ZACCHAEUS IN THE SYCAMORE TREE

ZACCHAEUS IN THE SYCAMORE TREE

The Day Jesus Invited Himself For Dinner

The Sycamore tree is a type of fig tree. But it is much bigger than what we call the “common fig” tree. As children we used to cut the skins of Sycamore figs with a razor blade while they were green, and then come a few days later to eat them, otherwise they would not taste nice. The fruit taste different from the “common fig” but can be just as delicious.

Here is the story of Zacchaeus:

Luk 19:1 Then [Jesus] entered and passed through Jericho.

Luk 19:2 Now behold, [there was] a man named Zacchaeus who was a chief tax collector, and he was rich.

Luk 19:3 And he sought to see who Jesus was, but could not because of the crowd, for he was of short stature.

Luk 19:4 So he ran ahead and climbed up into a sycamore tree to see Him, for He was going to pass that [way].

Luk 19:5 And when Jesus came to the place, He looked up and saw him, and said to him, "Zacchaeus, make haste and come down, for today I must stay at your house."
Luk 19:6 So he made haste and came down, and received Him joyfully.

Luk 19:7 But when they saw [it], they all complained, saying, "He has gone to be a guest with a man who is a sinner."

Luk 19:8 Then Zacchaeus stood and said to the Lord, "Look, Lord, I give half of my goods to the poor; and if I have taken anything from anyone by false accusation, I restore fourfold."

Luk 19:9 And Jesus said to him, "Today salvation has come to this house, because he also is a son of Abraham;

Luk 19:10 "for the Son of Man has come to seek and to save that which was lost."

When I was about 12 years old we were living in a village in the Nile Delta, called El-Santa. My father was the vet for this village and the surrounding area. We were considered upper class in this village, even though we were barely managing. My older two brothers were having lots of scuffles with other teenagers during their high school years. The other teenagers belonged to some wealthy families who had farms and real estate.

My father knew the police would not do anything and was at a loss as to what to do.

Because my father was a bit of a poet, he used to be asked to compose poetry for special occasions, such as the retirement of high ranking government officials.

As a result of this he struck up a friendship with the governor of our province. His position was considered to be a very high one. I knew how high later.

My father shared with him the problem and the governor decided not to talk to the police or pull any strings. He said to my father that he would come to pay us a visit in our house. This would send a message to every one to stop harassing my brothers.

Sure enough, some weeks later, the main street of our village was cleaned. Everyone knew that the governor was coming to our house. On the appointed day, early in the morning, people started to fill the main street. They were on the roof tops. They filled the trees. Police were everywhere. I could not believe my eyes. That day I asked myself, “Where did all these people come from?” The whole population of our village would not account for a fraction of the people there that day.

The news must have reached surrounding villages and the people came to get a glimpse of the governor. When I looked from the balcony I could only see people. The shops disappeared, the houses disappeared, just people, people everywhere.

As I began to read the story of Zacchaeus some years later, I remembered the scene of the governor’s visit. I always wondered how Jesus managed to spot Zacchaeus amongst this sea of people. How and why did he single out Zacchaeus? Everybody wanted to see Jesus.

I can assure you Zacchaeus was not the only one up this fig tree. This kind of fig tree provided the best seats at that time, but to Zacchaeus it came at a cost.

Have you tried to spot someone you know in a crowd? It is like that poster “Finding Wally. It is difficult enough to spot someone you know in a crowd. How much more difficult to spot someone you do not know!

When I looked from the balcony the day the governor visited us, all I could see were faces. I knew many people in my small village, but I could not see them.

It was many years later that I had my question answered. It was about eight years before I read of another incident where another sea of people was involved, yet Jesus noticed only one person:

Mar 5:25 Now a certain woman had a flow of blood for twelve years,

Mar 5:26 and had suffered many things from many physicians. She had spent all that she had and was no better, but rather grew worse.

Mar 5:27 When she heard about Jesus, she came behind [Him] in the crowd and touched His garment.

Mar 5:28 For she said, "If only I may touch His clothes, I shall be made well."

Mar 5:29 Immediately the fountain of her blood was dried up, and she felt in [her] body that she was healed of the affliction.

Mar 5:30 And Jesus, immediately knowing in Himself that power had gone out of Him, turned around in the crowd and said, "Who touched My clothes?"

Mar 5:31 But His disciples said to Him, "You see the multitude thronging You, and You say, 'Who touched Me?' "

Mar 5:32 And He looked around to see her who had done this thing.

Mar 5:33 But the woman, fearing and trembling, knowing what had happened to her, came and fell down before Him and told Him the whole truth.

Mar 5:34 And He said to her, "Daughter, your faith has made you well. Go in peace, and be healed of your affliction."

I would just like to quote the same incident as recorded by Luke:

Luk 8:43 Now a woman, having a flow of blood for twelve years, who had spent all her livelihood on physicians and could not be healed by any,

Luk 8:44 came from behind and touched the border of His garment. And immediately her flow of blood stopped.

Luk 8:45 And Jesus said, "Who touched Me?" When all denied it, Peter and those with him [fn] said, "Master, the multitudes throng and press You, and You say, 'Who touched Me?' " [fn]

Luk 8:46 But Jesus said, "Somebody touched Me, for I perceived power going out from Me."

Luk 8:47 Now when the woman saw that she was not hidden, she came trembling; and falling down before Him, she declared to Him in the presence of all the people the reason she had touched Him and how she was healed immediately.

Luk 8:48 And He said to her, "Daughter, be of good cheer; your faith has made you well. Go in peace."

This woman was healed before Jesus knew who she was or what was wrong with her.  Power went out of Jesus to heal her.

So if I want to borrow the language used in the story of the woman with the “bleeding problem”, and use it in the story of Zacchaeus, Jesus would come near the Sycamore tree and stop and say to the disciples: “Someone is looking at me.” And Peter and those with him would say to him: “Everybody is looking at you!” But Jesus would say something like this: “Somebody is looking at me because I feel a tug in my heart and it is pointing up there”. Then Jesus would look to where Zacchaeus is. And Jesus told him to hurry up and come down.

But let me tell you this. Even if Zacchaeus had not found a Sycamore tree to climb, but had stood on his toes behind the crowd, wanting to see Jesus, Jesus would have called him still. Jesus would have been drawn to that ‘beggar’ who wanted to know who Jesus is. 

Humility Is The Best Seat In The House

As I was growing up in the Middle East, I also wore the same dress Zacchaeus wore. It is a kind of long loose dress.

If you wore one of these and then tried to climb a tree you would soon realize how difficult that is. To be able to climb a tree you have to gather this loose dress and tuck it in your underpants, or tie it around your waist in a knot or hold the end of it with your teeth. To do any of these things, Zacchaeus had to expose part of his lower body.

It takes a great deal of humility to do that, to humiliate himself in such a way in front of every one was not a small thing. Zacchaeus did this before he could even climb one metre up the Sycamore tree.

But that is not all. As Zacchaeus climbed, he became more and more visible to more and more people. Then he sat there waiting. Some people must have laughed at the lengths he went to, just to have a look. To get a better view of Jesus, Zacchaeus must have kept on creeping along toward the end of the branch. Now he had the best seat in the house. It came at a cost. But he thought Jesus was worth it.

Unlike a man called Nicodemus (John 3:1-21), who was a religious leader and went to see Jesus by night, so that no one would notice him, Zacchaeus made a spectacle of himself to see Jesus. 

Zacchaeus put himself out on a limb, physically and spiritually. Jesus noticed.

Jesus said to Zacchaeus: "Zacchaeus, make haste and come down, for today I must stay at your house."

Jesus said “I must”. It is the same word used in verse like Mat 16:21 From that time Jesus began to show to His disciples that He must go to Jerusalem, and suffer many things from the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and be raised the third day.”

Zacchaeus’ behaviour left Jesus no room but in his house. Zacchaeus never dreamt of Jesus’ reaction, but this is how generous and faithful God is. God is no man’s debtor. As it is written, “the affirmation of Jehovah -- Far be it from Me! for he who is honouring Me, I honour” (1Sa 2:30) YLT

And “For thus says the high and exalted One Who lives forever, whose name is Holy, "I dwell on a high and holy place, and also with the contrite and lowly of spirit in order to revive the spirit of the lowly and to revive the heart of the contrite.” (Isa 57:15) NASB

And “The LORD [is] near to those who have a broken heart, and saves such as have a contrite spirit.” Psa 34:18 NKJ

And "But to this one I will look, to him who is humble and contrite of spirit, and who trembles at My word.” (Isa 66:2) NASB

When you see God you put yourself in dust and ashes. When you put yourself in dust and ashes God sees you.

Dear reader, apparently Google does not allow comments on websites like mine.

However, if you email me your comments, I will publish them under this article.

Just click on my email address and type away. Thanks.

The fig Farmer

abuhennah@gmail.com

Nathanael Under The Fig Tree

Nathanael Under The Fig Tree

What Happened Under The Fig Tree?

In comparison with His first meeting with all the other disciples, the first meeting of Nathanael and Jesus is the most dramatic. It is very rich in some of the details, but also says very little about other things.

John’s Gospel starts with a ‘big bang’. This incident is one of the manifestations of that ‘big bang’.

Here is how John recorded it:

Jhn 1:45 Philip found Nathanael and said to him, "We have found Him of whom Moses in the law, and also the prophets, wrote--Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Joseph."

Jhn 1:46 And Nathanael said to him, "Can anything good come out of Nazareth?" Philip said to him, "Come and see."

Jhn 1:47 Jesus saw Nathanael coming toward Him, and said of him, "Behold, an Israelite indeed, in whom is no deceit!"

Jhn 1:48 Nathanael said to Him, "How do You know me?" Jesus answered and said to him, "Before Philip called you, when you were under the fig tree, I saw you."

Jhn 1:49 Nathanael answered and said to Him, "Rabbi, You are the Son of God! You are the King of Israel!"

Jhn 1:50 Jesus answered and said to him, "Because I said to you, 'I saw you under the fig tree,' do you believe? You will see greater things than these."

Jhn 1:51 And He said to him, "Most assuredly, I say to you, hereafter you shall see heaven open, and the angels of God ascending and descending upon the Son of Man." (NKJ)

Israelite, With No Deceit!!

There is a huge contrast between what Nathanael said of Jesus and what Jesus said of Nathanael.

We understand why Nathanael said what he said. Nathareth was a very insignificant village. And Nathanael, before knowing Jesus, was a product of his age. People at that time derived their worth from where they were born or raised as we shall see later.

But why would Jesus call him “an Israelite indeed, in whom is no deceit!" or literally “[one] truly an Israelite, in whom there is no guile.” Or as we say in Australia “a true blue[1] Israelite”

The Lord Jesus did not dish out complements or rebukes without good reason. His words were always measured to address an issue. When the Lord Jesus called the church in Sardis “dead”, it was because they had a name that they were alive. When the Lord Jesus called the church in Smyrna “rich”, it was because they were materially poor.

When the Lord Jesus renamed Simon, son of Jonah as Cephas or Peter, (The names Cephas (from Aramaic) and Peter (from Greek) both mean “rock.”), Peter was anything but a rock. He was more like a wave that rushes in, and then retreats. Peter was not dependable. Paul at one time had to rebuke him for being a hypocrite. But Jesus kept molding him and shaping him. Jesus did not give men glory so that he could receive glory from them in return.

When Jesus asked the Samaritan woman for a drink, he blew her away; a Jew treating her as if she was a clean Jewess! Knowing how she lived, no other Jew would ask her for a drink even if she was a Jewess. But Jesus did, even though she did not, apparently, actually get around giving him a drink of water.

When Jesus asked the paralytic man, “Do you want to be healed?” it was because the paralytic man was comfortable in his rut.

Every single time the Lord Jesus said to his disciples, “Do not be afraid” it was because they were very afraid.

So why would Jesus call him “an Israelite indeed, in whom is no deceit!"?

It must be that Nathanael felt anything but a ‘true-blue’ Israelite. If I knew nothing about Nathanael, and was then told that Jesus said of him that he is “an Israelite indeed, in whom is no deceit!" I would be certain Nathanael did not feel he was an Israelite at all. The Lord Jesus never lavishly bestowed complements or a rebukes on any one for no serious reason.

When the Lord Jesus said of the poor widow, who put in just two mites, that she “has put in more than all those who have given to the treasury” there was a serious reason.

So let us get to know something about Nathanael.

A Man’s Worth

Back then, and until very recently, a man’s worth was derived from his ethnic and religious roots.

Paul could boast of his “dual citizenship”: “I am a Jew from Tarsus, in Cilicia, a citizen of no mean city; and I implore you, permit me to speak to the people.” Acts 21:39

Notice Paul puts his Jewish citizenship first, then his Roman citizenship.

On another occasion Paul boasted of his Jewish credentials according to the flesh when said that he is “circumcised the eighth day, of the stock of Israel, [of] the tribe of Benjamin, a Hebrew of the Hebrews” (Phl 3:5 NKJ)

Nathanael could not say that. There was something stopping Nathanael from boasting like Paul.

What was it?

Nathanael Is Bartholomew

We know for certain that Nathanael is one of the disciples.

The Lord Jesus had twelve disciples. Their names are mentioned in Matthew 10:2-4, Mark 3:16-19 and Luke 6:13-16. For example here is the list from Matthew:

Mat 10:2 Now the names of the twelve apostles are these: first, Simon, who is called Peter, and Andrew his brother; James the [son] of Zebedee, and John his brother;

Mat 10:3 Philip and Bartholomew; Thomas and Matthew the tax collector; James the [son] of Alphaeus, and Lebbaeus, whose surname was Thaddaeus;

Mat 10:4 Simon the Cananite, and Judas Iscariot, who also betrayed Him.

Nathanael had to be one of these people. He is not Peter. He is not Andrew. He is not James. He is not Philip. He is not Thomas. He is not Matthew. He is not James son of Alphaeus. He is not Lebbaeus, whose surname was Thaddaeus. He is not He is not Simon the Cananite. He is not Judas. All these people have been “defined” for us.

The only candidate left is Bartholomew.

Indeed the NET BIBLE, quoting Smith’s Bible Dictionary, said of  Bartholomew (son of Tolmai), one of the twelve apostles of Christ, (Matthew 10:3; Mark 3:18; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13) “It has been not improperly conjectured that he is identical with Nathanael.”

The Bible Gateway says: ‘Bartholomew son of Tolmai, one of the twelve apostles (Matt. 10:3; Acts 1:13); [is] generally supposed to have been the same as Nathanael. In the synoptic gospels Philip and Bartholomew are always mentioned together, while Nathanael is never mentioned; in the fourth gospel, on the other hand, Philip and Nathanael are similarly mentioned together, but nothing is said of Bartholomew’.[2]

And  MURRAY'S ILLUSTRATE BIBLE DICTIONARY notes that: 

“Bartholomew, [is] one of the Twelve, of whom nothing is recorded, 
unless he is to be identified with NATHANAEL.”[3]

So Nathanael is Bartholomew. It is the one person with two names.

Nathanael is a Jewish name. Bartholomew is a Gentile name that means ‘the son of Ptolemy’.

Nathanael, at best, had a Jewish mother and a Greek father, like Timothy, the one to whom Paul wrote. So he is 50% Jew.

But notice he is either Nathanael or Bartholomew. The two names are never combined. He is never mentioned as Nathanael Barltholomew.

What Is In A Name?

Why was Nathanael given ONLY the name “son of Ptolemy”? Why he was not called say, “Nemo son of Ptolemy, or Timon son of Ptolemy?"

People are called Joshua the son of Nun, or John the son of Zacharias, or Simon the son of Jonah, or James the [son] of Alphaeus. Why is the first name missing? Why was he just “son of Ptolemy?

In the Middle East when a person’s first name is not mentioned, it is a form of insult or a sign of insignificance.

Listen to how Sarah described Ishmael, Abraham’s son:

Gen 21:9 And Sarah saw the son of Hagar the Egyptian, whom she had borne to Abraham, scoffing. Gen 21:10 Therefore she said to Abraham, "Cast out this bondwoman and her son; for the son of this bondwoman shall not be heir with my son, [namely] with Isaac."

Ishmael is mentioned as the “son of Hagar” or “the son of the bondwoman”

Also notice how Bartimaeus was described: “blind Bartimaeus, the son of Timaeus, sat by the road begging. Mar 10:46

Nobody bothered to find out what was Bartimaeus’ first name. He is just a blind beggar, Bar  Timaeus (son of Timaeus)

And see how the Jews described Jesus, when they wanted to put Him down: “Is this not the carpenter, the Son of Mary?” (Mar 6:3)

Nathanael was just the “son of Ptolemy”. This was more of an insult than a name. And it stuck.

Someone must have named him Nathanael, but others called him “son of Ptolemy”. Did Ptolemy give his son a name?

Nathanael was carrying a huge burden.

As soon as Jesus met Nathanael, He wanted to roll this burden away. Jesus did not only say of Nathanael that he is a “true blue Jew”, He added that there was even no guile in him. For Jesus to go to the length of saying  there is even “no guile in him” is extraordinary. Jesus wanted to make sure that Nathanael believed that he is one hundred percent Jewish in spite of his background, with not the slightest trace of “estrangement”.

What was it that made Nathanael feel so “estranged”, so un-Israelite? 

This is my first question. The next question is:

What Happened Under The Fig Tree?

Jesus’ words to Nathanael must have startled him. It was natural for Nathanael to ask: How do you know me?

Jesus answered and said to him, "Before Philip called you, when you were under the fig tree, I saw you."

Jhn 1:49 Nathanael answered and said to Him, "Rabbi, You are the Son of God! You are the King of Israel!"

Jesus’ mention of what happened under the fig tree shook Nathanael’s innermost being to such an extent that it engendered in him a burst of faith such as  can parallel that of Simon Peter’s confession: "You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” Mat 16:16

It can also be second to Thomas’ cry “My Lord and My God”

What did happen under the fig tree?

The first two people who can find an answer to my two questions, an answer that will make sense of the many clues I have provided above, (I know it will be a guess, but so have many people guessed) will have free figs from my farm during the 2012 season (that is, if you can come to my farm). I will acknowledge their answer as part of my answer to these two questions in this article. I want you to have the chance to think of an answer before I tell you mine.

Please note you must guess the answer  to the two questions, not just the first one.

And here is my final clue: Nathanael means “gift from God”.

Please feel free to ask any questions.

The fig Farmer

abuhennah@gmail.com

NOW YOU CAN PROCEED TO:
WHAT HAPPENED UNDER THE FIG TREE?

 

---

[1] . 'True blue' is supposed to derive from the blue cloth that was made at Coventry, England in the late middle ages. The town's dyers had a reputation for producing material that didn't fade with washing, i.e. it remained 'fast' or 'true'.

[2] . http://www.biblegateway.com/resources/dictionaries/dict_meaning.php?source=1&wid=T0000457&interface=print&interface=print

[3] . http://www.archive.org/stream/murraysillustrat00pierrich/murraysillustrat00pierrich_djvu.txt

WHAT HAPPENED UNDER THE FIG TREE?

WHAT HAPPENED UNDER THE FIG TREE?

 
You will not appreciate this part unless you have read and struggled with the first article: NATHANAEL UNDER THE FIG TREE


Here are a few comments made by some who wrestled with what might have happened under the fig tree: “No one knows exactly what happened under the fig tree, or why it mattered so much to Nathaniel, but from the text it is clear that Jesus' simple statement affirmed his divinity and opened Nathaniel’s eyes to who Jesus really is.”[1]

“We aren’t told what happened under the fig tree but something about it was very significant to Nathanael. It was a life experience that meant something to him and Jesus was able to enter into it, empathize with it and convey this understanding back to him. This touched Nathanael deeply in his spirit. Up until then he had been an interested seeker, but that moment of empathy, that experience of being personally known draws out of him a sudden, powerful recognition of who Jesus is, being recognised and known by Jesus helps him to begin to perceive the true God.”[2]

“We don’t know what happened under the fig tree. We can imagine that whatever it was, it was a profound experience, and it was a solitary experience, and the fact that this Jesus, this man from Nazareth, knew what happened there changed Nathanael’s view, and Nathanael’s life. Was Nathanael’s fig tree experience a time of great sorrow, or exhilarating joy? Was it quiet and pensive? Was it heart throbbing? Was it serene or rapturous? Reflective or revelatory? We don’t know, but whatever it was, we have probably each had one. And whatever it was, there was nothing more powerful in Nathanael’s life than knowing that in that moment, previously assumed to be solitary, Jesus of Nazareth was there.”[3]  

It seems so small, something that most would only glance at on their way to chapter two, but part of me simply wonders what happened under the fig tree. A man who was only a few verses before questioning if Jesus was indeed the Messiah is now following after Christ in total abandon; all because He mentioned how He was with Nathanael under the fig tree. While scholars speculate what this means, a few things can be easily seen.
One, Nathanael was alone. Had anyone else been with Him, they could have told this stranger from Nazareth about him, but only the Messiah knew what happened to Nathanael under that fig tree. Two, Nathanael kept this part of his life private. He didn’t walk through the village sharing openly what happened under the fig tree. Perhaps it was a prayer, a communion with God, a confession of sin or a secret longing that he dared not share with anyone. Nevertheless, only Nathanael and the One True God knew what happened under that tree, and only God could have spoken to Nathanael in such a way so that He knew that this Nazarene was the Son of God.[4]

The following is what I think did happen under the fig tree.
Just as many people have guessed so too am I guessing.
You be the judge.

Why would anyone, in a Jewish culture, want to keep a gentile name when he already has a Jewish name? Let me illustrate:
Why would anyone in an “Arabic” culture want to be called son of “Smith”, when he already has a good Arabic name like Ahmad or Ali?
In the Middle east, when someone is called by his mother’s name as in “son of Fatima”, it is insinuated that the father is not known.
And when a person has a “good” Arabic first name but people insist on calling him “son of Smith”, they are insinuating that they know who the real father is. The “street” culture of Nathanael’s time wanted him to “know” his real place in the society. They were insinuating that he was an illegitimate child.
In the Biblical accounts Nathanael is never called Nathanael Bartholomew. He is either Nathanael or Bartholomew.
But the bigger clue comes from the huge “complement” Jesus gave Nathanael and the subsequent conversation as will be explained in the following emails.

From Abuhennah to Bob

Hi Bob

Happy 2012

Here is a big hint

There was something very drastic in Nathanel's life, a kind of a “social stigma”. As a result he saw himself as not Israelite at all, even if both his parents were Jewish. It used to be a social stigma up to say 50 years ago. That should be a big hint.
This will answer the first question.

Now this is a give away.

Happy thinking
Abuhennah

From Bob

Hiya Abuhennah!

I am sorry to disappoint you but even with your clue - I HAVEN'T A CLUE WHAT HIS PROBLEM WAS - unless it was illegitimacy or something?

Please don't leave me hanging - I just can't think outside the box on this one [maybe I don't eat enough figs! I can't FIG-ure it out!]

All the best,

Bob

From Abuhennah

You got it.

To use your exact words: it was illegitimacy.

Deu 23:2  “A bastard shall not enter into the congregation of the LORD; even to his tenth generation shall he not enter into the congregation of the LORD.”

Now reflect on the huge complement Jesus gave Nathanael.
Nathanael's burden had to be of such magnitude.

Now think of the answer to the second question:

Nathanael asks Jesus: how do you know me?

What would be an answer that says: I know you very well.

Or as a matter of fact I knew you since you were ...

And here is the second big clue:

What do people do with some illegitimate babies in very conservative cultures?

Keep on thinking, you are almost there
 

From: Bob

Hiya Abuhennah! About Nathanael . .

Did they adopt illegitimate kids out? Put them in orphanages? Ostracize them?

Was Nathanael hanging back under the fig tree because he felt too ashamed to come to Jesus the prophet - or because he had been ostracized to that place?
But where does the Deuteronomy connection come in?

Bob

 
From Abuhennah

Hi Bob
If he was a "bastard", that would make him illegitimate.

With Deut 32 in view, Nathanael could not boast of his ancestry like Paul. He would also feel very "un-Israelite"

Even recently such babies are sometimes left on the steps of a church or in an obvious place like a rail way station, in the hope that someone will find  and look after them.

If Nathanael was an illegitimate child, that would have bring great shame on the grandparents.

Now what is an obvious place where someone might leave an illegitimate baby some 2000 years ago?

From Bob

Hiya Abuhennah!

Under Fig Trees

From Abuhennah
Yes, that is right.
When Nathanael asked, “How do you know me?” Jesus was in effect saying to him: I knew you since you were wrapped up and abandoned under a fig tree.
This is what made Nathanael jump out of his skin and confess that Jesus is the Messiah.
This is the closest thing to saying: Before Abraham was I am!!!

Now imagine you are the one who found this little bundle of life and took him home.
After the shock and a lot of explaining your wife asks you: what do we call him?
Would you suggest something like "a gift from God"? a Nathanael?

From Abuhennah,

If my guess is right, the mother of Nathanael could not keep her baby, but in a small village nothing can be kept secret. Sooner or later she knew who found him.
How did she react when she saw her baby being nursed by someone else but she could not  have a closer look?
Then she watched him grow up, but she could not touch him, or even talk to him. 
Jesus came to the real world, not to a religious retreat where everybody was meditating under “fig” trees.

From Bob

WHAT YOU SAY IS PLAUSIBLE AND LOVELY. THANKS!

GOD BLESS,

BOB

A friend  took up the Nathanael challenge, but she could not figure out what was Nathanael’s issue. As I was explaining to her one of the possibilities of how  Nathanael found out that he was an illegitimate child. All of a sudden she told me that she was an illegitimate child. I did not know how to react. I continued my explanations, thinking that her experience happened long time ago, only to discover that her pain was a present reality as I saw her teary eyes every now and then.
Looking back I did not need to explain to her, because she actually explained to me something I did not know. Here are some of our emails after we talked:

Natalie to Abuhennah

I wish to share with you an incident in my childhood which is still for me a very vivid  memory.
I was born in a small country town 65 years ago as an illegitimate child.  Unlike today,
illegitimacy was frowned upon.  I was a tiny tot, probably about two and a half to three years old.
My cousins and I went to play with some neighbourhood kids nearby. I was chased out by a woman wielding  a broom calling, "get out of here you bastard!" I was extremely frightened and ran home.  At the time I had no idea what a bastard was, but I knew I was something very bad.
Even today, when I recount the event I get very emotional.
I look forward to heaven when like Nathaniel, Jesus will say to me "here is a "true blue" child of God in whom there is no deceit!

Abuhennah to Natalie
Hi Natalie

I just can not go to sleep without saying something.

First I would like to apologize for "opening' an old wound.
I know that words are cheap. So I can not just rattle verses etc.
Only Jesus knows your pain, your life pain.
And I just pray that as you talk to Him tonight, you will tell me that you had a wonderful time.
Thank you for sharing this with me.

God bless

Abuhennah

Natalie to Abuhennah
Dear Abuhennah,
Unless old wounds are opened the infection can't escape and healing is impossible.
Don't apologize, it's healthy for me to realize that there is still an old wound and thus
allow Christ in to heal. 
I thank you for your wisdom and insight and the encouragement I have received
from looking at the Nathanael passage with fresh eyes.
I know in my heart and can say with Nathanael "teacher, you are the Son of God"
So tonight I will go to Him, have a cry and He will comfort and heal me.
Sleep well. Love and prayers.
Natalie

P.S.  I'll be coming around for my figs in February!!!

Abuhennah to Natalie
AND every February as long as we have figs.
For me the Nathanael incident was just a puzzle and an intellectual exercise.
But after watching your bottled up tears, of more than 60 years, I knew how real and painful Nathanael's burden must have been.
You gave this incident flesh and blood. I now know why the first thing Jesus said to Nathanael was that he was a true Israelite with no guile in him.
Jesus is a wonderful savior. He is the only savior.

Abuhennah

And please remember I am also guessing as many have done so before.


The fig Farmer

abuhennah@gmail.com

COMMENTS

Hannah Berensen

That was awesome! 

I didn't think of that at all. I just thought he felt bad because he perhaps had a Greek parent.

I think we might have to turn some of these into a "Fig series" of Bible Studies for a our Bible study too:)

---

[1] . http://www.parkwoodchurch.net/sermons/2007/2007_07-08.htm

[2] . http://www.agape.org.uk/portals/0/Learning%20to%20listen.pdf

[3] . http://www.cathellwilliams.com/category/sermons/

[4] . http://www.blogger-index.com/2169637-musings-of-a-mississippi-girl

Jesus And The Samaritan Woman

Jesus And The Samaritan Woman

John 4:4-42

The material on this website is copyright©

There were three occasions on which Jesus came across a woman who had some sexual sin. On all three occasions, Jesus forgave the woman concerned.

The first woman came to him of her own volition. Jesus forgave her sins. The second one was dragged to Him, against her will. Jesus forgave her sins. This is the third incident. This time Jesus purposely went to meet the woman.

Please take time to read her story even if you already know it.

Jhn 4:3 He left Judea and departed again to Galilee.
Jhn 4:4 But He needed to go through Samaria.
Jhn 4:5 So He came to a city of Samaria which is called Sychar, near the plot of ground that Jacob gave to his son Joseph.
Jhn 4:6 Now Jacob's well was there. Jesus therefore, being wearied from [His] journey, sat thus by the well. It was about the sixth hour.
Jhn 4:7 A woman of Samaria came to draw water. Jesus said to her, "Give Me a drink."
Jhn 4:8 For His disciples had gone away into the city to buy food.
Jhn 4:9 Then the woman of Samaria said to Him, "How is it that You, being a Jew, ask a drink from me, a Samaritan woman?" For Jews have no dealings with Samaritans.
Jhn 4:10 Jesus answered and said to her, "If you knew the gift of God, and who it is who says to you, 'Give Me a drink,' you would have asked Him, and He would have given you living water."
Jhn 4:11 The woman said to Him, "Sir, You have nothing to draw with, and the well is deep. Where then do You get that living water?
Jhn 4:12 "Are You greater than our father Jacob, who gave us the well, and drank from it himself, as well as his sons and his livestock?"
Jhn 4:13 Jesus answered and said to her, "Whoever drinks of this water will thirst again,
Jhn 4:14 "but whoever drinks of the water that I shall give him will never thirst. But the water that I shall give him will become in him a fountain of water springing up into everlasting life."
Jhn 4:15 The woman said to Him, "Sir, give me this water, that I may not thirst, nor come here to draw."
Jhn 4:16 Jesus said to her, "Go, call your husband, and come here."
Jhn 4:17 The woman answered and said, "I have no husband." Jesus said to her, "You have well said, 'I have no husband,'
Jhn 4:18 "for you have had five husbands, and the one whom you now have is not your husband; in that you spoke truly."
Jhn 4:19 The woman said to Him, "Sir, I perceive that You are a prophet.
Jhn 4:20 "Our fathers worshiped on this mountain, and you [Jews] say that in Jerusalem is the place where one ought to worship."
Jhn 4:21 Jesus said to her, "Woman, believe Me, the hour is coming when you will neither on this mountain, nor in Jerusalem, worship the Father.
Jhn 4:22 "You worship what you do not know; we know what we worship, for salvation is of the Jews.
Jhn 4:23 "But the hour is coming, and now is, when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth; for the Father is seeking such to worship Him.
Jhn 4:24 "God [is] Spirit, and those who worship Him must worship in spirit and truth."
Jhn 4:25 The woman said to Him, "I know that Messiah is coming" (who is called Christ). "When He comes, He will tell us all things."
Jhn 4:26 Jesus said to her, "I who speak to you am [He]."
Jhn 4:27 And at this [point] His disciples came, and they marveled that He talked with a woman; yet no one said, "What do You seek?" or, "Why are You talking with her?"
Jhn 4:28 The woman then left her waterpot, went her way into the city, and said to the men,
Jhn 4:29 "Come, see a Man who told me all things that I ever did. Could this be the Christ?"
Jhn 4:30 Then they went out of the city and came to Him.

A few years ago, one of my nieces showed me a book, asking my opinion. As I opened the book I happened to read the following:

If people are spiritually asleep you have to shock them, startle them, scandalize them, if you want them to hear what you say. Jesus was especially good at this. When he wants to teach us something about worship he uses a whore. "Go call your husband!" "I don't have a husband." "That's right. But you've had five, and the man you sleep with now is not your husband." She was shocked. We're shocked. But Jesus simply sits there on the edge of the well with his hands folded, looking at the woman with razors in his eyes.[1]

I told my niece that I did not believe Jesus scandalized “sinners”. On the contrary Jesus defended “sinners” valiantly. The only people he exposed were the “religious” leaders, the “holier than thou” of His day.

A year ago I tried to find this quotation, but my niece could not remember the name of the book.

But with the help of Google, I managed to find that quotation. It is from a book called “Desiring God” by John Piper.

Before we discuss the story of the Samaritan woman and that quotation I would like to tell you a story.

When I was twenty years old, I was a young Christian, living in Cairo. At that time we were introduced to a woman, who “converted” to “Christianity”, after being healed.

This woman was married to a minister in the ruling government.

After she was “miraculously” healed, she began to hear voices in her left ear.

When she came to our house one day, one of my brothers noticed that she had a large piece of cotton wool taped over the whole of her left ear. He asked her why she had this large piece of cotton wool over her ear. She told him that this was the ear through which she heard the spirit talking to her. She did not want to hear any human voices through that ear, but only the voice of this spirit.

There were about a dozen people present in the lounge room, neighbours and relatives.

As she began shaking hands with people, she said to one young lady, “Good morning Madam”. The young lady corrected her by saying: I am not a Madam. I am a “Mademoiselle” (that is a young unmarried girl, a title equivalent to Miss). The lady said: No, you are a Madam. The young lady said, “No, I am a “Mademoiselle”. The woman replied: “The spirit that speaks in my ear does not lie.”

It was like watching an arm wrestle. After the shock and embarrassment, the young lady left the room.

I thought to myself, “This spirit can not be the spirit of Christ.” Jesus never behaved like that. Jesus never exposed people like that. Jesus went about forgiving sins not exposing sinners.

When a paralyzed man was dangled from a roof in front of Jesus, Jesus volunteered to forgive his sins. The paralytic man did not confess his sins or ask that his sins be forgiven.

The only people Jesus exposed were the religious leaders, the people who claimed to be better than the rest. It is on these people that he came down like a ton of bricks.

The reason I chose that author’s quotation is to use it as a background to show the real Jesus, the Jesus of the Gospels, the one who is full of love, grace and truth.

The Bible Did Not Say That

It is always important to get one’s facts straight.

John Piper, in his article, calls the Samaritan woman a “whore” once and a “harlot” four times. [2]

The Bible described her as a woman who had five husbands and was now living with another man. That is, one man at a time. This is not a description of a whore or a harlot.

Jesus asked her for a drink. When a Jew accepts a drink from someone, he is saying you are clean. You are just as clean as I am!

 A Jew will never touch a woman during her period. He will certainly never knowingly touch anything a harlot touches. As a young boy growing up in a traditional Middle Eastern setting, I often saw women, when they had to shake hands with a male relative, covering their hands with their head-covering in order that they may not defile the males. While the disciples “marveled” at just finding Jesus talking to a Samaritan woman, Jesus, by contrast, was prepared to take a drink from her, even though He knew exactly her past and present.

This woman was shunned and looked down on, even by other Samaritan women. This is why she had to come alone at noon to fetch her water. And now a man who is a Jew asks her for a drink! The Bible does not call this woman a whore or a harlot. Jesus did not treat her as a harlot.

Jesus’ request for a drink is astonishing.

Jesus Did Not Say That

Piper wants us to believe that this is what Jesus said to the woman: "That's right. But you've had five, and the man you sleep with now is not your husband." [3]

The Lord Jesus did not say, “The man you sleep with now is not your husband”. The Lord Jesus said, “And the one whom you now have is not your husband”.

I do not think Piper would stoop so low as to address a lady in his own congregation that way, even if she was a harlot.

The Lord Jesus chose his words carefully and Piper chose his words carefully too.

Piper’s words were calculated to wound, and shame, but Jesus’ words were calculated to cover this woman. And Jesus is the great ‘coverer’. He is our “cover”. Even the Hebrew word used to describe Jesus as our atonement is not far from the word ‘cover’ in meaning  It is kä·far' (that is to cover, or to cover over).

Piper’s words were designed to disgrace this woman but Jesus intentionally came to bestow grace upon this woman even from the first words he uttered to her, “Give me a drink.”

Jesus Did Not Do That

This is how that Piper wants his audience to understand what happened between Jesus and the Samaritan woman:

‘So now he touches the most sensitive, vulnerable spot in her life -- "Go call your husband." The quickest way to the heart is through a wound.

Why does Jesus strip open this woman's inner life like this? Because he had said in John 3:20, "Everyone who does evil hates the light and does not come to the light lest his deeds should be exposed." Concealed sin keeps us from seeing the light of Christ. Sin is like spiritual leprosy. It deadens your senses so you rip your soul to shreds and don't even feel it. But Christ has set his sights on this woman's conversion. So he lays bare her spiritual leprosy. "You've had five husbands and the man you're sleeping with now is not your husband."’ [4]

Now watch the universal reflex of a person trying to avoid conviction. She has to admit in v. 19 that Jesus has extraordinary insight ("You're a prophet!"), but instead of dealing with her guilt she tries to suck Jesus into an academic controversy: "O, so you're a prophet, well, where do you stand on the issue of where people ought to worship?" [5]

Not all religious talk represents the truth as revealed in Jesus.

Piper called the Samaritan woman a whore and a harlot which she was not. He uses offensive words to describe the relationship with the sixth man. Jesus describes this relationship in a polite way.

Now he wants his audience to believe that Jesus wounded her heart, stripped open her inner life and laid bare her spiritual leprosy.

Here is what the grace of the Lord Jesus did to this woman:

A Private Conversation

The Lord Jesus intentionally wanted to meet this woman. His meeting with her was not an accident. He knew she is coming to that well. He knew everything about her. The Lord Jesus wanted to discuss sensitive issues in her life. This is why their conversation had to be a private one.

The Lord Jesus had twelve disciples plus many others. But when he wanted to talk to this Samaritan woman about her life, not one other person was present. I am sure someone like the disciple John would love to have stayed with Jesus, but all of them went away or, more likely, were sent away.

How many people do you need to go and buy lunch? They must all have been just as tired and hungry and thirsty as Jesus, but they all had to walk in the heat of the day to buy the picnic lunch. Surely one or two of them could have spared the others the trouble and managed that. No. Jesus knew this woman was coming and he wanted a private conversation with her. He did not want to “scandalize” her in front of any one, even his closest disciples.

Even if John was the only disciple left, the Lord Jesus could have sent him a few metres away so that he would not hear what was being said. But, no, Jesus did not even want that. He did not want to hurt this woman’s feelings by allowing even one distant on-looker, even if this on-looker was a close disciple!

Jesus would not even allow a stray look.

What a wonderful Saviour!

Jesus Her Righteousness

Let us look at what the Lord Jesus said to this woman:

Jesus said to her, "Go, call your husband, and come here." The woman answered and said, "I have no husband." Jesus said to her, "You have well said, 'I have no husband,' for you have had five husbands, and the one whom you now have is not your husband; in that you spoke truly." (Jhn 4:16-18)

In reply to Jesus’ request, all the woman said was, “I have no husband”. But listen to how the Lord Jesus addresses the one Piper called a whore and a harlot. Jesus said to her, “Well said!”

The Greek expression; (well said) “Kalos epias” used in John 4:17 is exactly the same as in Luke 20:39 in which Jesus beautifully demolished the Sadducees who wanted to embarrass him.

Luk 20:39 “Then some of the scribes answered and said, "Teacher, You have spoken well. “Kalos epias.”

The inconsistency of many new translations is that they translated “Kalos epias” in John 4:17 as “You are right” or “that is correct” etc, while translating the same “Kalos epias” in Luke 20:39 as “well said” or “spoken well”.

Here is the definition of the Greek word “kalos”:

1) beautifully, finely, excellently, well

a) rightly, so that there shall be no room for blame, well, truly

b) excellently, nobly, commendably

c) honourably, in honour

               1) in a good place, comfortable

d) to speak well of one, to do good

e) to be well (of those recovering health)

You are right” and “that is correct” are neutral, but “well said” and “spoken well” are full of commendation and praise. Jesus commended her for saying she had no husband in John 4:17, just as the scribes commended Jesus for obliterating the Sadducees in Luke 20:39.

Jesus is about to bring this woman’s past and present to the light. But he does this between two amazing supporting “brackets”. Jesus, the Great Physician bracketed her sins between two sets of commendations.

The first bracket is, “well said”. Then Jesus brings up her past and present, followed by the second bracket of commendation: “in that you spoke truly”. What a teacher!

Just look at them. They are highlighted in red.

"Jesus said to her, "You have well said, 'I have no husband,' "for you have had five husbands, and the one whom you now have is not your husband; in that you spoke truly."

How did John so precisely place those two “brackets”? Would their impact on this woman have been the same if they had been placed next to each other? Would their impact be the same if both had been placed before or after bringing up her sins?

With these two “brackets”, the Lord Jesus was providing support for this woman as he brought up her sins. Jesus, intentionally, provided a commendation before and a commendation after bringing her past up. What a gentleman!

How did John so precisely place those two “brackets”? The Holy Spirit inspired John to write it this way. And this is wonderful indeed.

Would that incident be the same if these two commendations were missing altogether?  Many commentators have ignored them, as if Jesus never uttered them. This would have been indeed “laying bare this woman’s leprosy.”

A spirit of divination could have told the woman “everything that she ever did” but the Saviour of the World “covered everything that she ever did.” This is why she could face the world with her new song. "Come; see a Man who told me all things that I ever did. Is not this the Christ?"

From his goodness he imparted goodness to her, when he said to her, “Well said”. From his truthfulness he imparted truth to her, when he said to her, “You spoke truly”.

She was blown away!

When my children had crawled long enough, the day came when they managed to wobblingly stand up. As a father it is an exciting time because you know your child is attempting to take their first step. So what I used to do was to let my children hold onto my two index fingers and gently make them lean forward. I watched the unsteady legs take a step and two and three. It was a joy to be their “walker”. And through it all I would say to them, “Good girl!” or “Good boy, you are doing it, you did it; you did it!” Was not that what Jesus did for her? Jesus stretched his hands to this woman and helped her take her first steps. With one hand he said “You spoke well” and with the other he said “In that you spoke truly.”

Yes, “she did it”, but it is Jesus who was the supporter, the enabler, and the encourager. He was everything the Father was. And God has always been a Father. "I taught Ephraim to walk, taking them by their arms. (Hsa 11:3)

When we come to him, we come to our Father, not to the “School Master.”

Jesus Her High Priest

Did Jesus “lay bare her spiritual leprosy”? Or did he bear her on his heart?

To the woman who was caught in adultery and dragged before Jesus, Jesus said, “Neither do I condemn you, sin no more” (Jhn 8:11).

Of the woman who voluntarily came to Jesus and washed his feet with her tears and anointed his feet with perfume Jesus said, “Her many sins have been forgiven” (Luke 7:47).

But no such thing was said to the Samaritan woman.  Jesus said neither! These first two women were Jewish. This woman was a Samaritan. She did not know her left hand from her right hand. Unlike the other two women, Jesus sought this one!

And he did something wonderful for her.

He Himself confessed her sins for her! What more can anyone dream of? How astonishing!

All the woman said was, “I have no husband”. The woman did not say: “I have had five husbands and the one I now have is not my husband.” It is Jesus who said that for her and then he finished by saying, “In that you spoke truly”. It is He who spoke truly. She just said, “I have no husband”.

Here is amazing grace for you!

If you do not have the nerve to face your own past, he will face it for you. Indeed he did, when he died on the cross for you.

Her past, with all its sins and guilt, passed through his lips! Once that happened, it was never the same again. Say no more.

That explains why her past became her song.

She did not boast that he told her that she “spoke well”. She did not boast that he told her she spoke the truth. She boasted that he told her everything she had ever done. This she repeated over and over again to the people of the town. When her past passed through his lips, her past was never the same again. This was one of the sweetest things she heard from his lips. When these words passed through his lips, there was not a trace of condemnation but they were full of tenderness, love and forgiveness. This is amazing. What a beautiful Saviour!!!

Jesus confessed her sins because he was her High Priest. This was the job of the high priest, to “confess … all the iniquities of the children of Israel, and all their transgressions, concerning all their sins.” See (Leviticus 16:21)[6]

The Woman Said That

This woman could not go to fetch her water in the cool of the day. Every day she would go at noon time to get her daily water to avoid the stares and insults of other women who probably called her a whore and a harlot.

So when she heard Jesus say,

"Whoever drinks of this water will thirst again, but whoever drinks of the water that I shall give him will never thirst. But the water that I shall give him will become in him a fountain of water springing up into everlasting life." (Jhn 4:13-14)

the woman said to Him, "Sir, give me this water, that I may not thirst, nor come here to draw [water]." (Jhn 4:15) 

Jesus saw a tired, thirsty and lost sheep.

And he gave this sheep a drink and this sheep did drink. What a beautiful sight!

The woman did not sarcastically say "O, so you're a prophet”. The woman said: “Sir, I perceive that you are a prophet.”

Notice the respect she shows as she addresses Jesus. She calls him “Sir” (κύριος) which  is a title of honour expressive of respect and reverence, with which servants greet their master[7], not “O, so you are a prophet” as Piper imagined her to have said.

At this point the woman’s eyes were opened and she said, “Sir, I see…”[8]

When She Drank The Living Water

Piper rightly observed that the Lord Jesus never spoke to her about adultery again. Verse 18 was the end of that issue. But he does not tell us why. Instead he speaks of her trying “to avoid conviction” and not wanting to “deal with her guilt”.

But there is an amazing reason why the Lord Jesus did not speak to her about her adultery again. It is because, when The Lord Jesus confessed her sins for her, her sins were gone.

That was the moment she drank the living water.  

Some translations and commentators of John 4:18 want to give the impression that Jesus was rubbing her sin in. The NIV for example says “The fact is, you have had five husbands, and the man you now have is not your husband. What you have just said is quite true."

The fact, dear translators is that there is no “the fact is” in the original.

The second fact is, that the Lord Jesus linked the “you have well said” or “you have spoken well” with having five husbands etc. And as soon as these words passed through his lips, this so called fact belonged to the deep seas. As soon as Jesus confessed her sins for her, her burden was rolled away as far as the east from the west.

The third fact is that as soon as Jesus confessed her sins for her he, in the same breath, commended her by saying, “in that you spoke truly."

The fourth fact is that as soon as Jesus confessed her sins for her, she said, Amen. Or literally: “I can see you are a prophet!!!” She was saying, “It is so, as you said”. She did not deny it or beat around the bush as some commentators want us to believe. What a beautiful soul.

The fifth fact is that the Lord Jesus said the minimum about this woman’s past. He could have told her the names of her previous husbands etc, but he kept the “hurt” to the minimum. Our Lord is not a shock jock.

What a gentleman!!

Piper said:

Now watch the universal reflex of a person trying to avoid conviction. She has to admit in v. 19 that Jesus has extraordinary insight ("You're a prophet!"), but instead of dealing with her guilt she tries to suck Jesus into an academic controversy: "O, so you're a prophet, well, where do you stand on the issue of where people ought to worship?" [9]

By the time we get to verse 19, there was nothing left to be convicted of. By verse 19 there was not a trace of guilt left in this woman’s heart for her to deal with.

This is why the Lord Jesus never spoke to her about adultery again.

It is the hireling who would love to rub it in.

Jesus Did Not Rub It In

It is amazing that commentators take great delight in exposing their own hearts when it comes to talking about this woman’s sins in verse 18.

Here is what John Gill had to say about “in that saidst thou truly;” “or that which is truth: thus Christ the omniscient God, who knew her full well, and the whole of her past infamous conversation, and her present lewd and wicked way of living, exposes all unto her.”[10]
Another commentator said Jesus’ words were “A devastating exposure!”[11]
And another said “The words of Jesus are a verbal slap in the face”[12]
Another said: “Her sexual sins may be only the “tip of the iceberg,” but she is convinced He knows the whole iceberg. And she is right!”[13] Bob Deffinbaugh

The Lord Jesus kept his comment about her sins to minimum, but these commentators elaborated on her sins.

What the Lord Jesus said were the facts, but the commentators stretched, changed and sensationalized them.

The Lord Jesus used discrete words. They use sexually loaded words.

The Lord Jesus affirmed her. They degraded her.

The Lord Jesus asked her for a drink, but they called her a whore and a harlot.

Jesus words were calculated to bring forgiveness; theirs were calculated to condemn and judge.

Jesus’ words were designed to heal and remove her guilt, but their’ were designed to cut and injure.

If the Lord Jesus spoke only of the tenth of the iceberg, who are you to dig for the nine tenths?

Indeed the mouth speaks out of the abundance of the heart.

They spoke from the abundance of their heart and Jesus spoke from the abundance of his heart.

Had the Lord Jesus said what these commentators said, this woman would have gone home feeling so guilty and would have kept her mouth shut. And she would have left some water for those hot and tired commentators too.

These commentators behaved like the Pharisee in the following story:

Luk 7:36 Then one of the Pharisees asked Him to eat with him. And He went to the Pharisee's house, and sat down to eat.
Luk 7:37 And behold, a woman in the city who was a sinner, when she knew that [Jesus] sat at the table in the Pharisee's house, brought an alabaster flask of fragrant oil,
Luk 7:38 and stood at His feet behind [Him] weeping; and she began to wash His feet with her tears, and wiped [them] with the hair of her head; and she kissed His feet and anointed [them] with the fragrant oil.
Luk 7:39 Now when the Pharisee who had invited Him saw [this], he spoke to himself, saying, "This Man, if He were a prophet, would know who and what manner of woman [this is] who is touching Him, for she is a sinner."
Luk 7:40 And Jesus answered and said to him, "Simon, I have something to say to you." So he said, "Teacher, say it."
Luk 7:41 "There was a certain creditor who had two debtors. One owed five hundred denarii, and the other fifty.
Luk 7:42 "And when they had nothing with which to repay, he freely forgave them both. Tell Me, therefore, which of them will love him more?"
Luk 7:43 Simon answered and said, "I suppose the [one] whom he forgave more." And He said to him, "You have rightly judged."
Luk 7:44 Then He turned to the woman and said to Simon, "Do you see this woman? I entered your house; you gave Me no water for My feet, but she has washed My feet with her tears and wiped [them] with the hair of her head.
Luk 7:45 "You gave Me no kiss, but this woman has not ceased to kiss My feet since the time I came in.
Luk 7:46 "You did not anoint My head with oil, but this woman has anointed My feet with fragrant oil.
Luk 7:47 "Therefore I say to you, her sins, which [are] many, are forgiven, for she loved much. But to whom little is forgiven, [the same] loves little."
Luk 7:48 Then He said to her, "Your sins are forgiven."
Luk 7:49 And those who sat at the table with Him began to say to themselves, "Who is this who even forgives sins?"
Luk 7:50 Then He said to the woman, "Your faith has saved you. Go in peace."

Pharisees delighted to condemn, but Jesus delighted to forgive.

Pharisees were sin sniffers, but Jesus was the sin remover.

These commentators in their obsession with sin and what is right and wrong missed on seeing the beauty of Jesus and his mercy.

How did the words about her sins fall from his lips? Did he lower his voice? Did her lower his gaze or did he look her in the eye?

If he looked her in the eye, his look must have had an amazing healing effect. Here is a woman inviting the whole town, unashamed to show her dirty washing, because she met a man who told her everything that she ever did. She was not ashamed to tell the whole town about her past. Who is this man?! And what was she drinking?

She drank the living water.

She did not tell the people about the living water because she was bubbling with it. They could see it for themselves.

She did not tell the people about true worship because she was doing it.

She did not tell the town people that they did not have to worship in Jerusalem. She did not tell the people to come and see a man who would give them living water but she told them “Come, see a Man who told me all things that I ever did. Is this not the Christ?”

The true shepherd knew exactly what he had done. Amazing!

The hirelings do not know when enough is enough, but the good shepherd knew what he had done. He knew how effective his medicine was. He knew he had said enough.

Jesus did not rub it in, he rubbed it out.

That is why he came.

What a wonderful savior!

If your sins pass through the lips of Jesus, rejoice. Ah, rejoice, because they will never haunt you again.

This is why she could take all her dirty washing and show it to the whole town!

And this so called dirty washing was the purest and cleanest washing anyone has ever seen.

This woman broadcast it to the whole town!! The ones who had not known now knew. The ones who suspected her affair now knew. She did not care what others thought of her. She cared only for what Jesus thought of her. This is what counted.

What shocked her out of her “sleep” was not the laying bare her of “spiritual leprosy”, but his gentleness in bringing it up and then covering it so beautifully.

Jesus did not come to “wound” but to heal. He did not come to lay bare our sins but to atone (kafar) for them. He did not come to shame sinners but to give them beauty for ashes.

The approach of these commentators has turned the Gospel into “law”. As a result, the sheep get flogged, not fed.

And She Leaves Him

The woman said “Come: see a man, which told me all things that ever I did: is not this the Christ?” KJ

Only the king James translation got the sense of the woman’s question right. It is actually an emphatic assertion that this is the Christ not a “may be” or “could He be”.

Jesus told her plainly that He is the Christ, “I who speak to you am [He].”[14]

So when the Lord Jesus tells her that He is the Christ she leaves him!!!

She finds the desire of all ages and then bolts off!

Instead of holding to his feet and worshipping him she goes away?!

Instead of asking him when, why and what. she disappears!

She believed that the Christ, "When He comes, He will tell us all things."

So she finds the promised One whom generation after generation waited for but she leaves him by the well to broadcast her “spiritual leprosy” to the whole town!

What is going on???

The encounter is too beautiful to keep it to herself. It is too big to contain it in her little being. The living water is overflowing. The water he gave her had become “a fountain of water springing up into everlasting life."

Now she is worshipping in spirit and truth.

Would You Like To Meet Him

The Samaritan woman went to the town saying, Hey, everybody, come and meet someone who told me everything that I ever did.

If you had heard her speak like that, would you have wanted to go and meet that man?

Or would you have said: “Not on your life; he might tell me everything that I ever did too”!

Can you imagine the first bunch of Samaritan men approaching Jesus? As they get closer will they get cold feet? Might one say to the other, “You go first!”?

But they did go, and they went in their droves. Why? Because the Samaritan woman must have been so excited that the men thought that she must have won the big one! Her excitement said, “It is so beautiful when he tells you everything you did”.

How can you explain the whole town en mass going to have “their hearts wounded, their inner life stripped open and their spiritual leprosy laid bare”?

Not so! What they saw in her face was the wonder of His grace.

They must have been completely mesmerized by her bubbling joy. Her face must have reflected some of his glory.

There Were No Razors In His Eyes

John Piper said, “Jesus simply sits there on the edge of the well with his hands folded, looking at the woman with razors in his eyes”.[15]

Were there really razors in Jesus’ eyes when he looked at the Samaritan woman?

When the disciples came back with the food, they said "Rabbi, eat." Jhn 4:32 But He said to them, "I have food to eat of which you do not know." Jhn 4:33 Therefore the disciples said to one another, "Has anyone brought Him [anything] to eat?" Jhn 4:34 Jesus said to them, "My food is to do the will of Him who sent Me, and to finish His work”.

Jesus did not eat from the food the disciples brought. Jesus called this encounter “His food”. He was full. Have you eaten a Mango with razors in your eyes? Have you eaten a fresh ripe fig with razors in your eyes? Or were your eyes a sea of joy and delight.

Let me tell you another story:

As a farmer I have tried many projects to make a living. One of the projects was to breed milking goats. It was a very exciting time when they had their babies. We had to make sure that the foxes did not get the babies. So every afternoon we would count the babies. At one time we knew there should be 32 babies. I counted them and my son counted them, a few times. If one of us did not count 32, we would have to count again. The mothers used to hide their babies and we had to go all over the property to find them. One evening we counted 31. We called everybody to come and help. It was getting dark. The torch ran out of light. We panicked. When it was almost dark one of my sons thought to himself, if I was a mother goat, where would I hide my baby?

While the rest of us were looking all over the place for the missing baby, he zoomed in on the best places to hide something, such as under fallen logs. There were about six of those large logs. As it was getting dark and he could not see properly. He used his hands to feel things. White plastic shopping bags used to fool us in our search for babies. He felt what looked like a white patch. It was warm and soft. He shouted, “Dad, I have found it”. We all came running. And what joy. We carried it and gave it to its mother.

We had no razors in our eyes. We talked about it all night.

When Jesus sat at the well, there were no razors in his eyes. He was looking at one of his lost sheep.

In the parable of the lost sheep, that Jesus told, the shepherd carried the sheep on his shoulders. The shepherd does not drive it home with a stick. The hireling might do that. But the shepherd of the sheep does not do that. He knows the sheep is too tired for that.

And when the shepherd carries the lost sheep on his shoulders, he talks to it and sings to it all the way home. There would be no razors in his eyes.

Try carrying a sheep on your shoulders. You will soon notice it smells. It will also have some annoying insects and flies. But the shepherd of this sheep thinks this sheep does not smell. He is too full of joy to notice all that stuff.

When the Lord Jesus told this woman of her sins there was not the slightest hint of accusing her or condemning her. Be sure of this.

When the Jews dragged the woman who was caught in adultery before Him, he said to her, “Neither do I condemn you, sin no more” There were no razors in his eyes when he said: “Neither do I condemn you” and there were no razors in his eyes when he said: “Sin no more” either. His eyes were full of love and compassion.

When Jesus looked at the “rich young ruler”, there was love, (Mar 10:21), not razors in his eyes, even though he walked away from His love.

When Jesus stood before doomed Jerusalem, there were no razors in eyes, but tears.

Jesus was delivering a new baby. Has any father had razors in his eyes when his new baby was being born?

When Jesus sat by the well, he was anticipating a feast and a harvest. The razors were in someone else’s eyes.

The Etiquette Of The Kingdom

I Have No Husband

There was something very significant when the Samaritan woman said “I have no husband”

She could have said to herself, “what is a piece of paper? What is a ceremony? For all intents and purposes we are married. That man at home is a husband”.  But no, she recognized that the relationship she now has did not constitute a marriage. Her sin was a sin of the flesh, not a sin of the mind. She sinned against her “flesh” (see 1 Corinthians 6:18), but she did not sin against her “mind”. She did not minimize her sin. But most importantly, she did not reason out her sins to justify her life style. Her sins did not become a theological system that gave her a license for immoral behaviour. There was no malice in her answer. She was free from the yeast of the Pharisees. She was not a whitewashed tomb. She knew that her life stank. Her moral compass was intact. She did not mutilate her soul. She called a spade a spade, not a shovel.

To enjoy the presence of the King, there is an important thing every person needs to know. It has always been the same with his people since of old: “Only know this that you have sinned” (Jer 3:13)

The great physician will not apply his ointment, nor bandage our wounds before removing the infection. He does the disinfecting so beautifully, not with the stick of the “Law” but with his own blood.

He must dress you up to be fit for the wedding reception. You can not go into the reception with your dirty clothing. Yes he calls beggars and paupers for his reception but he makes them look a million!

The Generous King
Hospitality is very important in the Biblical culture. [16]  Even to this day it can be clearly seen in Middle Eastern villages.

In the Middle East, the way you treat your guest is a measure of your honour.

It goes without saying that you do not invite people to offend them or shame them. This does happen but if it happens it is the mark of a base person.

John Piper describes the words of Jesus in verse 18 to this woman as wounding her heart, stripping open her inner life and laying bare her spiritual leprosy. Another commentator said Jesus’ words were exposing all her present lewd and wicked way of living,[17] and “A devastating exposure!”[18]
Another said “The words of Jesus are a verbal slap in the face”[19]

Are such commentators presenting the real Jesus or are they projecting their own personalities out there?

Yes the Lord Jesus did expose people and lay bare their spiritual leprosy but he did not do it to  this woman. It was the ‘holier than thou” kind that he exposed.

The Samaritan woman did not invite herself into his presence. He invited her.

He was the initiator of the meeting. He intentionally went there and waited for her. And he was the initiator of the conversation. She was his guest. She was the guest of the king. And the king lavished upon her his gifts according to “His royal bounties” (1 Kings 10:13), and grace above grace.

He brought her to his banqueting house, and his banner over her was love, not a “verbal slap on the face.”

The Bible records that Jesus came across three women who had some sexual sins. On all three occasions, Jesus forgave them.

The first woman came to him of her own volition. Jesus forgave her sins. Another woman was caught in the act and dragged to Him, against her will. Jesus forgave her sins.

In the case of the Samaritan woman Jesus purposely went to seek her. What an honour!

Whether you voluntarily seek him, or others dangle you from the roof before him, or others catch you in the act and haul you before him, or whatever circumstances bring you before him, he will never slap you in the face. He is a wonderful host.

Jesus said to the Samaritan woman: "If you knew the gift of God, and who it is who says to you, 'Give Me a drink,' you would have asked Him, and He would have given you living water."

The operative words are: “If you knew”

But that is another topic.

All of the above was only the appetizer. There is so much more to the character of Jesus!

Dear reader, apparently Google does not allow comments on websites like mine.

However, if you email me your comments, I will publish them under this article.

Just click on my email address and type away. Thanks.

The fig Farmer

abuhennah@gmail.com

Appendix

Is Not This The Christ?

The Short Answer

In John 4: 29 the Samaritan woman said “Come, see a man, which told me all things that ever I did: is not this the Christ?”

Most translations render the last part of John 4:29 as “Could this be the Christ” or “Can this be the Christ” or a simple question, “Is this the Christ?” as if it is an open ended one.

What did the Samaritan woman mean when she said, “Is not this the Christ?”

Let us look at the context:

Jhn 4:25   The woman saith unto him, I know that Messias cometh, which is called Christ: when he is come, he will tell us all things.

Jhn 4:26   Jesus saith unto her, I that speak unto thee am [he].

Jhn 4:27 ¶ And upon this came his disciples, and marvelled that he talked with the woman: yet no man said, What seekest thou? or, Why talkest thou with her?

Jhn 4:28   The woman then left her waterpot, and went her way into the city, and saith to the men,

Jhn 4:29   Come, see a man, which told me all things that ever I did: is not this the Christ?

…

…

Jhn 4:39 ¶ And many of the Samaritans of that city believed on him for the saying of the woman, which testified, He told me all that ever I did.

Jhn 4:40   So when the Samaritans were come unto him, they besought him that he would tarry with them: and he abode there two days.

Jhn 4:41   And many more believed because of his own word;

Jhn 4:42   And said unto the woman, Now we believe, not because of thy saying: for we have heard [him] ourselves, and know that this is indeed the Christ, the Saviour of the world.

Barnes, commenting on John 4:26, “I that speak onto thee am He - I am the Messiah,” said, “This was the first time that he openly professed it.”[20] That is, Jesus openly professed that He is the Messiah.

Did the Samaritan woman believe Jesus to be the Messiah?

If the Samaritan woman was asking the doubtful question, “Could this be the Christ?” she would not have been ‘believing’. This would be a picture of someone sitting on the fence.

In that case John 4:39, “And many of the Samaritans of that city believed on him” before they met Jesus would be ridiculously untrue. For if she was doubting, how could her doubt produce faith in people who had not yet met Jesus. It is inconceivable that they believed while she was sitting on the fence!

Again, if she did not believe Jesus to be the Christ, Jhn 4:42 would make no sense: “Then they said to the woman, ‘Now we believe, not because of what you said, for we ourselves have heard [Him] and we know that this is indeed the Christ, the Saviour of the world.’”

Note the subject of their belief. “This is indeed the Christ, the Saviour of the world”. The subject of their belief, when she spoke to them before they met Jesus, was not that she met a man who told her of her past. Any man listening to the gossip could have told her that. A fortune teller could have told her that. The high point of her conversation was that she had found the Messiah.

In other words they believed before they met Jesus because of what she said. But now they believed because of what they heard and saw of Jesus Himself. What was the object of their faith? “We know that this is indeed the Christ, the Saviour of the world”.This is what she meant when she said, “Is not this the Christ?”

If most translations are right, what makes the Samaritans believe more than she did? She met Jesus and had a one to one conversation. The last thing he told her was that he is the Messiah.

It is unthinkable for Jesus to say to her, “I am He” and for her to then say, “I will think about that!” Jesus knew she would believe him, otherwise he would not have openly professed to her, and for the first time, that he is the Messiah. She was not like the Jews who refused to believe. She believed that “this is indeed the Christ”. If she did not believe, or had some doubt, how was it that the Samaritans whom she invited concluded that, “This indeed is the Christ.”?

In which situation would it be more likely that such information would be impressed upon a learner: a one-to-one encounter or a group session?

We are not told that Jesus told them that He is the Christ, but Jesus told her that He is the Christ. Some “scholars” want us to believe that she had “real doubt” but the town people were totally convinced and believed.

To those who say the Samaritan woman did not believe that Jesus is the Christ, I ask: How do you explain Christianity without the resurrection of Jesus? How do you explain that a whole town goes to see Jesus unless her faith was so infectious, her joy so out of this world and her body language so commanding that the whole town went to see Jesus?

Then again Jesus himself testified to the faith of the Samaritan woman.

Jhn 4:31 In the meantime His disciples urged Him, saying, "Rabbi, eat."

Jhn 4:32 But He said to them, "I have food to eat of which you do not know."

Jhn 4:33 Therefore the disciples said to one another, "Has anyone brought Him [anything] to eat?"

Jhn 4:34 Jesus said to them, "My food is to do the will of Him who sent Me, and to finish His work.

After the encounter with the Samaritan woman, Jesus was so full that his disciples thought someone must have brought him some food. Had she left in a state of doubt, Jesus would not have described the encounter with the words, "My food is to do the will of Him who sent Me, and to finish His work.” Jesus ate “His food” to the last mouthful and was satisfied. This is not a description of unfinished work!!

The long answer that discusses  points of grammar where the Greek word ‘meti’ is used will follow soon.

Endnotes

---

[1] . http://www.soundofgrace.com/piper84/040884m.htm - “God Seeks People to Worship Him in Spirit and Truth”

[2] . http://www.soundofgrace.com/piper84/040884m.htm

[3] . http://www.soundofgrace.com/piper84/040884m.htm

[4] . http://www.soundofgrace.com/piper84/040884m.htm

[5] . http://www.soundofgrace.com/piper84/040884m.htm

[6] . Lev 16:21 "Aaron shall lay both his hands on the head of the live goat, confess over it all the iniquities of the children of Israel, and all their transgressions, concerning all their sins, putting them on the head of the goat, and shall send [it] away into the wilderness by the hand of a suitable man.

[7] . Strong’s concordance.

[8] . It is the same word used in Jhn 6:40 "And this is the will of Him who sent Me, that everyone who sees the Son and believes in Him may have everlasting life; and I will raise him up at the last day."

[9] . http://www.soundofgrace.com/piper84/040884m.htm

[10] . http://www.biblestudytools.com/commentaries/gills-exposition-of-the-bible/john-4-18.html

[11] . http://www.biblecentre.org/commentaries/lmg_47_john.htm

[12] . http://www.keepbelieving.com/sermon/2001-01-14-The-Woman-at-the-Well-Christ-Speaks-to-the-Problem-of-a-Guilty-Past/

[13] . http://bible.org/seriespage/woman-well-john-41-42

[14] . The expression “is not this?” is found in many places in the New Testament, for example:

“You will know them by their fruits” Literally it says “will you not know them by their fruit” Which means “you will definitely know them by their fruit”

Similarly in Jhn 7:31  “And many of the people believed on him, and said, When Christ cometh, will he do more miracles than these which this [man] hath done?”

Literally it says: “He will not do more miracles than these which this [man] hath done.”

It is actually saying “there is no other Christ but he”. And this agrees with the first part of the verse “And many of the people believed on him”. The second part of Jhn 7:31 is the reason why they believed in him: If Jesus is not the Christ, and if a “Christ” was to come, he will not do more miracles than Jesus. This Jesus has provided full evidence for his credentials, and no one can exceed what he did.

Otherwise the verse would go like this: “And many of the people believed on him, and said, When Christ cometh, he may do more miracles than these which this [man] hath done?” And this does not make any sense.

So too the Samaritan woman believed that Jesus is the Christ. So “is not this the Christ” is an emphatic way of saying “He is the Christ.”

[15] . http://www.soundofgrace.com/piper84/040884m.htm

[16] . This hospitality can be seen very clearly in the life of Abraham, and to an unusual length in the life of Lot and also in the book of Job.

[17] . http://www.biblestudytools.com/commentaries/gills-exposition-of-the-bible/john-4-18.html

[18] . http://www.biblecentre.org/commentaries/lmg_47_john.htm

[19] . http://www.keepbelieving.com/sermon/2001-01-14-The-Woman-at-the-Well-Christ-Speaks-to-the-Problem-of-a-Guilty-Past/

[20] . http://bible.cc/john/4-26.htm