Abstract
This article explores the similarities between John 1:44-51 and 20:24-29, the Nathanael and Thomas narratives, and proposes that the two accounts are so close to each other in structure and vocabulary that they can be profitably read in parallel with each other.
In Easter Week 2013, in preparation for preaching to my two congregations on the Second Sunday of Easter, I once again carefully and closely read the set Gospel passage for that day, John 20:19-31. This lection recounts the appearance of the Risen Christ to the disciples without Thomas on the evening of the first Easter Day, then to the disciples including Thomas a week later, and finally the notice about how the things in John’s Gospel had been written so that the readers may come/continue to believe that Jesus is the Christ, and by believing may have life in his name.
As I once again read this passage, it suddenly occurred to me that the account of the appearance of the risen Jesus to Thomas in John 20:24-29 sounded extremely similar to the account of the meeting between the earthly Christ and Nathanael in John 1:44-51. I decided to investigate further. Consultation of my own (very limited) collection of commentaries and other works on the Fourth Gospel – Hoskyns and Davey, 1 Barrett, 2 Kruse, 3 Lindars 4 - threw up no recognition of this possible similarity on the part of these writers. Indeed, it seems that this similarity has not been particularly explored by New Testament scholarship in general, which I found surprising. Looking for similar narrative structures in several passages in the same biblical book is nothing new. Indeed, nearly twenty years ago I published an article in this Journal arguing that three passages in Jeremiah – 13:1-11, 18:1-11 and chapter 35 – shared a common structure. 5 I wonder if the failure to look at John 20:24-29 and John 1:44-51 in parallel with each other in fact stems from the rather high view accorded to Thomas and the rather low view accorded to Nathanael in Christian tradition – tradition canonises Thomas as Saint Thomas, gives him a title (Doubting Thomas), names him as an Apostle and gives him a mission field (India), whereas Nathanael has none of these things, except by being equated with St Bartholomew, an equation that is anything but proven. This high view of Thomas could have led to him almost having to be regarded as a unique figure in the Gospels, and certainly not to be compared with the lowly Nathanael.
Nevertheless, my sense of a strong similarity between the two episodes remained, so I concluded that it would be appropriate for me to seek to explore for myself the extent to which John 1:44-51 and John 20:24-29 really do have parallels with each other. What I intend to show here is that the two passages are indeed so similar to each other in their basic structure and vocabulary that we are all but forced to read each in the light of the other. I will then draw some possible conclusions from this insight.
Thomas and Nathanael both appear in John’s Gospel. Thomas is also named in the lists of the twelve apostles/disciples in Matthew, Mark, Luke and Acts, 6 but otherwise only appears in John. Nathanael does not appear outside of John (though, as I have just noted, the claim that he is the same person as the Bartholomew of the Synoptic lists of the Twelve is often made - but that is not relevant to this study). Thomas and Nathanael only appear together in John 21:2, in the list of the seven disciples gathered together by the Sea of Tiberias who decide to go fishing after the Resurrection and its aftermath, alongside Peter, the ‘Sons of Zebedee’ and two other – anonymous – disciples. Here, Nathanael is described as coming from Cana in Galilee and Thomas as Didymus, ie the Twin.
Thomas appears elsewhere in John in 11:16, where he is similarly called Didymus and where he urges his fellow-disciples to go with Jesus to Bethany (the home of the sick Lazarus, and of Mary and Martha), ‘that we may die with him,’ and in 14:3, in the farewell discourses. In this verse, Thomas is not called Didymus, and asks Jesus, ‘We do not know where you are going, so how can we know the way?’
But the most famous appearance of Thomas is surely that in 20:24-29, where he refuses to believe the Resurrection until he can see and touch the Risen Christ. The passage culminates in Thomas’ confession ‘My Lord and my God,’ the only explicit confession of Jesus’ divinity and the only acclamation of Jesus as ‘my Lord’ by a character in the Fourth Gospel.
Nathanael, by contrast, only appears elsewhere than in 21:2 in 1:44-51. Here, he is found by the newly-called Philip, who tells him that ‘we have found’ the Messiah, Jesus of Nazareth. Nathanael refuses to believe that anything good can come from Nazareth, but is willing to accompany Philip to meet Jesus. His meeting with Jesus transforms his view of him, addressing Jesus as Rabbi, Son of God and King of Israel.
Even this superficial outline of John 20:24-29 and 1:44-51 suggests that the two passages are very similar to each other, and this is borne out by a more detailed analysis of the narrative of the two texts, to which I now turn, proposing a nine-stage common narrative structure, with one of the two passages having a tenth feature not found in the other:
1. Introduction: 1:44 and 20:24
Each of the passages begins with an opening, scene-setting verse. ‘Now Philip was from Bethsaida, the city of Andrew and Peter.’ (1:43-44) ‘But Thomas, (who was called the Twin), one of the Twelve, was not with them when Jesus came.’ (20:24)
Notice how in both passages the focus is on the broader group of disciples (Philip, Andrew and Peter in chapter 1 and the Twelve in chapter 20), and that Jesus is described in both contexts as being ‘on the move’ – as having ‘come’ in 20:24 and as having decided to ‘go’ to Galilee in 1:43. 1:43 could perhaps be read as part of the ‘Introduction’ to the Nathanael story but, as the call of Philip, it does have an integrity of its own. With or without 1:43, 1:44 can still be seen as an ‘Introduction’ to 1:45ff.
2. Declaration from those who have seen or heard Jesus to the one who has not: 1:45 and 20:25a
Next, in each case, there is a speech in the first person plural from one (in 1:45) or several (in 20:25a) who have seen or met Jesus to a named individual who has not – Nathanael (in 1:45) or Thomas (20:25a). This is the first reference to Nathanael, while Thomas was named in the previous verse and so not in this one. Thomas has, of course, met Jesus before, while Nathanael has not. But the parallel is striking nevertheless, between ‘We have found him about whom Moses wrote in the law and also the prophets wrote, Jesus, son of Joseph, from Nazareth,’ (1.45) and ‘We have seen the Lord,’ (20:25a). Note the common use of the first person plural aorist form (have found/have seen), even though Philip is apparently alone (and the parallel with 20:25a could perhaps help to explain Philip’s ‘royal we’) and the fact that neither Nathanael nor Thomas was present at the previous encounter between Jesus and the current speaker(s) in the passages.
3. Objection/Refusal/Disbelief: 1:46a and 20:25b
In both passages, the one who has been told about Jesus now raises an objection, a refusal to believe – either that Jesus could be the Messiah, as he came from Nazareth (1:46a) or that Jesus could possibly have been raised from the dead (20:25b).
4. The Objector comes to Jesus: 1:46b-47a and 20:26a
The next stage in each account brings Jesus and the objector together. In Chapter 1, this is achieved by Philip inviting Nathanael to, ‘Come and see,’ and Nathanael evidently doing so, as the next sentence begins, ‘When Jesus saw Nathanael coming towards him, he said of him ….’ In Chapter 20, the action moves forward to the following Sunday, and the disciples – now including Thomas – being gathered together in ‘the house’ and finding that Jesus comes and stands among them. Note the common use of the verb, ‘to come’.
5. Jesus’ first words, addressed to all those present: 1:47b and 20:26b
Now that Nathanael/Thomas has been brought into the presence of Jesus, Jesus speaks. But, in each case, his first words are not addressed to Nathanael/Thomas alone, but rather to everyone present. It is clear in 20 that this is ‘the disciples,’ while who other than Philip is actually meant to be present in 1 is not quite so self-evident, but it is surely right to see Jesus’ words as being addressed to all his initial disciples, those whose calls have hitherto been recounted in John 1. In 1:47b, Jesus’ words are a description of Nathanael, in 20:25b, they are the standard greeting Jesus had used on his first appearance to the disciples (less Thomas) on Easter Day. 7
6. Objector’s Question: 1:48a
The two narratives now diverge slightly, in that in chapter 1 Nathanael now asks Jesus a question, for which there is no precise parallel in 20. ‘How do you know me?’ is a direct response by Nathanael to Jesus’ acclamation of him as ‘an Israelite in whom there is no deceit.’ The question is, in a real sense, needed in the Nathanael narrative to lead into Jesus’ address, in a way that is not needed in the Thomas narrative.
7. Jesus’ second words, to the Objector alone: 1:48b and 20:27
In each case, Jesus now speaks to the ‘Objector’ – Nathanael or Thomas. In each case, the Christ reveals his fore-knowledge of the Objector, describing how he had seen Nathanael under the fig tree before Philip called him (though this has not been previously recounted) and inviting Thomas to do the things he (Thomas) had previously (in verse 25b) had said – in the absence of Jesus - he would need to do before he believed.
8. The Objector’s Confession: 1:49 and 20:28
Nathanael and Thomas each now reply to Jesus and are named as the speaker in each case. And each makes a confession, acclaiming Jesus. Nathanael says, ‘Rabbi, you are the son of God! You are the King of Israel!’ Thomas’ declaration is, simply, ‘My Lord and my God!’ This makes Thomas the first person to explicitly confess the divinity of Jesus in John’s Gospel, even though readers have known this since the Prologue in the first part of Chapter 1. Jesus is often called ‘Lord’ in John, but here in Thomas’ confession for the first time he is acclaimed as, ‘My Lord.’ Nathanael’s confession is nothing like as exalted, and is far more Jewish and much less universal than that of Thomas, though surely equally as sudden and equally as effusive and hence a true parallel with that of Thomas. It would seem to be an appropriate acclamation at this early point in the Gospel, before the start of Jesus’ ministry, while that of Thomas is surely an equally appropriate one at the end of the Gospel (and after the Resurrection).
9. Jesus questions why the Objector has now believed: 1:50a and 20:29a
The Objector’s Confession is now, in each case, questioned by Jesus. To Nathanael, he says, ‘Do you believe because I told you that I saw you under the fig tree?’ and to Thomas, ‘Have you believed because you have seen me?’ Note how the same verb, ‘to believe’ is used in each case (though not in the same tense), and how ‘seeing’ is a component of each question – though in the first case it is the fact that Jesus has seen Nathanael and in the second that Thomas has seen Jesus that forms the substance of the question.
10. Conclusion: Jesus expands the conversation to include others: 1:50b-51 and 20:29b
The final component of each narrative continues the final speech of Jesus, with statements in the Indicative. In each case, also, the focus of Jesus’ attention/concern is expanded from just Nathanael/Thomas to a broader group. In the Thomas narrative, there is only one statement, ‘Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have come to believe,’ while in the Nathanael narrative there are two, with a shift from singular address in the first to plural address in the second: ‘ “You (sg) will see greater things than these.” Then he said to him, “Very truly, I tell you (pl), you (pl) will see heaven opened and the angels ascending and descending upon the Son of Man.”’ As well as the shift in emphasis from singular – Thomas/Nathanael – to plural – you/those – once again ‘seeing’ is in common, though this time the contrast is between what ‘you’ will see and those who have not seen being blessed.
Implications
It thus looks clear that, while they are not absolutely identical in narrative structure and theme, there are enough common features between John 1:44-51 and 20:24-29 to suggest that the two passages can profitably be read in parallel with each other. They definitely share a broad common structure and there is a common vocabulary also, especially the verbs ‘to come,’ ‘to see’ and ‘to believe.’ There are no other passages in John’s Gospel that evidence a narrative structure closely similar to that obviously shared by the Nathanael and Thomas narratives and that I have just described. Therefore, we are surely all but forced to read each of these narratives, not just within their own immediate contexts in John 1-2 and 20-21, but also in the light of and together with each other.
What might be the significance of this perception? 1:44-51 is the last of John’s series of narratives of the callings of the first disciples – Andrew and another anonymous follower of the Baptist (1:35-39), Peter (1:40-42), Philip (1:43), and then Nathanael (1:44-51) - before the start of Jesus’ ministry, while 20:24-29 is the last of the first series of the Easter narratives in John - the discovery of the empty tomb (20:1-10), the appearance to Mary Magdalene (20:11-18), the appearance to the disciples (20:19-23) and then the appearance to Thomas - before the concluding colophon (20:30-31) and then Chapter 21, which could then be read as the beginning of the mission of the Church, though I am aware that Chapter 21 is one of the ‘problem areas’ in Johannine studies. There is no consensus as to whether any or all of 21 is integral to the Gospel or an addition, or whether it is connected in any way to the rest of the Gospel or not. There is of course no New Testament manuscript evidence for a text of John without Chapter 21, 8 and there are those who would read 21 as a parallel to the Prologue in 1:1-18, and 21:14 does seek to connect at least 21:1-14 to chapter 20 but, on the other hand, 20:30-31 certainly does read like a conclusion to the whole Gospel. 9
This surely underlines the insight that, in John, the calling of the first disciples and the Easter narratives stand in parallel with each other, one at the beginning of the earthly ministry of Jesus, the other at the beginning of the ministry of the Church, which is the ministry of the resurrected Jesus. This would suggest that the resurrection appearances in Chapter 20 as a whole comprise a renewed calling and commissioning of the disciples – now to go out, rather than to come and follow – and, of course, unlike in the Synoptic Gospels, 10 there is in John no earlier account of the disciples being sent out as missionaries during the earthly ministry of Jesus. The confession of who Jesus is moves on, from him being acclaimed as Rabbi, Son of God and King of Israel by Nathanael at the end of the call narratives, to him being acclaimed as personal Lord and God by Thomas at the end of the resurrection narratives. The response of Jesus to the first confession looks forward to the ministry, suffering and death of Jesus, while his response to the second (‘Blessed are those who have not seen and have yet believed) is in the light of the Resurrection and looks forward to the effects of the ongoing mission and witness of the Church.
So the two narratives surely stand together – one at the end of the beginning of John, as an opening to the rest of the Gospel, the other at the end of the end of John, as a closing of the Gospel and as an opening of the next stage of the mission of Jesus through his sent-out disciples, of which chapter 21 can then be seen as the first – not yet altogether successful - stage.
And, as I have already noted, it is at the start of chapter 21 that we finally find Thomas and Nathanael, the two objectors, the two confessors, alongside each other, now working together at the task of fishing, which – spiritually – is the task of the Church. 11
Footnotes
1
E. C. Hoskyns, ed F. N. Davey, The Fourth Gospel, London, 1947 (2nd ed).
2
C. K. Barrett, The Gospel according to St John, London, 1960.
3
Colin G. Kruse, The Gospel according to John, Nottingham, 2003.
4
Barnabas Lindars SSF, ‘John,’ in ed. A. Culpepper, The Johannine Literature, Sheffield, 2000, 29-108.
5
Chris Knights, ‘The Structure of Jeremiah 35’, ExpTim 106 (1994-1995): 142-144.
6
Matthew 10:3; Mark 3:18; Luke 6:15; Acts1:13.
7
John 20:19, 21.
8
Unlike, say, for Mark 16:9-20.
9
I have offered a reading of 21:1-14 in ExpTim 124 (2012-2013):287-289.
10
Matthew 10; Mark 6:7-12; Luke 9:1-6.
11
I am grateful to my daughter, Mrs Miriam Montgomery, for her perceptive comments on the draft versions of this article.