream of this taking place over the place he is sleeping and, accompanied by the significance of the words he hears God speak to him, is compelled to build an altar when he wakes up. The dream spoke to the unique presence (literally, functionally, and in the future) of God in that place. The Son of Man reference comes from a vision in Daniel 7 where “one like a son of man” is lifted by clouds into the presence of the Ancient of Days. In the vision the son of man is the representative of the people of Israel, whose ascension on clouds to the throne symbolizes his/Israel’s vindication before the world. So how do these two Old Testament references function in John 1:51? Basically Jesus, in the way he combines these references and phrases the statement, is claiming to be both the Son of Man and the place over which heaven is communicating with earth (communication between heaven and earth being the implication of the angelic imagery).  Now notice the language in the text: Jesus is speaking in the future-tense to the disciples, while I just spoke in the present; Jesus is speaking in the future tense, of a coming event, but the event he’s speaking of is their seeing. In other words Jesus, John 1:1-18 walking around Palestine, already is the locus of divine communication between heaven and earth, but the day is coming when the disciples will see this. He is promising the opening of their eyes, a new understanding, insight into the mystery that stands before them and presses their categories of understanding to their very limits.

And so ends chapter one. John has brought us through the prologue, the witness of the Baptist and his struggle to get people to follow Jesus, and then to Jesus himself. Few are drawn to him, fewer are called by him, but these few encounter the Galilean in such a way that they are immediately propelled back out to their little worlds, only to draw fragments of those little worlds back in to Jesus. The promise of verse 51 closes the beginning of the story in a way that’s fitting for those first disciples and readers alike, testifying to the truth of verses 1-18 while propelling them/us into the rest of the story: “You are all awed by the way I’ve interacted with you so far, well you haven’t seen anything yet. Soon you will begin to grasp just who it is I am because, indeed, I am”.

Check out costamesahandymanservices.com