Was Gospel of John's Nathaniel James/Jacob son of Alphaeus?

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
Post Reply
gryan
Posts: 1120
Joined: Fri Jun 01, 2018 4:11 am

Was Gospel of John's Nathaniel James/Jacob son of Alphaeus?

Post by gryan »

This is the thesis of C E . Hill in a paper titled: THE IDENTITY OF JOHN'S NATHANAEL (Journal for the Study of the New Testament, Date: January 1, 1998)

Primary Text: Jesus Calls Nathanael (John 1)

43The next day Jesus decided to set out for Galilee. Finding Philip, He told him, “Follow Me.” 44Now Philip was from Bethsaida, the same town as Andrew and Peter.

45Philip found Nathanael and told him, “We have found the One Moses wrote about in the Law, the One the prophets foretold—Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Joseph.”

46“Can anything good come from Nazareth?” Nathanael asked.

“Come and see,” said Philip.

47When Jesus saw Nathanael approaching, He said of him, “Here is a true Israelite, in whom there is no deceit.”

48“How do You know me?” Nathanael asked.

Jesus replied, “Before Philip called you, I saw you under the fig tree.”

49“Rabbi,” Nathanael answered, “You are the Son of God! You are the King of Israel!”

50Jesus said to him, “Do you believe just because I told you I saw you under the fig tree? You will see greater (μείζω) things than these.” 51Then He declared, “Truly, truly, I tell you, you will all see heaven open and the angels of God ascending and descending on the Son of Man [Alluding to the Jacob's ladder story where Jacob's name was changed to Israel. I note that Genesis 28 also includes this statement that fits the James of Galatians being called a "pillar": "“This stone [LXX, λίθος], which I have set up as a pillar [LXX στήκω, "to stand firm"], will be God’s house...”, https://biblehub.com/context/genesis/28-12.htm ].

------------

From C E . Hill's comment on this primary text:

Whoever Nathanael was and whatever relationship he might have had with the twelve, John portrays him as one who had prolonged contact with Jesus and members of that group. He is first mentioned among a group that included Andrew, Simon Peter, and Philip (1.40-51) and appears again in Jn 21.2 in the company of Peter, Thomas, the sons of Zebedee, and two other disciples at the Sea of Tiberias after the resurrection (21.14). Nathanael's importance for the narrative of the early chapters of the Fourth Gospel is well recognized by interpreters.This 'ideal Israelite', 'this type of those within Israel whom the Father gives to the Son (cf. 6.37; 17.2-3)', makes a memorable confession of Jesus as Son of God and King of Israel that impresses even Jesus. His confession becomes the occasion for Jesus' promise to the disciples that they would see heaven opened and angels ascending and descending on the Son of Man (1.51)

...That John's Nathanael was a historical person and an early follower of Jesus would already appear to be confirmed, if Bauckham is correct, by the occurrence of this name in a list of personal disciples of Jesus in a rabbinic source (b. Sanh. 43a). From our present study it is also safe to conclude that Epistula Apostolorum''s apostle list represents an intentional identification with James the son of Alphaeus. It is less certain but still quite probable that Epistula Apostolorum's identification had something to do with the Jacob allusions in the Nathanael pericope and was based at least partly on an exegesis of Jn 1.45-51.
User avatar
billd89
Posts: 1347
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2020 6:27 pm
Location: New England, USA

Re: Bethsaida of Peter & Andrew

Post by billd89 »

Not to threadjack, but a recent discovery suggests the lost city of Bethsaida and the Church of the Apostles:
https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/202 ... 7f7f870000
gryan
Posts: 1120
Joined: Fri Jun 01, 2018 4:11 am

Re: Bethsaida of Peter & Andrew

Post by gryan »

billd89 wrote: Mon Aug 15, 2022 2:17 am Not to threadjack, but a recent discovery suggests the lost city of Bethsaida and the Church of the Apostles:
https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/202 ... 7f7f870000
Re: Archaeological discovery at "a Byzantine-era basilica" and GJohn

"The latest discovery at the dig is a floral pattern mosaic at a church first found in 2019. It bears an inscription calling for the intercession of the “chief and commander of the heavenly apostles”—aka Peter."
https://news.artnet.com/art-world/archa ... C%20Andrew.

John 1:44-45a
Now Philip was from Bethsaida, the same town as Andrew and Peter. Philip found Nathanael and told him...
Stuart
Posts: 878
Joined: Mon Apr 14, 2014 12:24 am
Location: Sunnyvale, CA

Re: Was Gospel of John's Nathaniel James/Jacob son of Alphaeus?

Post by Stuart »

I would say Nathaniel was not James (Jacob) son of Alphaeus.

Basically the Gospel of John is one of several hints that tell us originally there were no named apostles, simply the twelve. This is suggested in the anti-Marcionite literature where Megethius at one point says the names of the twelve are not recorded. I think it's also hinted by the relocation of the calling of the twelve in Matthew and Luke from the sequential spot we find in Mark. And in John it's differently placed as well. (Simon) Peter, James and John are the three. After that really nobody except Judas. Well Mark promotes Andrew to the level of three, but I suspect that is more a suggestion that Andrew was his sect's patron saint. The lists of the twelve appear to have borrowed from each other with repetition of James, Judas and Simon appearing. They are just names on a list who vanish; James of Alphaeus is but one of those.

The "original", perhaps I should say first revisions, of John appears to have a completely different tradition of Apostles. I have argued that Judas is present, but as a loyal disciple, and others named are Philip, Nathanael and some other not usually thought of as among the twelve, and did not always go around with him such as Nicodemus, Lazarus, also the unnamed man blind from his birth and even Joseph of Arimathea, all of whom are various called or accused of being disciples. (Andrew appears to be a later add, as he is only playing telephone in 1:40 and 12:22, and appears added a as name --with relationship to Peter deliberately stated; clear sign of editorial comment-- for "one of his disciples." All of these look like editorial adds (as is chapter 21), not in the early gospel.

The evidence for who Nathanael represents is thin. He is used to support a few key theological points (e.g., son of Joseph, not son of David), and he's called an Israelite. For all use of brother I'm skeptical, as I think the term in gospel use is most often like that of brother monks in an order or fellow ministers, the "band of brothers" meaning. Just as father meant your lineage or your theological alignment not your actual immediate parentage, In my view that literal parentage came later, part of the evolving theology.

What I am trying to say is there is no mapping the lists to John's disciples. John even suggests multiple of the called fell away and stopped circulating with him long before the last supper (verse 6:66). The tradition is very different, quite independent of the synoptic, much like we find evidence in the Pauline letters, where names like Apollos seem to be of the same stature as, and indeed are, apostles.

What we have instead in the list of names are most likely support for claims to authority for local patron saints. It's in the same spirit that Matthew equates Matthew with Levi, and that Mark elevates Andrew (ditto the editor of John). In Matthew's case I'd suggest it is to associate the authorship with somebody who was selected even before the twelve were called to be set apart, on almost equal footing with Peter, Jame and John from the fisherman story, thus more authoritative than Mark or Luke.

Look at the role the character is playing and ask why the author had him do this or say that. Cross mapping characters is an attempt at harmonizing the stories rather than to understand their different theologies and messages.
User avatar
neilgodfrey
Posts: 6161
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 4:08 pm

Re: Was Gospel of John's Nathaniel James/Jacob son of Alphaeus?

Post by neilgodfrey »

Another option is from Michael Goulder who once set out a case for Nathanael being both "the beloved disciple" and Paul, one and the same.

https://vridar.org/2012/08/23/is-paul-t ... -disciple/
gryan
Posts: 1120
Joined: Fri Jun 01, 2018 4:11 am

Re: Was Gospel of John's Nathaniel James/Jacob son of Alphaeus?

Post by gryan »

@neilgodfrey

Thanks, this is interesting.

I like the suggestion that the author of GJohn read Galatians and that, in his depiction of "the beloved disciple", he echoed language of Paul (eg. "the life I live now in the flesh, in the faith I live, that of the God and Christ who loved me and gave himself for me" Gal 2:20).

Just as Paul's "I" is participatory for "all", so also, the beloved disciple is a mystery person for "all" to identify with.
Post Reply