So in the last two segments, just to recap what we’ve done, we’re looking at John 1:19-42. And with the initial reading of that passage, we ran from
So that’s what it looked like. It looked as though the representatives were sent to him and then they came out and then he castigated them for their lack of faithfulness, their practice. But then we looked in the second segment and we added a bit more of the narrative from all of the Gospels and we looked more closely at the next day paragraphs that we see in John 1, right? John 1:29, John 1:35, and there’s another one at John 1:51 thereabouts. And when we looked at the first one and we probed it a bit more, well, then what it looked like in the first segment suddenly shifted. We had to look at the prior context and we had to correlate it with everything that had gone before. And all of a sudden, our perspective shifted. It now looked like this interaction took place the day before Jesus came out, presumably, from the Judean wilderness towards John 1:29.
Now, of course, it is possible to state that Jesus was simply walking towards John that day and that he may have come back from the Judean wilderness a few days prior. And so the first perspective in the first segment could still be possible. And you are certainly allowed to have that perspective if you want, but it seems as though the perspective that we arrived at, what it now looked like in the second segment, is actually the one that we should probably go with. And I talked about how the correlation causes texture, gives texture to the story. It also shows how complicated interpretation can be, which is why many competent scholars are quite willing to deal with each pericope in its own right and to simply treat them in terms of the theological voice, the theological message that they have.
So that’s basically a summarization of the first two segments of this unit. So we’re going to try to finish in this segment, and if we run overtime, in the next segment. We’re going to finish our exercise here, and then I’m going to summarize what all of it means at the end. So we’re looking at Luke. Luke 3:1-22 we’ve already looked at. But I want to direct your attention to
So only in Luke do we see that the descent of the Holy Spirit is no mere vision. The descent of the Holy Spirit is actually a theophany. Luke doesn’t use that terminology, but it compares favorably with what we see in the Old Testament. It is actually a theophany of the Holy Spirit, which is not humanoid. The Holy Spirit, he does not take the form of a man. He takes the form of a dove. And that is bodily form. Luke’s use of the adverb somatikos has that sense. There’s no ambiguity with respect to meaning of that word. And so a dove actually flies out of the heavens, which had been torn open, split open, and lands and descends on Jesus’ shoulder, and Jesus walks into the Judean wilderness with the dove on his shoulder. The Spirit leads him, or as Mark says it, drives him into the wilderness. So we see that in Luke that there was actually a theophany, a physical manifestation of the Holy Spirit. It is a singular event. Good interpreters do not normally hang all of their eggs, put all their eggs in one basket with respect to interpreting a verse. We usually like to look elsewhere for correlation and for confirmation. But somatikos is not so easily turned aside. Bodily, physical form.
At any rate, look at the prior context.
And then, of course,
So “Jesus returns in the power of the Spirit to Galilee, and a report about him goes out through all the surrounding country” (
So there seems to be a consensus with all the Synoptics. In Luke, we read a little blurb about Herod the tetrarch, his dalliance with Herodias, his brother Philip’s wife, that John had spoken out against, as well as the other evil things that this tetrarch had done. And this, of course, would be Herod Antipas historically, adds to his evil deeds by shutting John in prison. Mark and Matthew clearly tell us that John is arrested and placed in prison and then Jesus withdraws into Galilee. So we can infer that Jesus withdraws into Galilee soon after the three days that are highlighted, earmarked in the Gospel of John, which means that soon after Jesus comes out of the Judean wilderness, give or take a couple of days after the three days or maybe a little bit of time after that, John is arrested. Not too long after Jesus comes out of the Judean wilderness. That’s what it looks like. And so let’s hold on to that tentatively and see where it takes us. So again, Mark and Matthew point out John’s arrest prior to Jesus’ withdrawal into Galilee. So he goes back up north. And so we see it in all three Gospels. We see it in Luke. We see it in Mark. We see it in Matthew.
So let’s go back to John and let’s probe John a bit more and see what we come up with. So back to John 1. We’ve already looked at John 1:29-34. So after the events of
But afterwards, Matthew tells us angels come and minister to him, presumably bringing him food and drink so that he can recover strength because he hasn’t eaten anything, He hasn’t drunk anything for 40 days. So he comes out of the Judean wilderness in the strength of the ministry, in John’s ministry, having been fed. He has enough to keep going. He comes out of the Judean wilderness and John immediately announced, “Behold, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world!” He goes further.
So that takes us to
So notice what just happened. This exercise, this Unit 5 is about John and his contribution to the synoptic Gospels, and we’re still dealing with part one. So what just happened in this passage? Well, the very next day, the day after Jesus returned from the Judean wilderness, John is standing with two of his disciples. Jesus walks by and he looks at him and he says, “Behold, the Lamb of God!” He may have said some other things, but John doesn’t tell us that. “The two disciples heard him say this, and so they followed Jesus.” Jesus turned, saw them following, and asked them, “What are you looking for? What do you seek?” And they respond to him, “Rabbi, where are you staying?” There’s a lot of presupposition there on that part, which is acceptable. Their response is textured. They called him rabbi because John has pointed him out. He’s the Lamb of God. He is mightier than John. If John is a rabbi, how much more the one who is mightier than he is? So they call him rabbi. “Where are you staying?” which is basically a way of them inviting themselves over to hang out with him wherever he is staying. So he says, “Come and see.” Now they’re asking if they can go with him and he is being hospitable and he says, “Come and see.” He’s welcoming to them.
So they come and they saw where he was staying and they stayed with him that day. It was about the tenth hour, 4:00 in the afternoon? “One of the two who heard John speak and followed Jesus was Andrew, Simon Peter's brother” (
That’s a completely different setting that we read about in Luke, even though you can correlate it with the passages in Mark and in Matthew, right? But here, we have to go back even further than what we read about in the Synoptics because this is two days after Jesus comes out of the Judean wilderness and already we’re finding out that Andrew was a follower of John the Baptist and he clearly heard John the Baptist point to Jesus and say, “This is the Lamb of God. This is the one I’ve been speaking about.” He hears him say it the first day, the day Jesus returned. And he hears him say it the second day and it clicks, so he follows Jesus along with, presumably, John ben Zebedee, John the apostle. And Jesus turns around and asks them, “What are you seeking?” “Rabbi, where are you staying?” “Come and see.” “Let’s hang out.”
And what he does,
So they’re all there. They’re all there in Judea around the Jordan River in the south, right? And then, of course, so that takes us to
Again, to make the point without being redundant about it, reading the Gospels slowly and carefully with an appreciation for its layered nature is important. The third day, Jesus decides to go to Galilee. Happens to be the same day in which the wedding in Cana of Galilee begins, which tells us that he doesn’t get there that day probably, unless he really hoofed it from the south to the north because it’s in Galilee. Probably not the case. He may have gotten there the very next day if they traveled without stopping to rest, or he may have gotten there on the third day of the wedding. It’s entirely possible. All that we need to do to nail this down somewhat with a little bit more certainty would be to estimate as best as we could how long it would have taken to travel from Judea, in the vicinity of the Jordan, on foot to Cana in Galilee. How many miles was that? How long did it take for people who travel on foot? We know that Jesus was peripatetic. He traveled on foot. We don’t read of him traveling in caravans or any such thing. The only exception to that being when he was 12 years old and he and his parents obviously traveled as part of a group from Nazareth to Jerusalem for the feast.
But here in John, we read in
What we’re reading about here in John precedes all of that. And that’s important to note. That speaks to the layered nature of the Gospels, especially where John includes these chronological markers where he does. So Philip is included in the group. Philip finds Nathanael and says to him, “We have found him of whom Moses in the Law and also the prophets wrote (this is
Now, probably the way to read this section to the extent that we’ve read it would be to suggest, and we can suggest this, that possibly Andrew and John and Peter are all disciples of John the Baptist. It is possible to suggest that. There is nothing wrong with suggesting that. It’s a reasonable assumption to make based on what we’re reading. But we can also possibly and reasonably add Philip and Nathanael. They are followers of John the Baptist, or they had been subjected to the baptism of John. And there are grounds for this. If you will hold your place here and come with me to the book of Acts 1, we’ll look there briefly. Peter, when he gets up in the middle of the community of 120 prior to Pentecost, he says in
And so if we bring that particular text,
So when Nathanael says in
I’m not saying that Philip is not redeemed. As it turns out, he will end up being one of the apostles and he’s going to go out and he’s going to minister the Gospel after the ascension of Christ. What I am saying, though, is that he doesn’t fully understand. None of them do. They won’t understand fully until after his resurrection. So in the next segment, I’m going to briefly deal with the correlation of Luke with respect to the call of the disciples in Mark and Matthew and how it fits here with John. It will be brief, but it will also be sort of a summary of everything that we’ve done.
Thank you for reviewing this lecture brought to you by Blue Letter Bible. The Lord has provided the resources, so that these materials may be used free of charge. However, the materials are subject to copyrights by the author and Blue Letter Bible. Please, do not alter, sell, or distribute this material in any way without our express permission or the permission of the author.
We invite you to visit our website at www.BlueLetterBible.org. Our site provides evangelical teaching and study tools for use in the home or the church. Our curriculum includes: classes for new believers, lay education courses, and Bible-college level content. The lectures are taught from a range of evangelical traditions.
For any questions or comments please feel free Contact Us.