Nathanael

a disciple of our Lord. He appears to have been a pious Jew who waited for the Messiah: and upon Jesus saying to him, “Before Philip called thee, I saw thee under the fig tree,” Nathanael, convinced, by some circumstance not explained, of his omniscience, exclaimed, “Master, thou art the Son of God, and the King of Israel.” Many have thought that Nathanael was the same as Bartholomew. The evangelists, who mention Bartholomew, say nothing of Nathanael; and St. John, who mentions Nathanael, takes no notice of Bartholomew. We read at the end of St. John’s Gospel, that our Saviour, after his resurrection, manifested himself to Peter, Thomas, Nathanael, and the sons of Zebedee, as they were fishing in the lake of Gennesareth. We know no other circumstances of the life of this holy man.

Nathan´ael (given of God), a person of Cana in Galilee, who, when informed by Philip that the Messiah had appeared in the person of Jesus of Nazareth, asked, ’Can any good thing come out of Nazareth?’ But he nevertheless accepted Philip’s laconic invitation, ’Come and see!’ When Jesus saw him coming he said, ’Behold an Israelite indeed, in whom is no guile.’ Astonished to hear this from a man to whom he supposed himself altogether unknown, he asked, ’Whence knowest thou me?’ And the answer, ’Before that Philip called thee, when thou wast under the fig-tree, I saw thee,’ wrought such conviction on his mind that he at once exclaimed, ’Rabbi, thou art the son of God; thou art the king of Israel!’ (Joh 1:45-51). It is clear, from the effect, that Nathanael knew by this that Jesus was supernaturally acquainted with his disposition and character, as the answer had reference to the private acts of devotion, or to the meditations which filled his mind, when under the fig-tree in his garden. It is questioned whether Jesus had actually seen Nathanael or not with his bodily eyes. It matters not to the result; but the form of the words employed seems to suggest that he had actually noticed him when under the fig-tree, and had then cast a look through his inward being. It is believed that Nathanael is the same as the apostle Bartholomew. All the disciples of John the Baptist named in St. John 1 became apostles; and St. John does not name Bartholomew, nor the other evangelists Nathanael in the lists of the apostles (Mat 10:3; Mar 3:18; Luk 6:14): besides, the name of Bartholomew always follows that of Philip; and it would appear that Bartholomew (son of Tholmai) is no more than a surname [BARTHOLOMEW].

A disciple of Christ, probably the same as BARTHOLOMEW, which see. He was a native of Cana in Galilee, Joh 21:2, and was one of the first to recognize the Messiah, who at their first interview manifested his perfect acquaintance with Nathanael’s secret heart and life, Joh 1:45-51 . He was introduced by Philip to Jesus, who on seeing him pronounced that remarkable eulogy which has rendered his name almost another word for sincerity: "Behold an Israelite indeed, in whom is no guile." He was one of the disciples to whom Christ appeared at the sea of Tiberias after his resurrection, Joh 21:2 ; and after witnessing the ascension returned with the other apostles to Jerusalem, Mal 1:4,12,13 .\par

Nathan’ael. (gift of God). A disciple of Jesus Christ, concerning whom, under that name at least, we learn from Scripture little more than his birthplace, Cana of Galilee, Joh 21:2, and his simple, truthful character. Joh 1:47. The name does not occur in the first three Gospels, but it is commonly believed that Nathanael and Bartholomew are the same person.

The evidence for that belief is as follows: St. John, who twice mentions Nathanael, never introduces the name of Bartholomew at all. St. Matthew, Mat 10:3, St. Mark, Mar 3:18, and St. Luke, Luk 8:14, all speak of Bartholomew, but never of Nathanael. If was Philip who first brought Nathanael to Jesus, just as Andrew had brought his brother, Simon.

("God given".) Hebrew Nethaneel. Of Cana in Galilee (Joh 1:47; Joh 21:2). Three or four days after the temptation, Jesus when intending to "go forth into Galilee findeth Philip and saith, Follow Me." Philip, like Andrew finding his own brother Simon (Joh 1:41), and the woman of Samaria (Joh 4:28-29) inviting her fellow townsmen, having been found himself by Jesus, "findeth" his friend Nathanael, and saith, "we have found (he should have said, we have been found by: Isa 65:1; Php 3:12 ff, Son 1:4) Him of whom the prophets did write, Jesus of Nazareth the son of Joseph" (he should have said the Son of God). (For the rest, see BARTHOLOMEW.) Tradition makes Nathanael to have been the bridegroom at the marriage of Cana, to which he belonged.

Nathanael (Na-thăn’a-el), gift of God. A native of Cana of Galilee, Joh 21:2. whom our Lord called an Israelite without guile. Joh 1:47. He was led by Philip to Jesus, He went doubting, with the words on bis lips, "Can there any good thing come out of Nazareth?" Jesus, however, at once convinces him that he is the Messiah by the exhibition of his knowledge, declaring that he had seen Nathanael under the fig tree before ever Philip had called him. Nathanael confesses him to be the Son of God and the King of Israel. The name Nathanael occurs only in John. For this reason, combined with the fact that John never mentions the name of Bartholomew, it is generally supposed that the two are identical.

[Nathan’ael]

One of whom the Lord said, "Behold an Israelite indeed, in whom is no guile." He answered, "Whence knowest thou me?" The Lord told him that he had seen him under the fig tree, where probably he had been in some exercise of soul Godward: we may gather this from Psa 32:2; Psa 32:5, as one in whom is no guile is one who confesses his transgressions to the Lord. At once Nathanael said, "Rabbi, thou art the Son of God; thou art the King of Israel." Joh 1:45-49. Joh 21:2 speaks of Nathanael, of Cana in Galilee, who was with the apostles when they went fishing. This is doubtless the same person. It is thought by many that Nathanael was an apostle, and was the same as Bartholomew, whom John never otherwise mentions.

NATHANAEL (= Θεόδωρος, ‘Gift of God’ [Heb. נְחַנְאֵל, Num 1:8, 1Ch 2:14 etc.]; cf. Adcodatus, Deodatus, Dcusdedit).—We know nothing about him except what is told us in Joh 1:45-51; Joh 21:2. On the question of his identity with Bartholomew, see art. Bartholomew, i. p. 173^a. The place at which Nathanael was found by Philip and brought to Jesus is not mentioned; but it is not improbable that Nathanael was returning from listening to the preaching of the Baptist. He may have been baptized by him. The very detailed account of the calling of Nathanael leads one to suppose that it was an important event, such as the calling of one who was afterwards to be an Apostle. In any case, the local knowledge shown in Joh 1:44 f. is very real and, so far as it goes, it tells in favour of Johannine authorship; for St. John would possess this knowledge, and a later writer would not, and would not care to invent such details. Philip, like Nathanael, was a Galilaean, the one of Bethsaida, time other of Cana (Joh 21:2): they were therefore neighbours, and evidently friends. Like Andrew and John, Philip no sooner finds, or is found by, Christ, than he seeks to make Him known to others. The plural, ‘We have found him,’ etc., seems to imply that Philip, with Andrew and Peter and John and James, was now a disciple of Jesus. These five formed the beginning of the Christian Church. The order of the words in the Greek is noteworthy: Him of whom wrote Moses in the law’ comes first, ‘and the prophets’ being added as an afterthought; and the whole of this comes with emphasis before the verb, ‘we have found.’ It looks as if Nathanael and Philip had at times discussed the OT descriptions of the Messiah. At this time Philip would know nothing of the virgin birth at Bethlehem: he quite naturally describes Jesus as He was commonly known. The Scriptures to which he specially refers would he Gen 17:7; Gen 49:10, Deu 18:15.

Nathanael’s question, ‘Can any good thing?’ etc., does not imply that Nazareth had a bad reputation, but that the insignificant village, so close to his own home, was not a likely birthplace for the Messiah. Was a petty place, so familiar to them both, thus honoured? What prophecy said anything of the kind? The prophecy alluded to in Mat 2:23 is not known to us, and was probably unknown to Nathanael. In any case, Nathanael’s question confirms the statement that the miracle at Cana was the first of Christ’s signs. If Jesus had worked miracles at Nazareth, Nathanael at Cana must have heard of them.

Philip’s ‘Come and see’ is in harmony with the practical bent of his mind (Joh 12:21; Joh 14:8), and is the best answer to anything like prejudice. ‘He that doeth the truth cometh to the light’ (Joh 3:21, cf. Joh 1:9); and this is what Nathanael does, with good results. It is part of his guilelessness that he is willing to have any prejudice removed, and he at once accepts Philip’s proposal; cf. Joh 4:20; Joh 4:30. Christ praises him as truly an Israelite, i.e. as one who has something more than the blood of the patriarch, viz. a character which corresponds to the dignity of the name (Psa 73:1). In him the guile of Jacob the supplanter has given place to the righteousness which wins a victory with God. He is one whose death a prophet may desire (Num 23:10).

Nathanael overhears the praise of himself, and the question with which he replies to it has been criticised as arguing a want of modesty on his part. But his reply does not mean, ‘I know that I am all that; but how do you know it?’ Rather, he exhibits surprise that a total stranger should express any opinion about him, lie somewhat coldly intimates that he doubts the value of praise which can hardly be based upon experience. But, like Mary’s ‘How shall this be?’ (Luk 1:34), his question does not so much ask for proof as express astonishment. In both cases the proof which was not demanded was granted. Gabriel gave Mary a sign that he could read her future, for he showed that he knew all about Elisabeth’s prospects of a son; and Jesus gives Nathanael a sign that He could read his character, for He shows that He knows all about his private conduct (cf. what we read of Elisha in 2Ki 5:26; 2Ki 6:12). Nathanael at once recognizes the significance of this knowledge, and in his reply ‘the true Israelite acknowledges his King.’

It is right to allow for the possibility that in Nathanael’s confession (Joh 1:49), and in that of the Baptist (Joh 1:34), the Evangelist may be putting into the months of others language which had become natural to himself, but was not actually Used by them. St. John was so full of the doctrine that Jesus as the Messiah was the Son of God, that he may have made those who accepted Him as the Messiah express their belief in a form which was not used until somewhat later. We must admit that thus to antedate the terminology of a fuller appreciation of the truth would be possible. But Psa 2:6-7 will suffice to explain the language which the Evangelist attributes to the Baptist and to Nathanael. This Psalm was generally recognized as Messianic, and seems to have been very familiar (Act 4:25-28; Act 13:33, Heb 1:5; Heb 5:5). In the fulness of his conviction Nathanael quite naturally uses the fullest Scriptural designation of the Messiah with which he was acquainted. Experience of Christ’s miraculous knowledge had convinced him, as it convinced the Samaritan woman (Joh 4:29) and Thomas (Joh 20:27-28), that Jesus stood in the closest relation to God. Hence he uses this title of the Messiah (Joh 11:27, Mat 26:63, Mar 3:11 || Mar 5:7 || Mar 15:39 ||, Luk 4:41) rather than the common ‘Son of David’ (Mat 9:27; Mat 12:23; Mat 15:22; Mat 20:30-31; Mat 21:9-15; Mat 22:42 etc.). Although ‘Son of God’ and ‘King of Israel’ both indicate the Messiah, the titles are not quite synonymous, as is shown by the repetition of ‘Thou art.’ ‘Son of God’ gives the relation to God—a relation which would be only vaguely understood by Nathanael; ‘King of Israel’ gives the relation to the Chosen People. Thus the two titles complete one another.

Nothing is gained by suggesting (Cheyne in Enc. Bibl. iii. col. 3338) that ‘when thou wast under the fig-tree’ ought to be ‘when thou wast making supplication,’ because the Hebrew for the one (וְאַתֶּא מִתְחַנֵּן wĕattâ mithhannçn) would resemble the Hebrew for the other (וְאַתָּא תַּהַת הַתְּאֵנָה, wĕattâ tahath hattĕ’çnâ). What the Evangelist gives us is intrinsically more probable, as being more definite, and therefore more likely to impress Nathanael. Nathanael seems to have believed that Jesus knew what he was thinking about under the fig-tree, just as the Samaritan woman believed that He knew all about her past life. Fresh from the teaching of the Baptist, Nathanael may have been meditating on the coming of the Messiah as near at hand. It was under a fig-tree that Augustine heard the ‘Tolle, lege’ (Conf. viii. xii. 1). See OT reff. to ‘fig-tree.’

Believest thou?’ implies something of surprise at the rapidity of Nathanael’s conviction (contrast Mar 6:6); but ‘thou believest’ is perhaps right. Christ approves of his faith and of its basis; and He forthwith promises him an ampler basis, and therefore the prospect of a loftier faith. This wider basis of ‘greater things’ refers to the public signs which are to follow, and which seem to be alluded to in ‘the angels of God ascending and descending upon the Son of man.’ Angels are instruments of the Divine power in nature (Rev 14:18; Rev 16:5). Nathanael has believed because of a miracle of knowledge which could be appreciated by himself alone: he is hereafter to witness miracles of power which can be appreciated by all. And here it is to be noted that, while the ‘Israelite indeed’ enters upon a new life in recognizing his King by the sign granted to him, the Messiah Himself enters upon a new career in granting the sign. This private sign to Nathanael was a prelude to those public miracles in which Christ ‘manifested His glory’ to the Jewish nation and through it to all the world. The angels, who are to be instruments of the manifestation, are represented as being already on earth, the ‘ascending’ being placed first. They are ready to carry men’s prayers to heaven, and to bring down the blessings which prayer wins. But there is a reference to Jacob’s dream (Gen 28:12), suggested possibly by the place; for Bethel, Mahanaim, and the ford Jabbok all lay close to the route which Christ would take in going from Judaea to Galilee; and in the narrative in Genesis the ascending angels are mentioned first. What Jacob had dreamed was fulfilled in Jesus. Heaven was opened and remained so (perfect participle) to mankind. Heaven came down to earth in the Person of the Son of God, and, by a regular intercourse between His place of sojourn and His home, man became capable of attaining to heaven. It narrows the meaning far too much when the promise to Nathanael is interpreted of the angels who appeared after the Temptation, at the Agony, and after the Resurrection and Ascension.

The change in the designation of the Messiah is significant. Nathanael had called Him ‘the Son of God’: He calls Himself ‘the Son of Man,’ and it is the earliest occasion on which He does so. In the Synoptic Gospels the title ‘son of Man’ occurs 69 times, and Christ is represented as using it (always of Himself) on about 40 different occasions. In John the title is used 11 or 12 times, Joh 9:35 being doubtful; and none of these passages is parallel to anything in the Synoptics. Here the point may be that He is come, not to revive the old theocracy, nor to ‘restore the kingdom to Israel’ (Act 1:6), but to redeem the whole human race. It may also be that at this beginning of His ministry Jesus will not definitely accept the title ‘Son of God.’ Without rejecting it, He substitutes for it a title which seems to have been adopted by Him to veil, rather than to reveal, the fact that He was the Messiah. But here again we must allow for the possibility that the Evangelist is wording Christ’s reply according to language which he had often heard from His lips, but which was not used quite so early in the ministry as this.

In Nathanael we have an instance of a good man hampered by prejudice, but quite willing to be enlightened. He comes to the Light, and is searched, approved, and illuminated. In Christ’s treatment of him we have an instance of His knowledge of what was in man (Joh 2:25), not only in the case of mankind in general, but with regard to individual character; also of the working of the law that ‘whosoever hath, to him shall be given.’

The narrative of the call of Nathanael, like the rest of John 1, strongly confirms the belief that the writer is a Jew of Palestine, well acquainted with the Messianic hopes, and with the traditions and phraseology current in Palestine at the time of Christ’s ministry; able also to give a lifelike picture of Christ’s first disciples.

Literature.—B. F. Westcott, Gospel of St. John, 28 f., 33 ff.; R. C. Trench, Studies in the Gospels, 66; H. P. Liddon, University Sermons, 2nd ser. 4; Phillips Brooks, Mystery of Iniquity, 129; A. Maclaren, A Year’s Ministry; 2nd ser. 169; W. Boyd Carpenter, Son of Man, 163; J. G. Greenhough, Apostles of our Lord, 74; H. T. Purchas, Johannine Problems, 68; G. Matheson, Representative Men of the N.T. 71; Expos. 5th ser. viii. (1898) 336.

A. Plummer.

NATHANAEL.—1. 1Es 1:8 = 2Ch 35:9 Nethanel. 2. 1Es 9:22 = Ezr 10:22 Nethanel. 3. An ancestor of Judith (Jdt 8:1). 4. Nathanael of Cana in Galilee (Joh 21:2) appears twice in the Fourth Gospel. (1) When told by Philip, ‘We have found him of whom Moses in the law and the prophets did write—Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Joseph,’ Nathanael hesitated. ‘Can any good thing come out of Nazareth?’ he asked. Philip thereupon conducted him to meet Jesus, and, when he looked on that wondrous face, his doubt vanished, and he hailed Him as the Messiah, ‘the Son of God, the King of Israel.’ See Joh 1:43-51. (2) Nathanael was one of the seven to whom the risen Lord manifested Himself at the Lake of Galilee (Joh 21:2). His name occurs only in Jn. but the following are reasons for believing that he was identical with Bartholomew, who is never mentioned by St. John, and by the other Evangelists only in their catalogues of the Apostles (Mat 10:3 = Mar 3:18 = Luk 6:14). (a) Bartholomew is not a name, but a patronymic—Bar Talmai, ‘the son of Talmai.’ (b) Nathanael appears in St. John’s narrative as a friend of Philip, and Bartholomew is coupled with Philip in the lists of the Apostles. (c) Since the others of the seven at the Lake whose names are indicated by St. John were Apostles, it is probable that Nathanael also was an Apostle. His title would thus be Nathanael har Talmai.

David Smith.

(Hebrew: God has given)

A disciple of Jesus Christ, from Cana in Galilee (John 21), praised by Our Divine Lord as "an Israelite indeed, in whom there is no guile" (John 1), and enumerated among the Apostles as a witness to the miraculous draught of fishes, after the Resurrection (John 21). It is generally held that Nathanael is to be identified with Saint Bartholomew the Apostle, since one is not distinguished from the other. The Evangelists who mention Bartholomew tell nothing of Nathanael, and Saint John who speaks of Nathanael is silent concerning Bartholomew.

One of the first disciples of Jesus, to Whom he was brought by his friend Philip (John 1:43-51). It is generally held that Nathanael is to be identified with the Apostle Bartholomew of the Synoptic writers. The latter make no mention of Nathanael, but in their lists of the Twelve, one, Bartholomew, is always designated by his family Bar-Tolmai (son of Tolmai), and it is assumed that it is he whom the author of the Fourth Gospel designates by his personal name Nathanael. The main reasons on which this assumption rests are:that the circumstances under which Nathanael was called do not differ in solemnity from those connected with the call of Peter, whence it is natural to expect that he as well as the latter was numbered among the Twelve; Nathanael is mentioned as present with other Apostles after the Resurrection in the scene described in John 21; Nathanael was brought to Jesus by Philip (John 1:45), and thus it seems significant that Bartholomew is always mentioned next to Philip in the lists of the Twelve given by the Synoptists (Matthew 10:3; Mark 3:18; Luke 6:14).-----------------------------------JAMES F. DRISCOLL Transcribed by Sean Hyland The Catholic Encyclopedia, Volume XCopyright © 1911 by Robert Appleton CompanyOnline Edition Copyright © 2003 by K. KnightNihil Obstat, October 1, 1911. Remy Lafort, S.T.D., CensorImprimatur. +John Cardinal Farley, Archbishop of New York

na-than´ā́-el (Ναθαναήλ, Nathanaḗl):

(1) One of the “captains over thousands” who furnished the Levites with much cattle for Josiah’s Passover (1 Esdras 1:9) = “Nethanel” of 2Ch 35:9.

(2) (Ναθανάηλος, Nathanáēlos, Codices Vaticanus and Alexandrinus omit): One of the priests who had married a “strange wife” (1 Esdras 9:22) = “Nethanel” of Ezr 10:22.

(3) An ancestor of Judith (Judith 8:1).

(4) One of the Twelve Apostles. See next article.

- see Bartholomew the apostle

Only John’s Gospel mentions Nathanael, though he is probably the same person whom Matthew, Mark and Luke call Bartholemew. (For the identification of the two names see BARTHOLEMEW.) He lived in Galilee and was introduced to Jesus by Philip (Joh 1:43-45; Joh 21:2).

Nathanael was an honest person, free of deceit (Joh 1:47). At first he had difficulty believing that the Messiah should come from the small Galilean town of Nazareth, but he was quickly convinced when he learnt first-hand of Jesus’ supernatural knowledge (Joh 1:48-49). Jesus assured Nathanael that the Messiah was more than just a person with superhuman knowledge. He was the divinely given mediator, God’s unique ‘ladder’ that connected earth and heaven. Jesus’ mission was to bring God to the world and to make it possible for the world to come to God (Joh 1:50-51).