home >  Media > Weekend Message

When you first began to know something about Jesus, what kind of person were you? What did you think about? How did you view yourself? How did you view others? As we continue our look at the twelve we meet Nathanael, a straightforward, cynical, what you see is what you get kind of guy. He lays his perspective right out there for all to see. Today we’ll consider what he initially sees in Jesus and where Jesus leads him. It’s a journey short in time and long in impact.

Our senior pastor, Glenn McDonald, asked me a few months ago to preach this weekend because he was going to be on a road trip with his youngest son, Tyler. I immediately turned to my calendar, saw that I was going to be in town and said, “Sure, I’ll be glad to do that.” As he left my office, I asked, “Which of the twelve will be the focus that weekend?” And, when he said, “Nathanael” I didn’t give it a second thought.

I’ve given it a second thought many times over the past few weeks. Those second thoughts have increased the past several days. Now, there’s nothing frightening about Nathanael. The problem is not that there is so much material I couldn’t possibly get through it all. It’s the fact that the little bit of information we have is like a riddle that has been pieced together from several different riddles on totally different themes.

Let’s take for instance the identity of Nathanael as one of the twelve. These twelve were invited by Jesus to be his disciples. According to the Jewish practice of the day, they were to live surrendered to the total authority of their rabbi Jesus, living like him and learning to do that through what he taught and how he lived.

Nathanael is mentioned by name twice in the gospel of John. In the last chapter, after Jesus is raised from the dead, we find a list of Jesus’ disciples who go fishing one night. “Nathanael from Cana in Galilee” is mentioned along with Simon Peter, James, John and Thomas as part of that group who fish all night and catch nothing. Nathanael is also mentioned in the first chapter of John and we will get to that text in just a few minutes.

Nathanael is a disciple. He hangs out with others who are known to be of the twelve. So, he is one of the twelve, right? Well, not so fast. There are four places in the New Testament where the twelve are listed by name. The list appears in a slightly different order in Matthew, Mark, Luke and Acts but the same names are listed in each. Here is the list in Matthew: “Simon (who is called Peter) and his brother Andrew; James son of Zebedee, and his brother John; Philip and Bartholomew; Thomas and Matthew the tax collector; James son of Alphaeus, and Thadaeus; Simon the Zealot and Judas Iscariot, who betrayed him.” No Nathanael. But, there is a Bartholomew. So, what do we do with this riddle?

When we understand the name Bartholomew we can solve this riddle. The word is a compound word in the original language. “Bar” means “son of”. So, this Bartholomew is “son of Tholomew.” In Matthew’s listing of the twelve we see two others whose “full names” are given as “James son of Zebedee” and “James son of Alphaeus”. These two James are listed by both names to distinguish between them. So, Bartholomew is listed, the son of Tholomew with no need for the first name. What is his first name? I believe it is Nathanael. He is Nathanael Bartholomew, Nathanael son of Tholomew. Nathanael was one of the twelve.

This is even clearer when we read our text in the first chapter of John. Turn there with me. Here we find ourselves in the early days just after Jesus’ baptism. Andrew and Peter are already connected to Jesus. Andrew heard John the baptizer say Jesus was the Lamb of God. After he visited with Jesus over night, he told Peter, his brother, “We have found the Messiah.” Jesus has attracted his first few followers as we come to verse forty-three. Remember this is God’s holy Word. [READ John 1:43-51.]

This is an amazingly powerful account, isn’t it? Anytime anyone is aware of Jesus’ presence things happen. And for everyone who opens mind, heart and soul to Jesus, the impact is truly phenomenal.

But, and I’m begging for a little help and assurance here, is there anything puzzling to you in this text? For instance, a simple little matter: are they still where John baptized or have they already started for home? Okay, admittedly perhaps only a pastor would puzzle over that one. (This just reminds you to pray diligently for your pastors!)

Another question might be, “Why does Philip refer to Jesus as ‘the one Moses wrote about in the Law, and about whom the prophets also wrote”? In many places in scripture, the precise phrase “the law and the prophets” is used to describe the entire Hebrew bible. So, Philip testifies that everything in the scripture points to the one he and others have found. Then he tells Nathanael who the promised one is. He is “Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Joseph.”

Now the riddles start to pile up. Nathanael, a practicing, righteous, serious-minded, God-oriented Galilean Jew in his teen years cops an attitude. “Nazareth! Can anything good come from there?” And before we can take a moment to consider what’s behind this little fit, Philip responds, “Come and see.” As the reader, we might want to linger here a bit to try to understand what was going on as Nathanael comes along with Philip. But, John draws us on with immediacy to another riddle. In verse forty-seven we read, “When Jesus saw Nathanael approaching, he said to those around him, “Here truly is an Israelite in whom there is no deceit.” What? There’s no deceit in him, but he just copped an attitude that seems to be dripping with cynicism! And, before we can catch up Nathanael responds, “How do you know me?” Is he challenging Jesus? Is he agreeing with Jesus? Is he just asking, “Have we met before?” And, before we can consider these possibilities, the whirlwind of dialogue, of riddle piling up on riddle continues as Jesus responds to Nathanael’s direct question with, “I saw you while you were still under the fig tree before Philip called you.” Our response is, “Huh?” And Nathanael’s response is “Rabbi, you are the Son of God; you are the king of Israel.” What? Are you kidding me?

I need to tell you, that after weeks of off-and-on study, I still have trouble with these amazing, perplexing, seemingly convoluted pieces of conversation. Determining the meaning of any particular part leads to the challenge of how that meaning fits with all the possible meanings of the next part and so on down the line. I wrestle with key questions. What was the tone of these statements and questions? What is going on between the lines? What do these words mean? Does any of this conversation give us a clue about other parts of scripture that we must go to for a fuller understanding of these statements and of Nathanael himself? It’s a little like herding cats.

Two weeks ago some of these same questions might have come to mind when we had the opportunity to read a letter from our senior pastor. Glenn shared that he was taking a leave of absence. With each line we might have asked the same questions I’ve suggested for our text. What is Glenn’s tone? What’s going on between the lines? What do these words mean? Is there anything I should know about in the greater context of Glenn’s life and ministry that will lead to a fuller understanding of this letter and of Glenn himself? What are we to learn? The essence of the matter in Glenn’s words is stated when he quotes a colleague, “You don’t know what you don’t know.” In the positive it can be stated that Glenn has come to know as much of Glenn as he can at this point, as much of God as he can at this point and is ready to entrust himself to all that he does not yet know.

Perhaps Nathanael is a classic cynic, of the opinion that no one and no thing can be trusted. Sydney Harris writes that a true cynic is “not merely one who reads bitter lessons from the past; [but] one who is prematurely disappointed in the future.” Maybe Nathanael’s life experience has left him a warped, hurting man. Or, maybe he’s just quick with a cynical comment now and again to the amusement of his friends. But, even one cynical assessment reveals a hint of bigotry and pride. Maybe he’s just parroting the generally held consensus of the rest of the world about people who live in little towns like Nazareth. It matters and it doesn’t. I’ll keep trying to figure out this part of the riddle and the rest because I want to understand. But, I finally came to the point where I realized I was so caught up in the parts of the riddle that I was perhaps missing the main thing. I could do that with Glenn’s letter and the impact of that letter on me and on you, the people of zpc. I could get caught up in each detail and miss the main thing. The main thing for Glenn is that he says he needs to totally surrender to Jesus.

What is the main thing for Nathanael? I think the best clues are in Jesus’ words about seeing him under the fig tree and being an Israelite in whom there is no deceit. What fig tree? When? What was going on in the shade of this fig tree? Maybe it was a specific moment under some local fig tree where Nathanael was sitting, thinking and praying. It might have been the kind of private moment when he was wrestling deeply with God. Perhaps the wrestling was about faith, about life, about following God. Maybe Nathanael was laying out before God some complaint, some struggle, some issue where he was not at peace, something deeply out of sync. Maybe God initiated the wrestling, bringing to mind some sin, bringing conviction, bringing Nathanael closer to total surrender. Alone. With God. Wrestling. Struggling. We’ve all been there. Or we all should come there. “Surrender? Surrender that? Surrender her? Surrender me?”

Let’s move past the fig tree. When Jesus says Nathanael is an Israelite in whom there is no deceit, this is a play on words. The root of the word Israelite is the name Israel. This was not originally the name of a country. It was the name of a man. The man was originally named Jacob, the grandson of Abraham in the book of Genesis. The name Jacob means “deceiver”. Jesus uses this play on words to say that Nathanael is a deceiver descendant in whom there is no deception. Nathanael was apparently a “what you see is what you get” kind of man. His heart is out there for all to see. At least that’s what everyone who knows him thinks. But the outward appearance isn’t the complete story. Remember the tree.

Jesus tells him he saw him under the tree. He was present in what was perhaps a very private moment when he was wrestling with God, when only Nathanael and God were part of the conversation. When Nathanael hears Jesus say “I saw you,” he knows something no one else knows. He knows that only one person could know what was going on in his mind and heart and soul back under the tree. That person is God. “Rabbi, you are the son of God; you are the king of Israel.” You are God. You are the ruler over Jacob and me, one of his descendants. You are the one to whom complete surrender is due. Father Jacob eventually surrendered to you. I surrender now.

And then Jesus says to all of them, “You will see heaven open, and the angels of God ascending and descending on the Son of Man” referring to himself and the fact that he is the full, open, complete connection between heaven and earth for he is God in the flesh. Heaven open. Angels going up and down. These words would have brought to their minds who else but Jacob once again. Still the deceiver, Genesis 28 records how he fell asleep one night and had a dream of heaven open and a stairway stretching between heaven and earth and angels ascending and descending. Jacob woke the next morning and named the place “House of God” saying, “Surely the Lord is in this place, and I was not aware of it. How awesome is this place! This is none other than the house of God; this is the gate of heaven.”

Nathanael must have known that “the Lord is in this place, and I was not aware of it. How awesome is this place! This is none other than the house of God; this is the gate of heaven.” When Jacob had his dream he was not yet fully surrendered to God. Nathanael, face to face with Jesus apparently did surrender. He yielded all that he knew of himself to all that he knew of God. Glenn is now and will be at places where he will need to do the same. And, so too, you and I. Nathanael’s story isn’t just Nathanael’s story. It is Glenn’s and mine and yours. The key word to the whole riddle and all its parts is surrender.

The week Glenn wrote his letter I took a few days to go off to the Abbey of Gethsemani in north central Kentucky. It is a place where Trappist monks have been praying for the world for one hundred fifty years. I went there for personal retreat, for me and God to spend time together in that silent community. I spent a lot of time in a garden. A special place in that garden was a bench in the shade of that walled area. The time I spent there on that bench I now understand to be my time under the fig tree where Jesus saw me and where he called me to new places of surrender.

What about you? Can you be a Nathanael? Can you cry out to Jesus, honestly, openly, forthrightly with no deceit, “Rabbi, you are the son of God; you are the king of Israel”? I surrender all. Your life depends on it. The future of our ministry depends on it. Will we surrender all to Jesus?

Let me invite us to a few moments of silence as we approach the table where we meet Jesus face to face.

In John, Jesus did nothing to draw Andrew and the others until Philip—here he takes the initiative. Having resolved to go to Galilee, he finds Philip. The plain reading might indicate they are still by the Jordan east of Jerusalem. But, it is open grammatically/geographically—could be there, could be as they traveled, could be back in Bethsaida or somewhere else. Philip’s home town is Bethsaida (“house of fishing”) like Andrew and Peter. But Philip might now be residing in Capernaum as A&P are. “We” denotes the connection Philip has with the others (Andrew, Simon Peter, John)

Philip finds Nathanael. From Cana. Was it his wedding? “Nathanael” means “God has given”. (Equivalent of today’s rare “Theodore”) This name is used only in John among the disciples. In Matthew, Mark and Luke this name is absent but another disciple is named among the twelve and that is Bartholomew (“son of Tolmai”). Some believe Nathanael is not one of the twelve but Bartholomew is and is a different person. In this case, Nathanael would just be another disciple. But, I think the plain substance of this passage in John is that Nathanael is one of the twelve since all the others in this chapter are. So, his name is Nathanael bar tolmai (like Simon bar Jonah in verse 42).

Philip’s words about Jesus: the object of prophecy. The law and the prophets have spoken of him. (The rabbis speak of no less than 456 passages of their bible (our old testament) as indicating something about the messiah.) “Jesus of Nazareth of Joseph” followed Jewish tradition in terms of Jesus bar Joseph. [Why “of Nazareth”?]

Nathanael’s skeptical question does not apparently reflect a widely held opinion of Nazareth. It was neither famous or infamous. N’s question then is reflective of the opinion N had about such an improbable, insignificant place. Cana (the home town of N) might have seen it’s share of bias toward other nearby towns (like N—Lebanon/Frankfort).

Philip had no words to refute/answer, so he just says, “Come and see.” Not a bad response for all of us! This phrase was a rabbinic phrase of some common use. It was used to show that a solution to a particular problem was possible and that it should be sought together.

“An Israelite in whom there is no guile”. “Guile” is used in other Greek literature for “bait” (for catching fish). So, it is as “any cunning contrivance for deceiving or cathcin, as the net in which Hephaestus catches Ares . . . the Trojan horse . . . Ixion’s bride . . . the robe of Penelope.” It has the notion of deceit or craftiness. Jacob is described this way before he finally yields to the God of his fathers (Gen. 27:35) [So he is “an Israelite in whom there is no Jacob—no conniver, deceiver]. “You are a straightforward person!” Jesus says.

Interestingly, Nathanael reveals that he believes himself to be such a man, honestly and transparently. In fact, he is somewhat stunned by the accuracy of Jesus’ knowledge of him, that Jesus would name him so clearly. (I being more guileful might have said, “oh, not me!”) Jesus’ replies about seeing him under the fig tree and this is apparently quite clear and convincing to Philip as Jesus intended. Before Philip called for Nathanael Jesus saw him under that tree. The fig tree is almost universally a symbol of home. It provides a place of safety for shade, meditation, prayer, study, visiting, etc. “It seems probable that Nathanael had had some outstanding experience of communion with God in the privacy of his own home, and that it is this to which Jesus refers.” MORRIS. It was clearly not only a moment in time but it was what was on Nathanael’s mind at that time. Whatever it is, no human would have access to this information.

It is born out in Nathanael’s affirmation that is totally over the top from where he began. “How could Jesus son of Joseph even be of any worth” to an affirmation of his divinity! “Rabbi, you are the Son of God; you are the king of Israel.” Barclay: “Nathanael capitulated for ever to the man who read and understood and satisfied his heart.” In this moment he yielded all that he knew of himself to all that he knew of Jesus. This “Israelite” by Jesus’ greeting is now affirming Jesus as his king.

Much more was to come. And Jesus would be the means through which heaven and earth meet and communicate. “The wide open heaven, and the ascending and descending angels symbolize the whole power and love of God, now available for men, in the Son of man.”

Cynic; cyn⋅ic

cyn·ic (sĭn'ĭk)

n.

1. A person who believes all people are motivated by selfishness.

2. A person whose outlook is scornfully and often habitually negative.

Cynics on Cynics:

A cynic is not merely one who reads bitter lessons from the past; he is one who is prematurely disappointed in the future. Sydney J Harris

The cynics are right nine times out of ten. H L Mencken

No matter how cynical you get, it is impossible to keep up. Lily Tomlin

The name (Bartholomaios) means "son of Talmai" (or Tholmai) which was an ancient Hebrew name, borne, e.g. by the King of Gessur whose daughter was a wife of David (II Kings 3:3). It shows, at least, that Bartholomew was of Hebrew descent; it may have been his genuine proper name or simply added to distinguish him as the son of Talmai. Outside the instances referred to, no other mention of the name occurs in the New Testament.

Nothing further is known of him for certain. Many scholars, however, identify him with Nathaniel (John 1:45-51; 21:2). The reasons for this are that Bartholomew is not the proper name of the Apostle; that the name never occurs in the Fourth Gospel, while Nathaniel is not mentioned in the synoptics; that Bartholomew's name is coupled with Philip's in the lists of Matthew and Luke, and found next to it in Mark, which agrees well with the fact shown by St. John that Philip was an old friend of Nathaniel's and brought him to Jesus; that the call of Nathaniel, mentioned with the call of several Apostles, seems to mark him for the apostolate, especially since the rather full and beautiful narrative leads one to expect some important development; that Nathaniel was of Galilee where Jesus found most, if not all, of the Twelve; finally, that on the occasion of the appearance of the risen Savior on the shore of the Sea of Tiberias, Nathaniel is found present, together with several Apostles who are named and two unnamed Disciples who were, almost certainly, likewise Apostles (the word "apostle" not occurring in the Fourth Gospel and "disciple" of Jesus ordinarily meaning Apostle) and so, presumably, was one of the Twelve. This chain of circumstantial evidence is ingenious and pretty strong; the weak link is that, after all, Nathaniel may have been another personage in whom, for some reason, the author of the Fourth Gospel may have been particularly interested, as he was in Nicodemus, who is likewise not named in the synoptics.

No mention of St. Bartholomew occurs in ecclesiastical literature before Eusebius, who mentions that Pantaenus, the master of Origen, while evangelizing India, was told that the Apostle had preached there before him and had given to his converts the Gospel of St. Matthew written in Hebrew, which was still treasured by the Church. "India" was a name covering a very wide area, including even Arabia Felix. Other traditions represent St. Bartholomew as preaching in Mesopotamia, Persia, Egypt, Armenia, Lycaonia, Phrygia, and on the shores of the Black Sea; one legend, it is interesting to note, identifies him with Nathaniel. The manner of his death, said to have occurred at Albanopolis in Armenia, is equally uncertain; according to some, he was beheaded, according to others, flayed alive and crucified, head downward, by order of Astyages, for having converted his brother, Polymius, King of Armenia. On account of this latter legend, he is often represented in art (e.g. in Michelangelo's Last Judgment) as flayed and holding in his hand his own skin. His relics are thought by some to be preserved in the church of St. Bartholomew-in-the-Island, at Rome. His feast is celebrated on 24 August. An apocryphal gospel of Bartholomew existed in the early ages.

He is called Bartholomew in the Gospels of Saints Matthew, Mark, and Luke. Most scholars believe that Bartholomew is called Nathaniel in the Gospel of John, and that Bartholomew was actually his last name. The name Bartholomaios means “son of Talmai” (Tolomai or Tholmai), an ancient Hebrew name. (The King of Gessur, whose daughter was a wife of David, bore the name; see 2 Samuel 3:3.) So, in this article, I will refer to him as Saint Nathaniel bar Tolomai (this would amount to him being known as Nathaniel son of Tolomai, just as Peter was called Simon bar Jonah, which would mean Simon son of Jonah.)

Outside the references mentioned, there are no other instances of the name of Saint Nathaniel bar Tolomai being mentioned in the New Testament. What we know of him after the New Testament is not certain. There is no mention of him in ecclesiastical literature before Eusebius, who mentions that Pantaenus who was the master of Origen, was evangelizing in India, and was told that Saint Nathaniel bar Tolomai had preached there before him, and had given them a copy of the Gospel of Saint Matthew written in Hebrew. This was treasured by the Church there. India, was the name given to a vast area, and was not limited to the geographical area we know as India today. Other traditions indicate that Saint Nathaniel bar Tolomai also preached and evangelized in Mesopotamia, Persia, Egypt, Armenia, Lycaonia, Phrygia, and on the shores of the Black Sea.

There are conflicting traditions regarding his death. According to one, he was beheaded at Albanopolis in Armenia. According to another he was flayed (skinned alive) alive and crucified head down by order of Astyages, for having converted his brother, Polymius, King of Armenia. Because of the latter legend, he is often represented as a man holding his skin. His relics are at Saint Bartholomew-on-the-Tiber Church, in Rome, and in the cathedral in Canterbury, England.

John Macarthur refers to him as “genuine”

Another commentator, “honest”

Both of these are from the “without guile” assessment of Jesus.

How does this match with his bigotry, his cynicism? Can one be both a cynical bigot and honest/genuine/without guile? Did the “without guile” act as a point of departure, a turning point for Nathanael?

What little we know about Bartholomew from this matter of fact statement is based on the etymology of his name. Bar- is the Hebrew prefix indicating a patronymic name, a name based on one's father (such as Jackson in modern English; FitzWilliam in the English of the Middle Ages; or Ivanovich in modern Russian). The word tolmai or talmai is Hebrew for "one abounding in furrows," that is, a farmer. Tholmai occurs in the Old Testament as the name of the King of Gessur, whose daughter became one of the wives of King David (2 Samuel 3:3). We conclude that Bartholomew was the son of a farmer.

• The question "Can anything good come out of Nazareth?" is generally interpreted as a joke -- or more likely, a wisecrack -- illustrating a rivalry between the citizens of Bethsaida and Nazareth. Hereafter we will see that Nathanael/Bartholomew is the "light-hearted" apostle, who somehow manages to balance the intensity and seriousness of his comrades, such as Peter.

• Jesus recognizes Nathanael immediately; Nathanael responds with immediate and profound faith in Jesus.

• Based in part on Nathanael's recognition of Jesus as the Son of God, Jesus promises him that he will see a vision of heaven.

When Nathanael made his appearance in the Gospels, he did so with a touch of friendly sarcasm and smiling irony. Philip was advising Nathanael somewhat in detail and dogmatically, " ' We have found him of whom Moses in the Law and the Prophets wrote, Jesus the son of Joseph of Nazareth.'" Philip's friend objected to this way of putting it. The mischievous Nathanael replied discreetly, " ' Can anything good come out of Nazareth?' " Perhaps Nathanael spoke these words of mockery about Nazareth with certain contempt of familiarity that is so often found between two neighboring villages. Cana, the home of this apostle, lay only about nine miles from Nazareth.

Nazareth must indeed have been despised, however, and apparently it had an evil reputation. For that very reason the evangelist Matthew saw the prophesied abasement and humiliation of the Messias fulfilled in Jesus, because Jesus was reared in Nazareth .

Jesus could forget this cautious discipline's judgment against Nazareth and his prejudice against the Messias Himself. As He saw Nathanael coming, joyfully He could say, "'Behold a true Israelite in whom there is no guile. '" St. Augustine made the remark about this passage: ""A great testimony! That which was said neither to Andrew nor to Peter nor to Philip was said of Nathanael. How highly the Jews esteemed the honor of being an Israelite is easily seen in St. Paul's Epistle to the Romans and in his second Epistle to the Corinthians.

Still when our Lord greeted Nathanael, He did not say this disciple was merely an Iaraelite. He stressed that He was an Israelite without guile. It was not often that an Israelite received such praise. Even Jacob, the father of the tribe of Israelite, was no more than a man "without guile." Frankness and sincerity had ceased to be universal virtues of the Israelites; nevertheless, Nathanael was a simple and candid person. He did not act as others and pretend. He did not have "two-hearts, a fold in his heart where he saw the truth, and another fold where he engendered lies."

The few words of Nathanael recorded in the Gospel, then, were spoken from a true heart, and remain as fresh and clear as a spring. There was nothing artifical or affected in this follower of Christ, nothing made up or thought up on the spur of the moment. Jesus, the eternal truth, readily and gladly accepted this Isrelite who was without a shadow of pretense.

Nathanael was more surprised than flattered by Christ's words of praise. Startled, he immediately asked, "' Whence knowest thou me?'" Then our Lord cast a second, even brighter, ray of His infinite wisdom into the happy and perhaps too carefree soul of this fisherman. He wanted to rouse him from his contentment, to stir the very depths of his soul. "Jesus answered and said to him. 'Before Philip called thee, when thou wast under the fig tree, I saw thee.'"

What happened under that fig tree remained a secret between Jesus and Nathanael. Maybe it was a triumphant struggle. Maybe it was a decisive resolution. Maybe it was a brilliant confession. In any case, under that fig tree-Palestinians loved to plant fig trees around their homes-a profound, personal experience must have occurred.

The revelation of the Messias so stirred Nathanael that he was inspired to cry enthusiastically, "'Rabbi, thou art the Son of God, thou art King of Israel.'" Only an hour before he was laughing to think that Jesus from Nazareth was supposed to be the Messias, and now, after hearing only a few words of His infinite wisdom, he was paying Him homage. His confession far surpassed the blustering, joyful confessions of Andrew and Philip. Truly, Nathanael Bartholomew, the cheerful apostle, was an Isralite" without guile," without "a fold in his heart."

The meaning of this homage should not be overestimated. Yet it appears to be as great as Peter's confession of the Messias in Caesarea Philippi: "'Thou are the Christ, the Son of the living God.'" Nevertheless, in reality it was a long way between the Jordan and Caesarea Philippi, between the happy calling of the warm spring and the first belief of the hot summer. To the disciples on the Jordan, Jesus was the Messias, but their expectations of an earthly Messias were anything but spirtually refined. The apostles still had to withstand many difficulties, doubts, and conflicts before they were to reach their pure and unconditioned credo. The Lord said to Peter, "'Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-Jona...'" But He did not say, "Blessed art thou, Nathanael Bar-Tholmai..." Bartholomew's confession on the Jordan was the first spring, beautiful but frail. Jesus called him to mold him and to strengthen him.

"Answering, Jesus said to him, 'Because I said to thee that I saw thee under the fig tree, thou dost believe. Greater things than these shalt thou see.'" Then He turned also in the other, and continued, "'Amen, amen, I say to you, you shall see heaven opened, and the angels of God ascending and descending upon the Son of Man.'" Once before, the patriarch Jacob, the father of all Israelites, saw an angel ascending and descending. Nathanael and his companions, these Israelites without guile, were from then on to await the lasting, spiritual fulfillment of that vision of Jacob: Jesus in constant communication with heaven. The power of His words and miracles began and reached its completion in heaven. Jesus on earth and the Father in heaven were together, united, one in an eternal exchange of power and love.

Jesus is not, as Philip, so well, but wrongly, believed, "the son of Joseph of Nazareth." He is the "Son of God." "King of Isarel.""Knower of Hearts," as Nathanael praised Him. He is the Lord of Heaven and the Master of Angels. Nonetheless, one is glad to hear this practical confession which flows like a glittering mountain stream in spring in the first chapter of John's Gospel. Solemnly had this first chapter been opened: "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God; and the Word was God." And now the earthly echo of these words resounded triumphantly upon the eternal seething of waves: "'Rabbi, thou art the Son God, thou are King of Israel.'"

It is a pity that the evangelist John did not give a fuller picture of Nathanael in the first Chapter of his Gospel. With the exception of the brief mention of this apostle in the twenty-first chapter of the fourth Gospel, there is no other mention of him through the wide span between the first and last chapter. The evangelists, inspired by the Holy Spirit, limited themselves to a fuller account of the life of Jesus. The very fact that these comments were made so brief is already an indication of the direction in which their inspired thoughts were to venture.

One cannot go wrong if he keeps that happy meeting between Jesus and Nathanael before his eyes. Thoroughly honest, happy, cheerful, and inspired, he has been an inspiration to men of all ages. He was popular and much liked by the other apostles; his colleagues eagerly sought his friendship. Clear, truthful, and frank in everything, he was so simple that anyone could see through him. He was really the apostle without guile or deceit.

At the Last Supper revealed, "'One of you will betray me.'" No one thought of Bartholomew. Not even a slight suspicion was raised against him. Only sunshine and spring surrounded this apostle. When the disciples walked along the long, hot roads, with the Lord, tired and stickly with dust, and when the pressing of a crowd was so taxing that they could not find time even to eat, when they, along with the Lord, had no place to lay their head at night, there was Bartholomew, cheerful, tireless, and happy as ever. He alone of the followers of Christ could lift up their sinking spirits. Then the eyes of the Lord would benevolently fall upon this disciples as they had in the hour of their first meeting. Nathanael Bartholomew was called because of his natural ability to reflect the goodness, kindness, mercy, and love of the Savior.

For the melancholy Thomas, for the sober Philip, for the objective Matthew, it was a real blessing that Bartholomew occasionally led this second group of apostles to look at the brighter side of life. He put some cheer and life into this melancholy, sober and objective group. He brought the fragrance of spring and a bit of poetry into this somewhat too cool, somewhat too dry, somewhat too gloomy atmosphere. With his keen natural perceptiveness, he could brighten and enliven Thomas, tease and animate Philip, transfigure and perfect-Matthew. He could rub against all three of their natures and get away with it three times as often as any other apostle. It is good to stand to the sunshine, but it is better to be the sunshine for others. In doing all this, Nathanael did not overstep the fine border of tact. It is very striking how old legends again and again allude to this apostle's distinguished origin and refined speech. The silence of the Gospels also gives an indication of his quiet reserve. He could hold back his happiness lest he becomes too frolicsome, or even loud and boisterous.

This noble harmony of directness and reserve, of gaiety and courtesy, suggest the symbolism of the full name of this apostles, Nathanael Bartholomew. Literally the Hebrew name, Nathanael means "gift of God." Ever cheerful person is a gift of God to a friendship. Bartholomew means "son of a drill-plougher." A "Nathanael" must also be a "Bartholomew," a man who goes below the surface of things. And a "Bartholomew" must be a "Nathanael," a sunny gift of God that penetrates to the depths of life, but remains on the outside also, so that, once buried in these depths, it does not lose sight of the blue heavens from where it came, where the angels of God ascend and descend.

Finally, we turn once again to the Gospel, to the hour in which the young and carefree Nathanael met the Messias for the first time. With flashing eyes and inspired lips he called out openly to Jesus, "'Rabbi, thou art the Son of God, thou art King of Israel.'" But this cheerful and lovable man had not surmised in the least what a tremendous burden he was to bear for the Son of God. He was portrayed by artist as a gray and stooped old man. For the Son of God he had gone half way around the world. Through the many long journeys. For centuries, even, his remains were not permitted the quiet rest of the grave.

In his hand he held the horrible knife with which he was allegedly skinned alive. It is not certain in what manner he died. Maybe he was flayed and maybe he was not. But it is certain that inwardly he had completely stripped himself of self and had become the faithful and devoted servant of the King of Israel. This shedding of the world right down to the very nerve-center was demaned by Christ Himself. Twice Matthew recorded Jesus' words about this:

"And if thy hand or thy foot is an occasion of sin to thee, cut it off and cast it from thee! It is better for thee to enter life maimed or lame, than, having two hands or two feet, to be cast into the everlasting fire. And if thy eye is an occasion of sin to thee, pluck it out and cast it from thee! It is better for thee to enter into life with one eye, than, having two eyes, to be cast into the hell of fire.

For this reason some like to represent Christianity as a big, dismal "no" to anything that might have the slighest trace of joy in it. It supposedly forbids the "yes" in life. But such men as Nathanael Bartholomew, who work and suffer the most for Christ, are the most joyful. Nathanaels are those without the guile of a pessimistic bearing, dressed-up heroism, or weary resignation. They know sadness and they know hope; they know the nakedness and on completeness of their own existence, and wait for the fulfillment of another life.

St. Paul, writing to the Christians of all ages, exhorted,

Let us conduct ourselves in all circumstances as God's ministers, in much patience; in tribulations, in hardships, in distresses; in stripes, in imprisonments, in tumults; in labors, in sleepless nights, in fastings; in innocence, in knowledge, in long-sufferings; in kindness, in the Holy Spirit, in unaffected love; in the word of truth, in the power of God; with the armor of justice on the right hand and on the left; in honor and dishonor, in even report and good report

Nathanael's appearance in the Gospel gives us the explanation for this rare and mysterious union of sorrow and bliss in the same person: "Greater things than these shalt thou see... You shall see heaven opened, and the angels of God ascending and descending upon the Son of Man.'"

There is no place in John in which the disciples see literal angels moving between heaven and earth, or heaven and Jesus. However, angels are those who bring the divine presence and so are the divine intermediaries. So the question becomes, "Where in the Gospel of John do we see the divine presence revealed to the disciples?" The answer comes quite quickly: in the next chapter.

In John 2:11 we read, "This, the first of his miraculous signs, Jesus performed at Cana in Galilee. He thus revealed his glory, and his disciples put their faith in him." In the miracle of turning the water into wine the disciples saw Jesus' "glory" revealed. This resulted in faith. What was Jesus' glory? John has already answered that question in John 1:14-18: "The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the One and Only, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth. _ No one has ever seen God, but God the One and Only, who is at the Father's side, has made him known." John is saying that the "glory" or reputation that belongs to the Father is seen in Jesus. We could put it that Jesus is the window through which one sees the Father.

Jacob at Bethel sees a stairway to heaven and experiences the presence of God. The disciples during Jesus' life did not literally see a stairway to heaven, but they did experience the presence of God and commerce between heaven and earth. They had this experience when they observed the signs which Jesus performed and saw his "glory," which was the "glory" of the Father. Nathanael had believed because of a prophetic word given by Jesus. Both he and the other disciples would experience more than this:they would experience Jesus as the "gate of heaven," the place where the presence of the Father in heaven was expressed on earth. They saw this in the signs which Jesus worked, and they responded with commitment (faith).

John picks up this theme in John 14:12, when he indicates that the presence of the Spirit in the believer will make him or her into one who can be even more of a window into heaven, the topic of another chapter. At this point what we notice is that Jesus is the point of contact between God and the world. In him there is traffic between heaven and earth. That traffic is seen in his signs in which the presence of the glory of the Father in him shines through. This, John is saying, calls for belief. Nathanael committed himself to Jesus on the basis of what he had; we have far more basis for committing ourselves than he did. 

-- Peter H. Davids ("Hard Sayings Of The Bible")