John 1:49

Ver. 49. “ Nathanael says to Him: whence knowest thou me? Jesus answered and said to him: Before Philip called thee, when thou wert under the fig-tree, I saw thee. ”

This reply by which Nathanael seems to appropriate to himself the eulogy contained in John 1:48 has been criticised as not modest. But he wishes simply to know on what grounds Jesus, who sees him for the first time, forms this judgment of him. Certainly, if we take account of the extraordinary effect which Jesus' answer produced upon Nathanael (John 1:50), it must contain to his view the indubitable proof of the supernatural knowledge which Jesus has of him. Lucke thinks that this knowledge applies only to the inward moral state of Nathanael; Meyer, on the contrary, that it applies only to the external fact of his sitting under the fig-tree. But thoroughly to comprehend the relation of this saying of Jesus, on the one side, to his previous declaration (John 1:48), and, on the other, to the exclamation of Nathanael (John 1:50), it is indispensable to unite the two views. Not only does Nathanael note the fact that the eye of Jesus had followed him in a place where His natural sight could not reach him, but he understands that the eye of this stranger has penetrated his interior being, and has discerned there a moral fact which justifies the estimate expressed by Jesus in John 1:48.

Otherwise, the answer of Jesus does not any the more justify that estimate, and we cannot understand how it can call forth the exclamation of Nathanael in John 1:50, or be presented, in John 1:51, as the first of the Lord's miraculous works. What had taken place in Nathanael, at that moment when he was under the fig-tree? Had he made to God the confession of some sin (Psa 32:1-2), taken some holy resolution, made the vow to repair some wrong? However this may be, serious thoughts had filled his heart, so that, on hearing the word of Jesus, he feels that he has been penetrated by a look which participates in the divine omniscience. The words: before Philip called thee, are connected by Weiss with what follows, in this sense: “When thou wert under the fig-tree before Philip called thee.” But they much more naturally qualify the principal verb: I saw thee. And the same is true of the second limiting phrase: “ when thou wert under the fig-tree,” which refers rather to what follows than to what precedes. For the situation in which Jesus saw him is of more consequence than that in which Philip called him. The construction of ὑπό, with the accusative (τὴν συκήν), with the verb of rest, is owing to the fact that to the local relation there is joined the moral notion of shelter. I saw denotes a view such as that of Elisha (2 Kings 5). In Jesus, as in the prophets, there was a higher vision, which may be regarded as a partial association with the perfect vision of God. At this word, Nathanael feels himself, as it were, penetrated by a ray of divine light: