John 1:35-51 | The First Step
Notes
Transcript
So we're picking up today where we left off last week in the Book of John, John 1:35.
Last week we looked at the story of Jesus being baptized by John the Baptist, and we looked at this three-day process that involved some very important events.
Now we're coming into the third day in John 1:35, and we would see Jesus immediately after his baptism began to assemble a group of men that would aid him in his ministry.
What's particularly interesting is this group of men would probably be the most unlikely group of men that you could pick to aid in the most important ministry to ever exist on earth.
So let's jump right into it. Let's look at John 1:35, pick up where we left off last week.
Again, the next day, John stood with two of his disciples. And looking at Jesus as He walked, he said, “Behold the Lamb of God!”
So again, we looked at this last week, how the timing can be somewhat confusing here, but if you remember, Jesus is baptized by John, and then the next day he comes back to where John is, and then we see this response from John the Baptist.
And the response is this: "Behold the Lamb of God."
So we've clearly seen that John now, through the baptism of Christ, understands who Jesus is and what he is there to do.
Now we see for the first time this public proclamation that John is giving of Jesus and calling him the Lamb of God.
I think it's interesting to note that John understood perfectly who Jesus was and what he came to do at this time.
Later, we will see the disciples that follow Jesus are consistently confused to some aspect, and we may incorrectly think that more of Jesus' mission was hidden than actually was.
However, we see clearly at this point that even John the Baptist before the ministry of Jesus understood perfectly what his mission was.
His mission was simply to come as the Son of God, to become a man, live a perfect life, teach, perform miracles, heal, and then die on a cross for sins.
Now also note that in verse 35 we see two disciples that are mentioned. These are not disciples of Jesus, as these are disciples of John.
Now, the term disciples just means follower or someone who would travel alongside someone, would put themselves under their authority to learn and to observe them.
We see John would have gained quite a following at this point.
We see from even other passages of Scripture, even moving all the way into the book of Acts, that John's influence would travel across this part of the world.
And so, just like Jesus would have disciples, John has disciples, and this is where Jesus would find his first followers.
So let's see how Jesus picks his first two disciples.
The two disciples heard him speak, and they followed Jesus. Then Jesus turned, and seeing them following, said to them, “What do you seek?”
They said to Him, “Rabbi” (which is to say, when translated, Teacher), “where are You staying?”
He said to them, “Come and see.” They came and saw where He was staying, and remained with Him that day (now it was about the tenth hour).
Now I want to stop here for a second because this passage addresses a very serious misunderstanding about the calling of Jesus' disciples.
You remember there were four gospels that tell the account of the same time period, many similar events, the ministry of Jesus. That is Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John.
In Matthew In Mark, we see the story of the calling of these disciples, and initially we can come to assumptions that are just not true based on the lack of information in those Gospels.
We won't spend too much time on their account of the calling of the disciples; however, what we see in those accounts is Jesus approaching these men who are fishing, and he calls them to follow him.
And the assumption is that Jesus comes upon these men who he's never met, who he knows nothing about them, and somehow supernaturally convinces them to drop everything on the spot and follow him.
I think this is unsettling to some because it almost appears like a coercion.
Why would anyone in their right minds, who is fishing, see someone come upon them, tell them to follow him, someone they've never met, and they drop their entire life, their entire way of living, everything they've known, and just follow this man?
This can even be taken so far as to serve as a picture of how we should follow Christ.
That we should be expected to have such a blind faith that, regardless of the calling, the circumstances, we just drop everything and follow with no basis for why.
And as you can see, this can be a very dangerous misunderstanding.
What this can lead to is this mindset that if God is calling someone to something, that they are expected to blindly follow and drop everything on a whim to do that.
Now, if God is truly calling that individual, yes, we should have that faith. We should have that desire to drop everything and follow. However, the issue comes in truly knowing what God is calling us to do.
And from this example in Matthew and Mark, it would appear that we should be ready for a random calling with no background, no understanding, no context to come at any time. And then we should be willing to drop everything and follow that.
And again, if this is truly the case, we should; however, we don't see God generally call in this way.
Consistently throughout Scripture, when someone is called to something (a position in ministry, a specific job, repentance), there is factual evidence and proof that precedes that calling.
When Jesus Speaks to the woman at the well. He doesn't walk up to her and immediately tell her, "Repent and follow me."
Instead, he has a discussion with her. He reveals her sin in a supernatural way, giving her a reason to believe what he says.
Then he proceeds to explain who he is and How she should proceed in light of the gospel and her sentence
When God calls the Apostle Paul to ministry, He supernaturally blinds him, speaks to him audibly, gives him the calling, gives him the direction. This is another example of a great misunderstanding that we often get.
In the account of Paul's conversion at the beginning of Acts, we would tend to believe that there is a very short calling, direction, and Paul blindly follows.
However, later we see Paul recounting also the book of Acts, what happened, and he gives far more details. Details such as the fact that God explains to him exactly what his calling would be, what he is to do, and what the results will look like.
So in this case as well, we see that God gives us logical reasons to follow.
He never expects us to believe with a blind faith.
Jesus did not one day come onto the scene with no proof, no background, no context, and start asking individuals to blindly follow someone they've never met.
And this is what we see in John: this missing piece filled in.
In the book of John, we see that these two disciples that follow Jesus are disciples of John.
These are not unbelievers. These are men who have been baptized already into repentance. They are looking for the Savior, and they are actively following the ministry of John the Baptist.
Then we see in verse 37 and 38 of John 1 that they, in reaction to John proclaiming who this man is and potentially personally seeing him baptized and the Holy Spirit come upon him, start to follow him.
Understand the timeline. At this point, Jesus has not called them to anything.
In fact, even when they are following Jesus, Jesus doesn't coerce them into following him against their will or unknowingly. Rather, he responds, "What do you want? What do you seek?" (Verse 38)
And they call them teacher and say, "Rabbi, where are you staying?" They want to see the context.
This is so important. The first interaction Jesus has with these two men isn't a random interaction, a blind confrontation, and then a calling that they follow with no logical reason to do so.
We see a slow progression where they come to know who Jesus is and desire to follow him before he ever calls them.
Jesus asked them what they want, why they're following him. They ask him, "Where are you staying?"
Notice how Jesus responds in verse 39.
He said to them, “Come and see.” They came and saw where He was staying, and remained with Him that day (now it was about the tenth hour).
So even now they have desired to come follow Jesus. He tells them to come and see where he's staying, basically just inviting them to his home. There's nothing really supernatural here going on, and they just hang out.
They stay with him the rest of the day. No calling yet. No mission laid out. Just fellowship.
One of the two who heard John speak, and followed Him, was Andrew, Simon Peter’s brother. He first found his own brother Simon, and said to him, “We have found the Messiah” (which is translated, the Christ).
So we get even more very, very important information here that's often missed in the calling of the disciples.
We see This disciple of John named Andrew. It's now fall. Jesus has spent the day with him, and he wants to go tell his brother that he has found the Messiah. He's found the Christ.
He's been following John the Baptist. John the Baptist has proclaimed for some time now that a savior would come, that Christ would come, the Messiah and Andrew has found him. John has confirmed this, and he is excited to go share what he's found.
So he goes to his brother, Simon, and he brings him to Jesus.
Now notice what Jesus says to Simon.
And he brought him to Jesus.
Now when Jesus looked at him, He said, “You are Simon the son of Jonah. You shall be called Cephas” (which is translated, A Stone).
So here we see the first indication that Jesus affirms who he is through supernatural means.
Simon comes to Jesus. Jesus looks at him. He doesn't ask who he is. He tells him who he is.
It says you are Simon, son of Jonah, but you now will be called Cephas.
This word, Cephas, is translated to a stone.
Now, there are many different reasons for this, I believe.
I don't believe it is correct to narrow down this naming to one specific purpose.
Simon began this ministry as a humble fisherman, and he would end up holding a foundational role in the beginning of the church.
It would be the steadfastness and the strength that Simon would have that would be integral to the Early church, staying united and strong in their faith
So I think this name change is multi-faceted. I think it indicates his change from humility and status to someone that must lead. I think it shows his character of one that would need to become steadfast. I think there is an indication of a foundational aspect of who he would be in the early church. I think it applies to many different things, and we shouldn't narrow down its meaning too specifically.
And we saw earlier that this Simon in verse 40 is called Simon Peter.
So you know this disciple, as he'll be called most commonly throughout the rest of the Gospels as Peter, not Simon.
It can be difficult to keep track of the different names that it appears many individuals have in Scripture.
Often you'll see someone called by one name and then called by a completely different name. It can be confusing.
The reason for this is really quite simple. It's due to the context of the environment that they lived in.
They were Jews living in a Greek-influenced Roman environment. Because of this, They would often have a Jewish Hebrew name and then a Greek name, and they would go by whatever name was most appropriate.
We see this to be the case with Paul, as his Hebrew-oriented name was Saul. He later identifies himself more so as Paul because it helps him in identifying with his Gentile audience better.
You know this if you know someone from another country that has come to America. Often they will have their traditional name that will be clearly in their language, and then they will have a common name that maybe they've just chosen randomly or as some sort of an adjustment from their true name.
Now, what can also be somewhat confusing is that it appears that these names are very similar. What's the difference in Saul or Paul or Simon and Peter? It doesn't appear there's a cultural difference really between these.
And the reason for this, understand, is that these names, along with the rest of the words in Scripture, are translated into English.
So we have multiple layers of translation. These Hebrew names are translated and transliterated into English, and what would have been their Hebrew name is now converted to an English sense. Their Greek name was already more identifiable with English, so now we end up with what appears to be two similar names and culture, but in reality they would have been very different.
For example, there has been a great amount of controversy over the name of Jesus recently.
The name of Jesus would not have been the actual pronunciation, the name that he would have been called while he was on earth.
His Hebrew name that he would've been called by was Yeshua, and Yeshua would've been the pronunciation of what he was called.
Now, this has brought up a lot of debate recently, and some even take it as far as to say that if someone is saved or calls on the name of Jesus, that they are not truly saved because that was not his name.
They would try to claim that there's a great belief in a false gospel, that Satan has somehow twisted this name from its original meaning, and that serves as a loophole that we can't be saved by the name of Jesus.
I understand this is obviously illogical if I call myself Pastor Zach or Pastor Zachary, and so one calls me Zach and another calls me Zachary. That does not mean that one of those is not my name.
There are different means by which names are used, and as long as the individual that that name has been addressed to is the same individual, then the Pronunciation is not important.
Even the name Jesus is pronounced differently across different languages today.
So here we see Simon Peter, who we'll reference as Peter moving forward (that's what he's most commonly referenced as), receives this nickname as Cephas, which is translated as "stone”
So now we move into John 1:43, and this is the following day. We have four back-to-back days here that are very, very important in the beginning of Jesus' ministry.
The following day Jesus wanted to go to Galilee, and He found Philip and said to him, “Follow Me.”
Oh, so Zach, it appears that everything you just said is not true. Now Jesus goes to another man, Philip, randomly calls him, and if he's never met, to just follow him.
While it may appear that way, we quickly see in Scripture through context that this is still not the case.
Now Philip was from Bethsaida, the city of Andrew and Peter. 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.”
Notice what we see here is that Philip is from the city of Andrew and Peter. Very small city. Tight-knit. He was probably in their circle, but then notice how, when he finds Nathanael, what he says.
He doesn't say I was fishing, and some random guy who had never met comes up and told me to follow him. He says we have found him of whom Moses and the law and also the prophets wrote: Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Joseph.
So what we see here is not that Jesus is again calling us to blind faith or calling Philip to blindly follow him, but rather we see a lack of information.
And through implication, we can see that Philip was most likely very aware of Jesus and was probably in the same discipleship or even under the same authority as John the Baptist.
He was looking for the savior. He says the very similar announcement: we have found him, the one we've been looking for. This is what John would have been calling them to do.
So we have a very similar story here. We have an individual who is aware of who Jesus is. Jesus comes and now calls this one, Philip, to actually follow him to become his disciple. Philip tells Nathaniel that he's found him, and notice how Nathaniel says,
And Nathanael said to him, “Can anything good come out of Nazareth?”
Philip said to him, “Come and see.”
I think this is such a good parallel because Nathanael is in the position that we traditionally think the disciples were
Nathanael hasn't met Jesus. He knows nothing about this man. All he is going off of is the witness of someone else who says that they have seen him.
And he reacts in a way that some take to be overly critical or unbelieving, but in fact, I think he reacts the most logically.
It did not make sense for this savior prophesied one, even if Nathanael was in the same circle. He was looking for this messiah. It wouldn't make sense, based on the information he was given and the lack of context, that the savior would have come out of Nazareth.
I love the response of Phillip. Phillip doesn't try to justify; he doesn't try to convince. He just points him in the direction.
I think this is such a good example of how we should respond to those who don't have the same interaction with Christ, the same relationship that we have.
Because we are taking our context of who Christ is, our personal relationship, our experiences with him, we expect that others should have that same understanding that we have.
And then when they don't, we either chalk it up to them rejecting the gospel, or them being defensive, or them just not getting it, but in fact they're just responding logically.
Why would they follow someone who they don't know, just based on your word?
Why would they believe something that does not make logical sense to them?
Why would Nathaniel just believe the word of Philip and just blindly follow this person who he has no logical reason to believe?
And Philip gets this. Instead of Philip trying to convince him to change his logic, he says, "Let me show you the evidence."
And this should be our response to those who we try to share the gospel
Our mission should not be "Let me try to tell you what you should think."
Our mission should not be: let me try to put the heart I have for Jesus in someone else.
The mission should be: I will point them to the one who I believe in.
I will give them the same evidence that caused me to believe.
We can share the gospel with Jesus. He changed my life. This person who you don't believe in changed my life, saved me from sins, and you should just believe it because I believe it.
We wonder why this call to the gospel never works.
We wonder why people are so critical.
Instead, if we approach them with: "I believe in Jesus because this is what the Bible says. I trust the Bible. You have to change my life, and I think you can change your life too. I believe in him because someone told me about him, or I read it in his word, or I observed the world around me and came to this conclusion that was further supported by Scripture. The power of the Holy Spirit drew me to this truth. Drew me to the Gospel. Then I was saved, and this change in my life was even more evidence that this is real. This is true, and Jesus is who he says he is."
Then their response can't be: 'Why just don't believe what you believe?' Their Their response has to be, "I don't agree with that evidence," and they have to have a reason why. That's so much easier to discuss.
So Nathanael goes and sees Jesus, and Jesus ridicules him for doubting, right?
Jesus saw Nathanael coming toward Him, and said of him, “Behold, an Israelite indeed, in whom is no deceit!”
Now I think there is a fair amount of evidence to take this one of two ways.
One way to take this is that Jesus is being somewhat sarcastic.
Because Nathanael referenced that nothing good could come out of Nazareth, referring to Jesus, that Jesus responds sarcastically or critically, like, 'Oh, an Israelite, a perfect Israelite.'
I think there's very much evidence that this isn't actually the case.
Without getting too deep into it, based on the context and even the Greek that she used, I think it's likely that Jesus is being very serious here.
Jesus is actually saying, "Look, you are an Israelite without the deceit and without the Lies and without the sinful controlling nature of the Israelites of the day
I think this is probably the case because I believe if Jesus would have responded to him in a way that is sarcastic, Nathanael would have responded defensively or in another sarcastic way.
But notice what he says.
Nathanael said to Him, “How do You know me?”
Nathaniel doesn't appear to be responding to someone who has just critically attacked him in some way, even if it was sarcastic. He responds with sort of an exposure.
Your response with this language: how does this person know my heart as an Israelite?
I notice Jesus is answering.
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.”
You know, we see here in the call to Nathanael evidence.
How we would Normally, we look at the calling of the Disciples. We would think Jesus should have expected Nathaniel to just believe.
We would have expected Jesus to say something along the lines of, "Just follow me. I'm God. You should just believe in me. You should just have faith," but he doesn't. He answers this question with logic.
He gives him the evidence that he was supernaturally able to see when Philip came and told him under the fig tree, specifically where Nathanael was sitting, of who he was.
And he not only says that, but he says, "I saw you before that, before he called you into the fig tree, I knew who you were."
He gives evidence to Nathanael. Here's something that nobody else would know. This is proof that I have a power. I don't claim that power to be from Satan or some other means, so this power's from God.
And now, with that witness and the claim that Jesus knew him even before that, that he has always known who he is, not just this single event. On top of the claims of Philip, Andrew, and John the Baptist, Nathanael has logical reasons to believe in this man.
And he does.
Nathanael answered and said to Him, “Rabbi, You are the Son of God! You are the King of Israel!”
Nathanael didn't see Jesus approaching him and immediately say, "That's Jesus, that's the Son of God."
John the Baptist didn't see Jesus approaching him. He immediately called Him the Son of God, as some think.
Philip and Andrew weren't in a boat, and Jesus came and told them to follow him randomly, a man they never met, and they dropped everything and followed him.
In all these cases, Jesus revealed to them who he was and provided proof of who he was, whether it was:
through the dove, the Holy Spirit descending on him
the Father declaring who he is to all at his baptism
the evidence of him telling Nathanael the supernatural way of something that happened that he couldn't have known
In all these cases, he gives them proof and evidence. No blind faith is required.
And it's interesting that we would think this would be a no-brainer. That if we were Nathanael and Jesus told us this and he knew at this event that we would just immediately drop everything and believe in everything the man says. I don't think we would.
I think we'd still be doubtful, and I think even Jesus thought this, because then we saw Jesus' response to Nathanael.
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.”
Jesus is shocked that that's all it took for him to believe.
It's Israeli just because I said that I saw you under the fig tree. That's cause you to believe.
Jesus says, "If that's the kind of faith you have, you're gonna see much greater things than just this."
And He gives them this incredible promise. Notice this in John 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.”
Now there's some debate as to what Jesus is referring to here, but I feel somewhat confident, as do many other scholars, in what he's referencing.
There isn't really a specific future prophecy of this occurring.
We don't really see anything in Revelation or later in the ministry of Jesus that would indicate this event as Jesus has described it happening.
However, we do see an indication earlier in Scripture of an event very similar to this.
In Genesis 28, see the story of a man named Jacob. There's this vision, and in this vision, angels are going up to heaven and coming back down to earth in this cycle.
Jacob's name would later be changed to Israel, and he would have twelve sons, who'd be the twelve tribes of Israel. Then all the Israelite Jewish descendants would come from those sons.
And so, in light of Jesus just referencing Nathanael as an Israelite who actually has no deceit in him, it seems to identify with Jacob.
Why? Because Jacob was known for his deceit.
You may know Jacob as the one who stole the birthright And blessing from his brother Esau by deceiving him And his father
Jacob was the core of the deceit of Israel. And it seems like an odd coincidence that Jesus would reference Nathanael as being a descendant of this Jacob whose name was changed to Israel, who doesn't have to seed in him. And then immediately after, he references this very same scene that Jacob witnessed, and the question is why?
Well, as Jacob could only see this vision of what appears to be a communication somehow between heaven, the spiritual realm, and earth
I think what Jesus is saying is you're going to see that vision come to fruition, but not in a vision, but in a person.
You're going to see what a vision was picturing: Kingdom of God, heaven, present on earth, exemplified in the person of Jesus. I think he's telling Nathaniel, "You're going to see this happen." You're surprised by me telling you where you were sitting. Just wait till you see what I'm going to do.
It's a simple message. There's not a whole lot of application, but there is one specific point that I want you to get today.
When it came time for Jesus to choose the men who he would use to establish the early church, to spread the gospel, to aid him in his ministry, he chooses really nobodies.
Fisherman.
There were plenty of other individuals who followed John that probably would have followed Jesus if he told them to.
So why them?
Well, in opposition to what we normally think, I think it's because they desired to follow him.
A normal picture of how Jesus called the disciples was random men who Jesus had picked out, and he goes and coerces these men into following him. They have no idea who they are even following.
But in reality, Andrew and This other disciple who's with him takes the first step towards Jesus. Jesus didn't tell them to follow him. They saw the evidence. They had faith. They desired to follow him, and he welcomed them.
This isn't to say that Jesus just chose whoever was willing to follow him. I think they were selectively identified and called for this; however, there was no coercion.
There was no blind faith.
Jesus called based on those who are willing to look at the truth and the evidence and desired the truth, and then they followed it.
I think this is how we should look at the calling of God. And the spreading of the gospel.
Often we sit and wait for God to come and tell us to follow him, like we think Jesus did with the disciples.
When in reality, the ministry Christ is walking past us. His present calling of God is evident, and what we are to do. We can be like Andrew, and we can determine there's a truth to this man. I'm gonna get up and follow Him. I'm gonna do whatever He tells me to do. Or we can watch Him walk away and wait for Him to come tell us to follow Him.
We can come to church once a week and witness the ministry of the gospel walk by. The needs of the church walk by. The logical observation of service that's needed just walk by. See the graphic up on the screen that we need volunteers. Just go on by time after time after time, and we can say, as we sit here, "No, I'm gonna go fishing. I'll wait for someone to come tell me to follow them.”
This is you. Let me ask you: how long are you willing to wait?
How long are you willing to deny the logic and the evidence in front of you? What is needed from you? Waiting for someone to come and tell you what you already know.
Be like the disciples actually were in their calling.
They were already desiring to follow Jesus before they even knew who he was.
And this is where we should be: a heart that sees the evidence, sees Christ, sees this world that He has made, sees His love, and our hearts are ready to serve, even if the calling isn't there yet. We're ready to do whatever we can that's in front of us, and then if that time comes or the clear, direct, lifestyle-changing calling comes, we don't have to decide then, because we have already taken this step in our hearts to follow Him.
