Embedded Files
Nathanael Under The Fig Tree
What Happened Under The Fig Tree?
In comparison with His first meeting with all the other disciples, the first meeting of Nathanael and Jesus is the most dramatic. It is very rich in some of the details, but also says very little about other things.
John’s Gospel starts with a ‘big bang’. This incident is one of the manifestations of that ‘big bang’.
Here is how John recorded it:
Jhn 1:45 Philip found Nathanael and said to him, "We have found Him of whom Moses in the law, and also the prophets, wrote--Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Joseph."
Jhn 1:46 And Nathanael said to him, "Can anything good come out of Nazareth?" Philip said to him, "Come and see."
Jhn 1:47 Jesus saw Nathanael coming toward Him, and said of him, "Behold, an Israelite indeed, in whom is no deceit!"
Jhn 1:48 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."
Jhn 1:49 Nathanael answered and said to Him, "Rabbi, You are the Son of God! You are the King of Israel!"
Jhn 1:50 Jesus answered and said to him, "Because I said to you, 'I saw you under the fig tree,' do you believe? You will see greater things than these."
Jhn 1:51 And He said to him, "Most assuredly, I say to you, hereafter you shall see heaven open, and the angels of God ascending and descending upon the Son of Man." (NKJ)
Israelite, With No Deceit!!
There is a huge contrast between what Nathanael said of Jesus and what Jesus said of Nathanael.
We understand why Nathanael said what he said. Nathareth was a very insignificant village. And Nathanael, before knowing Jesus, was a product of his age. People at that time derived their worth from where they were born or raised as we shall see later.
But why would Jesus call him “an Israelite indeed, in whom is no deceit!" or literally “[one] truly an Israelite, in whom there is no guile.” Or as we say in Australia “a true blue[1] Israelite”
The Lord Jesus did not dish out complements or rebukes without good reason. His words were always measured to address an issue. When the Lord Jesus called the church in Sardis “dead”, it was because they had a name that they were alive. When the Lord Jesus called the church in Smyrna “rich”, it was because they were materially poor.
When the Lord Jesus renamed Simon, son of Jonah as Cephas or Peter, (The names Cephas (from Aramaic) and Peter (from Greek) both mean “rock.”), Peter was anything but a rock. He was more like a wave that rushes in, and then retreats. Peter was not dependable. Paul at one time had to rebuke him for being a hypocrite. But Jesus kept molding him and shaping him. Jesus did not give men glory so that he could receive glory from them in return.
When Jesus asked the Samaritan woman for a drink, he blew her away; a Jew treating her as if she was a clean Jewess! Knowing how she lived, no other Jew would ask her for a drink even if she was a Jewess. But Jesus did, even though she did not, apparently, actually get around giving him a drink of water.
When Jesus asked the paralytic man, “Do you want to be healed?” it was because the paralytic man was comfortable in his rut.
Every single time the Lord Jesus said to his disciples, “Do not be afraid” it was because they were very afraid.
So why would Jesus call him “an Israelite indeed, in whom is no deceit!"?
It must be that Nathanael felt anything but a ‘true-blue’ Israelite. If I knew nothing about Nathanael, and was then told that Jesus said of him that he is “an Israelite indeed, in whom is no deceit!" I would be certain Nathanael did not feel he was an Israelite at all. The Lord Jesus never lavishly bestowed complements or a rebukes on any one for no serious reason.
When the Lord Jesus said of the poor widow, who put in just two mites, that she “has put in more than all those who have given to the treasury” there was a serious reason.
So let us get to know something about Nathanael.
A Man’s Worth
Back then, and until very recently, a man’s worth was derived from his ethnic and religious roots.
Paul could boast of his “dual citizenship”: “I am a Jew from Tarsus, in Cilicia, a citizen of no mean city; and I implore you, permit me to speak to the people.” Acts 21:39
Notice Paul puts his Jewish citizenship first, then his Roman citizenship.
On another occasion Paul boasted of his Jewish credentials according to the flesh when said that he is “circumcised the eighth day, of the stock of Israel, [of] the tribe of Benjamin, a Hebrew of the Hebrews” (Phl 3:5 NKJ)
Nathanael could not say that. There was something stopping Nathanael from boasting like Paul.
What was it?
Nathanael Is Bartholomew
We know for certain that Nathanael is one of the disciples.
The Lord Jesus had twelve disciples. Their names are mentioned in Matthew 10:2-4, Mark 3:16-19 and Luke 6:13-16. For example here is the list from Matthew:
Mat 10:2 Now the names of the twelve apostles are these: first, Simon, who is called Peter, and Andrew his brother; James the [son] of Zebedee, and John his brother;
Mat 10:3 Philip and Bartholomew; Thomas and Matthew the tax collector; James the [son] of Alphaeus, and Lebbaeus, whose surname was Thaddaeus;
Mat 10:4 Simon the Cananite, and Judas Iscariot, who also betrayed Him.
Nathanael had to be one of these people. He is not Peter. He is not Andrew. He is not James. He is not Philip. He is not Thomas. He is not Matthew. He is not James son of Alphaeus. He is not Lebbaeus, whose surname was Thaddaeus. He is not He is not Simon the Cananite. He is not Judas. All these people have been “defined” for us.
The only candidate left is Bartholomew.
Indeed the NET BIBLE, quoting Smith’s Bible Dictionary, said of Bartholomew (son of Tolmai), one of the twelve apostles of Christ, (Matthew 10:3; Mark 3:18; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13) “It has been not improperly conjectured that he is identical with Nathanael.”
The Bible Gateway says: ‘Bartholomew son of Tolmai, one of the twelve apostles (Matt. 10:3; Acts 1:13); [is] generally supposed to have been the same as Nathanael. In the synoptic gospels Philip and Bartholomew are always mentioned together, while Nathanael is never mentioned; in the fourth gospel, on the other hand, Philip and Nathanael are similarly mentioned together, but nothing is said of Bartholomew’.[2]
And MURRAY'S ILLUSTRATE BIBLE DICTIONARY notes that:
“Bartholomew, [is] one of the Twelve, of whom nothing is recorded,
unless he is to be identified with NATHANAEL.”[3]
So Nathanael is Bartholomew. It is the one person with two names.
Nathanael is a Jewish name. Bartholomew is a Gentile name that means ‘the son of Ptolemy’.
Nathanael, at best, had a Jewish mother and a Greek father, like Timothy, the one to whom Paul wrote. So he is 50% Jew.
But notice he is either Nathanael or Bartholomew. The two names are never combined. He is never mentioned as Nathanael Barltholomew.
What Is In A Name?
Why was Nathanael given ONLY the name “son of Ptolemy”? Why he was not called say, “Nemo son of Ptolemy, or Timon son of Ptolemy?"
People are called Joshua the son of Nun, or John the son of Zacharias, or Simon the son of Jonah, or James the [son] of Alphaeus. Why is the first name missing? Why was he just “son of Ptolemy?
In the Middle East when a person’s first name is not mentioned, it is a form of insult or a sign of insignificance.
Listen to how Sarah described Ishmael, Abraham’s son:
Gen 21:9 And Sarah saw the son of Hagar the Egyptian, whom she had borne to Abraham, scoffing. Gen 21:10 Therefore she said to Abraham, "Cast out this bondwoman and her son; for the son of this bondwoman shall not be heir with my son, [namely] with Isaac."
Ishmael is mentioned as the “son of Hagar” or “the son of the bondwoman”
Also notice how Bartimaeus was described: “blind Bartimaeus, the son of Timaeus, sat by the road begging. Mar 10:46
Nobody bothered to find out what was Bartimaeus’ first name. He is just a blind beggar, Bar Timaeus (son of Timaeus)
And see how the Jews described Jesus, when they wanted to put Him down: “Is this not the carpenter, the Son of Mary?” (Mar 6:3)
Nathanael was just the “son of Ptolemy”. This was more of an insult than a name. And it stuck.
Someone must have named him Nathanael, but others called him “son of Ptolemy”. Did Ptolemy give his son a name?
Nathanael was carrying a huge burden.
As soon as Jesus met Nathanael, He wanted to roll this burden away. Jesus did not only say of Nathanael that he is a “true blue Jew”, He added that there was even no guile in him. For Jesus to go to the length of saying there is even “no guile in him” is extraordinary. Jesus wanted to make sure that Nathanael believed that he is one hundred percent Jewish in spite of his background, with not the slightest trace of “estrangement”.
What was it that made Nathanael feel so “estranged”, so un-Israelite?
This is my first question. The next question is:
What Happened Under The Fig Tree?
Jesus’ words to Nathanael must have startled him. It was natural for Nathanael to ask: 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."
Jhn 1:49 Nathanael answered and said to Him, "Rabbi, You are the Son of God! You are the King of Israel!"
Jesus’ mention of what happened under the fig tree shook Nathanael’s innermost being to such an extent that it engendered in him a burst of faith such as can parallel that of Simon Peter’s confession: "You arethe Christ, the Son of the living God.” Mat 16:16
It can also be second to Thomas’ cry “My Lord and My God”
What did happen under the fig tree?
The first two people who can find an answer to my two questions, an answer that will make sense of the many clues I have provided above, (I know it will be a guess, but so have many people guessed) will have free figs from my farm during the 2012 season (that is, if you can come to my farm). I will acknowledge their answer as part of my answer to these two questions in this article. I want you to have the chance to think of an answer before I tell you mine.
Please note you must guess the answer to the two questions, not just the first one.
And here is my final clue: Nathanael means “gift from God”.
Please feel free to ask any questions.
The fig Farmer
NOW YOU CAN PROCEED TO:
WHAT HAPPENED UNDER THE FIG TREE?
Dear reader, apparently Google does not allow comments on websites like mine.
However, if you email me your comments, I will publish them under this article.
Just click on my email address and type away. Thanks.
The fig Farmer
[1] . 'True blue' is supposed to derive from the blue cloth that was made at Coventry, England in the late middle ages. The town's dyers had a reputation for producing material that didn't fade with washing, i.e. it remained 'fast' or 'true'.
[2] . http://www.biblegateway.com/resources/dictionaries/dict_meaning.php?source=1&wid=T0000457&interface=print&interface=print
[3] . http://www.archive.org/stream/murraysillustrat00pierrich/murraysillustrat00pierrich_djvu.txt
Google Sites
Report abuse