JESUS: YOUNG REBEL WITH A CAUSE -- JESUS HEALS THE SON OF A NOBLEMAN

Jesus Heals the Son of a Nobleman by James Tissot, 1886-96

Luke 4:14a and John 4:45-54

Cana, Galilee

And Jesus returned in the power of the Spirit into Galilee: then when he was come into Galilee, the Galilaeans received him, having seen all the things that he did at Jerusalem at the feast: for they also went unto the feast. So Jesus came again into Cana of Galilee, where he made the water wine. 

There are a number of interesting things about this passage. One is the comment that will appear at the end of this passage, “This is again the second miracle that Jesus did, when he was come out of Judaea into Galilee.” Bibles and commentaries often begin this section with the heading, “Jesus’ second Miracle” or “The First Healing by Jesus”. I even used “The First Healing” in my heading.

We know the “Second Miracle” statement is wrong.  While Jesus was in Jerusalem for the Passover “many believed in his name, when they saw the miracles, which he did.” And when Nicodemus came at that time his first words to Jesus were, “Rabbi, we know that you are a teacher come from God: for no man can do these miracles that you do, except God be with him.” John even acknowledges that Jesus had performed other miracles between the wedding at Cana and now. At the beginning of this passage John says, “the Galilaeans received him, having seen all the things that he did at Jerusalem at the feast.”

John referring to it as the second miracle performed after he came from Judea to Galilee is probably a misunderstanding caused by style, translation or time. This was the second miracle performed by Jesus after he came to Galilee from Judea because it was the second time he had come to Galilee from Judea and performed a miracle. It is like this: my wife and I have vacationed in Sussex County twice and stayed at The Inn. We could state this is again the second stay at The Inn we did, when we were come out of New Castle County into Sussex. It does not mean we never stayed at another hotel anywhere; only it was the second time at this particular hotel in this particular circumstance. You get more a sense of this as John’s meaning with the literal translation: “this again a second sign did Jesus, having come out of Judea to Galilee.”

The other heading may or may not be true. We really don’t know for certain this was the first healing. We are told Jesus performed miracles in Jerusalem, but not told specifically what they were. Certainly there may have been healings. It is hard to imagine them being anything else. Did he feed the entire city from a loaf of bread? Did he calm a storm threatening to blow down the Temple? If a spectacular miracle had occurred in Jerusalem it probably would have been given more attention. It seems arguable these were routine cures, if you can call curing routine. Every miracle Jesus performed during his ministry was not recorded in detail. Usually when a specific miracle was described it was for a reason beyond just showing Jesus could perform miracles. This is the case with the curing of the Nobleman’s son.

And there was a certain nobleman, whose son was sick at Capernaum. When he heard that Jesus was come out of Judaea into Galilee, he went to him, and besought him that he would come down, and heal his son, for he was at the point of death.

Who was this Nobleman? We don’t know. He was just a “certain Nobleman”. Some have speculated he was a Roman official, some that he was an official to Herod Antipas and some that he was connected to the Customs House located in Capernaum. None of that is known nor does it matter. It is probably safe to assume he was Jewish, but we aren’t told that with certainty.

There is cachet to being a Nobleman. It is a position of eminence and generally of wealth. This man had a staff of servants and being called a Nobleman here indicates he had substance and standing. He would have been a man who could provide for his family’s need and would have been educated. Therefore, he could afford doctors to attend to his ailing son, thus his son must have been beyond the skill of doctors to cure.

He heard Jesus had come out of Judea and he went to him. This is not a casual walk down the street. Capernaum was 15 to 18 miles (estimates vary) from Cana. It is a several hour jaunt. Why he thought Jesus could help isn’t given. Perhaps the man had been to the Passover in Jerusalem and witnessed or heard of the miracles Jesus performed there. Perhaps by this time the servants at that earlier wedding in Cana had told far and wide how they saw this man turn water to wine. Whatever this man knew, he had at least a hope that Jesus could heal his son. 

Then said Jesus to him, “Except you see signs and wonders, you will not believe.”

Several newer translations (New King James, New American Standard, NIV) read, “Unless you people…” I don’t see anything in the original text or in the literal translation (Jesus then said unto him, “If signs and wonders ye may not see, ye will not believe. “[YLT])  to indicate Jesus said this to anyone but the Nobleman or spoke of “you people”. It is possible others were around and might have heard the conversation, but it appears the conversation was directed at the Nobleman. 

However, Jesus often used these encounters as teaching moments. He would have known the heart of the Nobleman, so there would not have been need to test the man. But Jesus might have wanted to demonstrate something about belief, perhaps even to just this man.

The nobleman said to him, “Sir, come down ere my child die.”

Jesus said to him, “Go your way; your son lives.”

And the man believed the word that Jesus had spoken to him, and he went his way.

We see a growth in faith.  First the man was insistent that Jesus go to Capernaum. He seemed to believe Jesus could cure his son only if he was physically present in the room with the dying child. Even after Jesus’ initial statement, he is persistent in his request for Jesus to come. Yet when Jesus tells him to go because his son lives, the man accepts this. This is a step to understanding that Jesus has the power to answer our prayers even when he is not physically present. Distance is not a barrier to God.

Still the man had a little doubt.

And as he was now going down, his servants met him, and told him, saying, “Your son lives.”

Then enquired he of them the hour when he began to amend. And they said to him, “Yesterday, at the seventh hour the fever left him.” So the father knew that it was at the same hour in which Jesus said to him, “Your son lives,” and himself believed, and his whole house.

This is again the second miracle that Jesus did, when he was come out of Judaea into Galilee.

See, the man needed a bit more proof this was the work of Jesus. It was not sufficient to hear his son has gotten better; he needed to ask at what hour. I don’t think we are any different. We can pray for things in our lives, but when the prayer is answered, we sometimes chalk it up to coincidence or some action we took. We are like Gideon and his fleece [Read Judges 6:36-40]. We always demand some further proof before we truly believe. 

Here we see Jesus’ first statement to the man was on the mark. Except he could confirm this as a “sign and wonder”, he might not have believed. When he learns the son revived at the exact moment Jesus said he would live then he fully believes it was from the Lord. 

This verifying information has the benefit of bringing his whole house to belief, but it still took a sign and wonder.

Note we have in two of these early encounters by Jesus a further witnessing by the individuals encountered. The Samaritan Woman at the well went who told others and as a result they came to belief. Here the Nobleman leads his whole house to belief. 

A final remark about the “exact hour’. The servants reply the fever broke in the seventh hour. There were many different time keeping methods used in those times. The Jews kept the hours from sunrise, so the seventh hour would have been about 1:00 PM. It is difficult to know for sure what this was in Roman time. Rome by this time had the water clock and so wasn’t dependent on the sundial, although the latter was still in use. I do not know exactly how they counted their hours; that is, what was the starting point of a day for the first hour on a water clock. If the time were dependent on a sundial, it might have been around 12:45 PM depending on the season of the year. I have read it said the seventh hour would have been 7:00 PM, but I don’t know how this was calculated for that would have started the calculation at noon.

Seven o’clock PM has a certain appeal since the servant says the seventh hour yesterday. If Jesus had told him his son would live at 7:00 PM the Nobleman probably wouldn’t have made the trip home at night. Seven in the evening or one in the afternoon, it doesn’t really matter. All we know is the man didn’t return to Capernaum until the next day and it isn’t necessary to know the reason.

JESUS: YOUNG REBEL WITH A CAUSE -- A WEDDING IN CANA

 

 On the map, you will see Cana just above Nazareth and if you look further down to the Dead Sea, you will see a Bethany just at the top of the sea. As stated previously, no one  really knows the exact location of either of these places anymore. Their placement on this map is the most commonly accepted guess. It is thus estimated that Cana was about 9 miles north of Nazareth. The location of Bethany beyond the Jordan probably was just inside the border of modern day Jordan.

At any rate, there are those who claim Jesus could not have been at Bethany beyond the

Jordan and then attended a wedding in Cana in the time frame given by John. However, this is a miscalculation of the text. When they read, “On the third day a wedding took place at Cana in Galilee”, they mistakenly think it is the third day after John the Baptist pointed Jesus out to John and Andrew. However, a careful count of the references to “the next day (as we did) shows Jesus decided to leave for Galilee on the third day and the reference of the wedding on the third day may be the third day of that trip or it may be the third day after his meeting with Nathanael.

Some still argue the distance was too great, but this only comes from living in a culture and time when we ride everywhere. We are not use to walking great distances to go between places as was common in those times. The distance between Bethany and Cana was most likely 90 to 95 miles. I walk at an average rate of 4 miles per hour. If we allow a slower pace of three miles per hour, a person could cover the distance in three days by walking between 10 and 11 hours a day. If the person did average four miles per hour, it would be eight hours a day. For people used to foot travel, certainly doable. Time also depends on where Jesus found Philip, and this is not clear from the text.

Anyway we pick up on when Jesus and his new disciples arrive at this wedding.

Whose wedding was it?

What is so significant about a wedding?

Were Jesus snd his disciples gate crashers?

Illustration: The Wedding at Cana by Jacopo Robusti Tintoretto, 1561

John 2:1-12

And the third day there was a marriage in Cana of Galilee; and the mother of Jesus was there and both Jesus was called, and his disciples, to the marriage.

Jesus said to her, “Woman, what have I to do with thee? My hour is not yet come.”

His mother said to the servants, “Whatsoever he says to you, do it.”

And there were set there six water pots of stone, after the manner of the purifying of the Jews, containing two or three firkins [8 or 9 gallons] apiece. Jesus said to them, “Fill the water pots with water.”

And they filled them up to the brim.

And he said to them, “Draw out now, and bear to the governor of the feast.”

And they bare it.

And the third day a marriage happened in Cana of Galilee…The third day from what? I don’t know. I have seen much speculation about this comment, everything from it being the third day after he found Philip to the three days of Christ’s resurrection. I’m not speculating. You figure it out, please tell me. Perhaps it is as simple as the wedding took place on the third day of the week.

At any rate, Mary says to Him (probably whispered). “They have no more wine.”  This was going to be a great embarrassment to the family running out of wine before all the wedding celebrating was over. I’m thinking Jesus and His disciples had just arrived when the wine ran out and so Mary informed Him of that fact. It would have been customary for Jesus and his followers to be given wine upon arrival and perhaps this had not happened. If we look at the Young’s Literal Translation of this text it becomes clearer this may have been the sequence of events:

And the third day a marriage happened in Cana of Galilee, and the mother of Jesus was there, and also Jesus was called, and his disciples, to the marriage; and wine having failed, the mother of Jesus saith unto him, `Wine they have not…'

This may have been a family wedding. We find later that Mary, Jesus, His disciples and His brothers went down to Capernaum from there, so His brothers were also guests. Mary as a close family member may have been helping with the arrangements, every indication is she had some say so at the proceedings. It may also be this is why Jesus decided to go to Galilee when He did, he had been invited to this wedding. The literal translation says Jesus was called. His new disciples may have been called as a courtesy. These were not gatecrashers, one had to be invited to attend a wedding feast. We have to be called to attend the Wedding Feast of the Lamb. We won’t be allowed in without our invitation.

Was the Jewish wedding of the first century similar to weddings today?

I was dating a little red-haired Irish Lass back in 1960. Her name was Pat. We were getting pretty serious and then I came to work one morning (we worked on the the same floor of the same company) and she told me we couldn’t see each other anymore. Right afterward she ran into the Ladies Room crying. A few moments later this tall, (a foot taller than Pat) Irish-German-Native American girl came out of the Ladies Room and asked me about Pat. A week later I was dating that tall girl. Three weeks later I said, “You know I’m going to marry you, don’t you?” I did the formal asking in September 1960 and a year later I did indeed marry Lois. That was nearly 57 years ago. We had the wedding and a procession of cars to the reception site and then late that evening we went off on a honeymoon. We didn’t tell anyone where we were going for that first night, and there in secret we consummated our marriage.

I assume it is pretty similar today, if the couple even bothers with a wedding.

It was quite different in Jesus time. 

For instance, I didn’t formally ask Lois’ father or mine about becoming engaged. It was a decision between her and I because we were in love. In the first century marriages weren’t necessarily love affairs, but business deals conducted by the fathers of the couple. Traditionally a contract was drawn up and the girl would marry the guy and the guy would provide some amount to the family of the bride to compensate them for her value; after all, they were losing some household help. By the time of Jesus this had softened a little and if the bride had a good father, he would give a large portion of this payment to the daughter.

At this point the marriage consisted of two parts. Upon the agreement between families the happy couple were betrothed. This was nothing like our engagements. Legally at betrothal the couple were married. They just couldn’t live together nor have sex. The only way out was not just handing back a ring, but having a divorce. And there better not be any hanky-panky on the side because this would be adultery and result in very serious consequences, including death by stoning. Remember Mary faced this possibility when it was revealed during her betrothal to Joseph that she was with child.

After betrothal, the groom went away to prepare a place for his bride. That sound familiar?

14 “Let not your hearts be troubled. Believe in God; believe also in me. ² In my Father's house are many rooms. If it were not so, would I have told you that I go to prepare a place for you?  ³ And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again and will take you to myself, that where I am you may be also. ⁴ And you know the way to where I am going.”  ⁵ Thomas said to him, “Lord, we do not know where you are going. How can we know the way?” ⁶ Jesus said to him, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me. ⁷ If you had known me, you would have known my Father also. From now on you do know him and have seen him.” (John 14:1-7)

After time, the groom will return and then a wedding will be held. This too is a bit different from today, and we can probably breath a sign of relief. Once the ceremony was held a number of people traipsed behind the couple to the wedding chamber, where the marriage was consummated and proof of the bride’s virginity was passed about.

Now where I was from there was a thing called a chiveree that probably harkened back to this. It was why we didn’t tell anyone where we were going on our wedding night. You see people would sneak up on the place and wait until they thought you went to bed, then they would make all kind of noise and shout for your appearance. No one had to prove virginity anymore, thankfully.

So back to the wedding at Cana. The ceremony and the consummation appear to be over. Now the tradition of the wedding feast was going on full blast. This feast didn’t just last an evening; it could go on for days. The first thing we are told about this particular feast is the wine has run out. 

Notice that Mary does not ask Jesus to do anything; she just states a fact, “They have no wine.” Jesus’ reply is curious, “Dear woman, why do you involve me? My time has not yet come.” (NIV) [Woman, what have I to do with thee? Mine hour is not yet come. (KJV)]

If his mother had called Jesus to the wedding and she had some responsibility for the provisions, was it inferred by her statement he would help by creating more wine?

The King James translation sounds harsh, “Woman, what have I to do with thee?” The NIV sounds either indifferent or put-upon, “Dear woman, why do you involve me?” First, He is speaking to his mother and we would not today generally refer to our mother as “woman”. But in those times this was actually a term of respect. Second, there may have been a better translation of Jesus’ response. Here is the Young Literal Translation: “Jesus saith to her, `What -- to me and to thee, woman? Not yet is mine hour come.”

This may to be similar to us saying, “Mother, just between you and me, it isn’t my time yet.”

Mary never made a specific request and she doesn’t wait for a specific answer either. She goes to the servants and says to do what Jesus tells them. This again indicates Mary had some authority at this wedding, enough that the servants would obey her. Also notice this is all kept rather secretive. There are only three groups who witness what happens: Mary and Jesus, the servants and the disciples. There is no spectacle made of this first miracle. No one else is let in on it. Mary doesn’t boast, “Look everyone at what my wonderful son the Messiah can do.” Jesus doesn’t stand before the wedding guests and announce, “Watch this and be amazed.”

It isn’t time for that yet.

Jesus quietly points out some empty ceremonial washing jars and tells the servants to fill them with water. He doesn’t say to what purpose. He then tells them to draw some and take it to the banquet master, which they do. 

When the ruler of the feast had tasted the water that was made wine, and knew not whence it was (but the servants which drew the water knew) the governor of the feast called the bridegroom and said to him, “Every man at the beginning does set forth good wine; and when men have well drunk, then that which is worse, but you have kept the good wine until now.”

This beginning of miracles did Jesus in Cana of Galilee, and manifested forth his glory, and his disciples believed on him.

The banquet master had no idea a miracle had occurred. The biggest miracle in his eyes was the family had saved the best wine for last, something that just wasn’t done. Generally, it still isn’t. You serve the expensive wine first, and then you serve cheaper wine. Why? To save cost. When one first drinks a cup of wine, the taste buds are fresh and the drinker savors the drink, but after a cup or two, the taste is dulled to a point it is hard to distinguish a change in the drink. In the case of those times, the best wine would be served and then wine that was either a bit close to turning sour or new wine that had not fully fermented. 

There is a lesson here. Jesus honored his mother and saved the bridegroom’s family from embarrassment, but he took none of the credit, if you think about it. As far as the banquet master and the wedding guests were concerned, the bridegroom was a generous person. A true kindness from a generous heart is one unmotivated by self-aggrandizement or praise seeking. It is not self-serving. It is the right hand not knowing what the left hand does so the good deed done is between the doer and God. Mary didn’t have to actually ask, because she knew he and his buddies would trot down to the nearest Total Wine store and get more…no he would do it out of mercy. Jesus did it without yet fully revealing himself.

The servants had seen what happened, why didn’t they say something? Perhaps somewhere at sometime they did speak of it to intimate acquaintances they trusted not to ridicule them? Put yourself in their sandals. If you saw a man take a jug of water and turn it into fine wine, would you tell anyone? Who would believe you? Would you tell the banquet master, your boss? He might think you’d been sneaking the wine on duty and fire you on the spot. 

There was someone else Jesus allowed to witness this transformation of water into wine, the five new disciples he had chosen to bring with him from Bethany. Remember what was the last thing said to Nathanael before the trek to Cana began? "You believe because I told you I saw you under the fig tree. You shall see greater things than that." Here is the first of greater things these Disciples will see over the next three and a half years. It is also the first opportunity Jesus takes to manifest his glory to these men to teach them to put their faith in him.

As an aside, I read some believe this wedding was Nathanael’s. This doesn’t make much sense and seems only to come from the fact Nathanael is from Cana. However, if you notice after the banquet master receives this new wine (and don’t think the reception of new wine doesn’t have a far more spiritual and future meaning) he called the bridegroom aside to congratulate him. This would indicate Mary and Jesus were attending the wedding feast. This is an important fact.

Today when we think of attending a wedding it means going to a relatively short ceremony where the bride and groom exchange vows to each other. This is often followed by a joyride, a caravan of cars following the newlyweds and blowing horns. This ends with a reception, where a meal is served, music is provided, often dancing and then the happy couple drive off to parts unknown for a honeymoon.

This is not the wedding procedure being followed in Cana in the First Century. First, the couple was for all intent and purpose “married” with their betrothal. This was not the same as our engagement period today. One did not simply decide to return the ring and try someone else. To end a betrothal one had to have legal reason to petition for a divorce. (This was the situation Joseph faced when Mary told him she was pregnant, whether to divorce her for adultery.) 

Once a woman had accepted the man’s proposal and the betrothal was established, the groom would tell his bride he was going to prepare a home for her and would return for her when it was ready. (Keep this in mind; it will come up again later in Jesus’ promises to those who believed in Him.) While he was busy building or preparing this home, she would be busy getting a number of things together by her bed for the moment he returned. When he came back, she would know it because he would come with his friends and there would be the blowing of a trumpet.

Here is why this could not have been Nathanael’s wedding. The groom would collect his bride and followed by the wedding guests and family, they would go to their new home for seven days, their version of the honeymoon. On the first night, the wedding was consummated and proof of the bride’s virginity was displayed. The wedding party and guests would then basically party for a week while the bride and groom enjoyed time alone with each other. At the end of these seven days, the happy couple would reemerge and the Wedding Supper would commence.

Since the bridegroom was in attendance at this celebration, this was the Wedding Supper and Nathanael could hardly have been on his honeymoon when three days prior he was in Bethany.

It is interesting that this whole sequence from when John addressed the Pharisees until Jesus was at the wedding feast paralleled the wedding of the bride and groom. John told the Pharisees the Messiah was coming. Jesus appeared the next day and on the fourth day after he met his new Disciples left for Cana where he arrived three days later; the time of the groom appearing until the end of the honeymoon and the wedding feast.

After this he went down to Capernaum, he, and his mother, and his brethren, and his disciples and they continued there not many days.

There is one person missing from this group, Joseph. Joseph is not mentioned as attending this wedding and has disappeared from the narrative completely at this point. My opinion is Joseph has died between the time Jesus was twelve years old and His baptism.  I think circumstantial evidence in the Scriptures supports this. From this point onward until near the end of Jesus ministry, Mary is mentioned in conjunction with his siblings. It would be expected if the husband died that the family would take care of the widow. (We will discuss this further later.)