IN respect to this apostle, there occurs a primary question about his
name, which is given so differently in different sacred authorities,
as to induce a strong suspicion that the two names refer to two totally
distinct persons. The reasons for applying the two words, Nathanael
and Bartholomew, to the same person, are the circumstances,――that none
of the three first evangelists mention any person named Nathanael, and
that John never mentions the name Bartholomew,――that Bartholomew and
Nathanael are each mentioned on these different authorities, among the
chosen disciples of Jesus,――that Bartholomew is mentioned by the three
first evangelists, on all the lists, directly after Philip, who is by
John represented as his intimate friend,――and that Bartholomew is not
an individual name, but a word showing parentage merely,――the first
syllable being often prefixed to Syriac names, for this purpose; and
_Bar_-Tholomew means the “son of Tholomew,” or “Tholomai;” just as
Bar-Jonah means the “son of Jonah;” nor was the former any more in
reality the personal, individual name of Nathanael, than the latter was
of Peter; but some circumstance may have occurred to make it, in this
instance, often take the place of the true individual name.
A few very brief notices are given of this apostle by John, who alone
alludes to him, otherwise than by a bare mention on the list. It
is mentioned in his gospel that Nathanael was of Cana, in Galilee,
a town which stood about half-way between lake Gennesaret and the
Mediterranean sea; but the circumstances of his call seem to show
that he was then with Philip, probably at or near Bethsaida. Philip,
after being summoned by Jesus to the discipleship, immediately sought
to bring his friend Nathanael into an enjoyment of the honors of a
personal intercourse with Jesus, and invited him to become a follower
of the Messiah, foretold by Moses and the prophets, who had now
appeared, as Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Joseph. On hearing of that
mean place, as the home of the promised King of Israel, Nathanael,
with great scorn, replied, in inquiry, “Can any good thing come out
of Nazareth?” To this sneering question, Philip answered by the simple
proposition, “Come and see;”――wisely judging that no argument could
answer his friend’s prejudice so well as an actual observation of the
character and aspect of the Nazarene himself. Nathanael, accordingly,
persuaded by the earnestness of his friend, came along with him,
perhaps, partly to gratify him, but, no doubt, with his curiosity
somewhat moved to know what could have thus brought Philip into this
devout regard for a citizen of that dirty little town; and he therefore
readily accompanied him to see what sort of prophet could come out of
Nazareth.
The words with which Jesus greeted Nathanael, even before he had been
personally introduced, or was prepared for any salutation, are the
most exalted testimonial of his character that could be conceived, and
show at once his very eminent qualifications for the high honors of the
apostleship. When Jesus saw Nathanael coming to him, he said, “Behold
a true son of Israel, in whom is no guile!”――manifesting at once a
confidential and intimate knowledge of his whole character, in thus
pronouncing with such ready decision, this high and uncommon tribute
of praise upon him, as soon as he appeared before him. Nathanael,
quite surprised at this remarkable compliment from one whom he had
never seen until that moment, and whom he supposed to be equally
ignorant of him, replied with the inquiry, “Whence knowest thou me?”
Jesus answered, “Before Philip called thee, when thou wast under the
fig-tree, I saw thee.” The fig-trees of Palestine, presenting a wide,
leafy cover, and a delightful shade, were often used in the warm season
as places of retirement, either in company, for conversation, or in
solitude, for meditation and prayer, as is shown in numerous passages
of the Rabbinical writings; and it was, doubtless, in one of these
occupations that Nathanael was engaged, removed, as he supposed, from
all observation, at the time to which Jesus referred. But the eye
that could pierce the stormy shades of night on the boisterous waves
of Galilee, and that could search the hearts of all men, could also
penetrate the thick, leafy veil of the fig-tree, and observe the most
secret actions of this guileless Israelite, when he supposed the whole
world to be shut out, and gave himself to the undisguised enjoyment
of his thoughts, feelings, and actions, without restraint. Nathanael,
struck with sudden but absolute conviction, at this amazing display of
knowledge, gave up all his proud scruples against the despised Nazarene,
and adoringly exclaimed, “Rabbi! thou art the Son of God,――thou art the
King of Israel.” Jesus, recognizing with pleasure the ready faith of
this pure-minded disciple, replied, “Because I said unto thee, ‘I saw
thee under the fig-tree,’――believest thou? Thou shalt see yet greater
things than these.” Then turning to Philip as well as to Nathanael,
he says to them both, “I solemnly assure you, hereafter ye shall see
heaven open, and the angels of God ascending and descending upon the
Son of Man.”
On the day but one after this occurrence, as John records, Jesus
was in Cana of Galilee, the residence of Nathanael, and was present
at a wedding which took place there. From the circumstance that the
mother of Jesus was there also, it would seem likely that it was the
marriage of some of their family friends; otherwise the conjecture
might seem allowable, that the presence of Jesus and his disciples
on this occasion, was in some way connected with the introduction of
Nathanael to Jesus; and that this new disciple may have been some way
concerned in this interesting event. The manner in which the occurrence
is announced,――it being next specified, that two days after the
occurrences recorded in the end of the first chapter, Jesus was present
at a marriage in Cana of Galilee,――would seem to imply very fairly,
that Jesus had been in some other place immediately before; and it is
probable therefore, that he accompanied Nathanael home from Bethsaida,
or whatever place was the scene of his calling to the discipleship,
along with Philip. The terms of the statement are not, however,
absolutely incompatible with the idea of this first introduction of
these two disciples to Jesus, in Cana itself, which may have been the
part of Galilee into which Jesus is said to have gone forth, after
leaving Bethabara; although, the reasons above given make it probable
that Bethsaida was the scene. After this first incident, no mention
whatever is made of Nathanael, either under his proper name, or his
paternal appellation, except that when the twelve were sent forth in
pairs, he was sent with his friend Philip, that those who had been
summoned to the work together, might now go forth laboring together
in this high commission. One solitary incident is also commemorated by
John, in which this apostle was concerned, namely, the meeting on the
lake of Gennesaret, after the resurrection, where his name is mentioned
among those who went out on the fishing excursion with Peter. His
friend Philip is not there mentioned, but may have been one of the
“two disciples,” who are included without their names being given. From
this trifling circumstance, some have concluded that Nathanael was a
fisherman by trade, as well as the other four who are mentioned with
him; and certainly the conjecture is reasonable, and not improbable,
except from the circumstance, that his residence was at Cana, which
is commonly understood to have been an inland town, and too far
from the water, for any of its inhabitants to follow fishing as a
business. Other idle conjectures about his occupation and rank might
be multiplied from most anciently and venerably foolish authorities;
but let the dust of ages sleep on the prosy guesses of the Gregories,
of Chrysostom, Augustin, and their reverential copyists in modern
times. There is too much need of room in this book, for the detail
and discussion of truth, to allow paper to be wasted on baseless
conjectures, or impudent falsehoods.