John 1: 43-50

I sat here and puzzled a few moments over why John tells us about the calling of Philip and Nathanael when he doesn't include the rest of the disciples. It makes sense that he would tell us about how Peter came to know Jesus, considering the role Peter would play in establishing the infant church. He does not go into the calling of the other disciples, except for Philip and Nathanael. Why?

Two reasons, I think.

First, because of Nathanael's response to Jesus. And second, because of Jesus' reply back to Nathanael.

When Philip goes to find his friend Nathanael, he doesn't say (like Andrew) "Come, we have found the Messiah." No, he says very specifically, "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."

What does this tell us? Nathanael didn't just know the prophecies about Messiah - passed down from father to son in any good Jewish family. He had actively studied the Law and the Prophets for himself. Jesus himself confirms this when Nathanael asks "How do you know me?" and Jesus replies "Here is a true Israelite, in whom there is nothing false." A true Israelite - one who studied the Scriptures and took them to heart, lived by them.

But even though Nathanael was well read on the Torah, how does he answer Philip's statement? With disbelief! "Nazareth! Can anything good come from there?" Even one who knew the Scriptures backwards and forwards was not expecting Messiah to come in the way that Jesus came.

What makes Nathanael believe? When Jesus tells him that he saw him under the fig tree before Philip even went to fetch him. You can almost hear the wheels turning in Nathanael's head as he processes this, and then his eyes get wide and his jaw drops and he realizes both Who is talking to him and the full implications of it.

"Rabbi, you are the Son of God; you are the King of Israel." Why does he use both terms? Why not just one? Because the Jews were not looking for their Messiah to be anything but a man, a good man, a righteous man - but just a man, like King David. For the second time in John's gospel, he emphasizes that those who encountered the living Jesus with open eyes - immediately recognized Him as not just Messiah, but the Son of God.

I like to think that the next thing Jesus said is said with rueful amusement...."You believe because I told you I saw you under the fig tree. You shall see greater things than that." (As in, I saw you before Philip went to get you and you're impressed by that? Boy have you got a lot of surprises in store for you!) And then he gives him a glimpse into what he will be witness to.

"I tell you the truth, you shall see heaven open, and the angels of God ascending and descending on the Son of Man."

John's story abruptly ends there. I have to think it's because at that point all the disciples were utterly speechless. I think I would have been.

And you know, that's the thing. When I encountered the living Jesus, in his Word, through His people, then at work in my own heart - I was struck speechless. Sometimes I think we Christians spend too much time talking at people about Jesus, instead of showing them and bringing them to Jesus - like Andrew and Philip did.

God help me to remove this mask and let people see Jesus, not me.