A laymans commentary on John's gospel. The Wedding at Cana. John 2:1-10.

 The Wedding at Cana.

John 2:1-10

This narrative is one of the most enjoyable stories to me.

One of the reasons lies in the hidden depth that God saw fit to conceal in what many perceive as vague details, and yet, if it is apparent, rarely does anyone talk about the background. The other aspect is one that becomes apparent when you watch something like The Chosen, where they show the wedding at Cana. The setting is filled with such excitement and joy, and yet, it is a picture of things to come that have misery attached to the future events (By the way, we are there now.) Even what seemed to be a catastrophe was turned into delight as the Father of the bride proclaims, you have saved the best wine for last. This moment in time is symbolic of our eventual wedding celebration with Jesus once we all gather in heaven. What a time we will have, as people like me learn how to dance to Jewish songs, and Jesus will be dancing alongside us.

Several years ago, while I was still attending a Vineyard church, my wife, who was at the time still just my girlfriend, got sick and stayed home. That prompted me to sit with people I really did not know. Yes, they were regular attendees, but all I ever seemed to get out of them was a casual nod of the head.

Since I don't pay attention to sports, my conversations are attempts to share my understanding of Jesus. I truly believe that my mission is to the church, and so I began talking with these “strangers” about a recent Israeli archaeological discovery that I was made aware of. This discovery was about a quarter mile outside of Nazareth. At this site, the archaeologists found several broken endeavours at lathing out granite pots, cups, and plates. I had no idea that early Jews, around the time of Jesus, would have had the ability to lathe a large pot.

For most, this would be insignificant information, but several thousand years ago, an entrepreneurial Jew realized that the Levitical law concerning vessels of household or of sanctuary usage said nothing of articles made from granite. So, by the time Jesus comes along, and, He happens to be a craftsman and may well have been capable of making sizable granite vessels, which just happened to be in use at the wedding that day. I got excited because I could see the association that these vessels may have had with Jesus, and I had tried to point that association out to the guy I was eating lunch with.

His response when I shared this information was to denounce me for not sticking with the canon (trusted religious interpretations) of scripture. That is when I said, it's fascinating that you should say that, because you and others like you are quick to talk about Jesus being a carpenter, when in reality the scriptures say nothing about Jesus being a carpenter. The Greek word used against Joseph was tektōn, which carries definitions such as: a craftsman, an artist, or a writer. The evidence concerning this confusion comes from Matthew 13:53 -55, where the Pharisees directed their comments toward Joseph, who was long since dead, making their efforts nothing more than a derogatory slur about Jesus's lowly character and occupation.

If you doubt what I said, consider the backbone of young Mary. I am quite sure that she was convinced that the baby was God's baby – by the Holy Spirit, but that story does not and will NOT go over big with the busy bodies about town, some of whom are probably suggesting that she be stoned. You know the story. The angel (who, by the way, must have been quite impressive) tells Joseph not to worry, it's God's baby. Joseph, whom we are told was deemed to be a good man, takes Mary, his contractual wife, and leaves Nazareth for Bethlehem. How convenient that it was tax time, and the majority of his relatives lived there. How peculiar that none of them have any room available in their “homes” for Joseph and his pregnant wife, who happens to be carrying God's baby. None of them are buying his story, and they end up in a cattle stall, poop and all.

How long do the people of Nazareth hold on to their hatred of Jesus, a mumzer (illegitimate) child?

The answer to the question is somewhere between 30 and 33 years. This statement is facetious and assumptive based on the fact that the Pharisees were speaking of Jesus, who had already started His ministry at age 30.

So with all that, let's start digging into John's gospel again.

“On the third day there was a wedding in Cana of Galilee, and the mother of Jesus was there;” (John 2:1 NASB)

Interesting how it is focused on the fact that Mary is not mentioned by name, and at the same time, pointing herout without a name dominates the conversation simply because she is there. This notable absence of a name may play into John's nature, as he says things about himself by referring to himself as that disciple whom Jesus loved. She will soon make much ado about them running out of wine to Jesus.

As you can see, Cana is North of Nazareth and a comparable distance from the shores of Galilee.

“and both Jesus and His disciples were invited to the wedding.”(John 2:2 NASB)

At this point in time, Jesus has not called all twelve disciples. Some of those numbers included: James, John, Peter, Philip, Nathanael, and Andrew – seeing as he was one of those who paid attention when Jesus showed up to be baptized by John.

So, where was Jesus on this map when this invitation to be a disciple reached their ears?

We don't know for sure; however, Matthew's gospel gives us a clue, and it points to the home of His mother.

Matthew 13:1-2 NASB “That day Jesus went out of the house and was sitting by the sea. (2) And large crowds gathered to Him, so He got into a boat and sat down, and the whole crowd was standing on the beach.”

You may have a similar problem/complaint, as I have, when you are studying, whose house did Jesus come out of?

Most will tell you the question is of no significance, but the problem with that attitude is that there is nothing in scripture that is of no significance. As you can see on the map, He was NOT in Nazareth, as it is NOT a coastal village.

Matthew's gospel tells us,

Now when Jesus heard that John had been taken into custody, He withdrew into Galilee; and leaving Nazareth, He came and settled in Capernaum, which is by the sea, in the region of Zebulun and Naphtali.
(Matthew 4:12-13 NASB)

Settled is the Greek word katoikeō, which means to inhabit or to have an abode.

Matthew goes on to expound upon the move to Cana.

"The land of Zebulun and the land of Naphtali, by way of the sea, beyond Jordan, Galilee of the nations! The people who sat in darkness saw a great Light; and Light has sprung up to those who sat in the region and shadow of death." (Matthew 4:15-16 MKJV)

What is going on with Mary? 

“And when they ran out of wine, the mother of Jesus said to Him, 'They have no wine." Jesus said to her, "Woman, what does your concern have to do with Me? My hour has not yet come."
(John 2:3-4 NKJV)

My mother would show up at events and always insert herself in the preparation of food or setting tables. If she stumbled upon the fact that they ran out of wine, she might have quietly rejoiced because she held to a religious, legalistic view that drinking would send you straight to hell, but I digress.

In “The Chosen,” Mary acted like the woman who was getting married was the closest of friends and appreciated her love and help. I apprehended this viewpoint because it removed the negative way that I looked at Mary's manner of handling this setting.

Note how Jesus responds to His mother. According to most translations, He merely calls her "Woman, what does your concern have to do with Me? My hour has not yet come."

The Greek word for woman is gunē. It means woman, maiden, wife, or damsel. The Ultimate Cross-Reference Treasury says that the word is “ far from implying anything disrespectful, and was employed as an honorable appellation” (designation)

What I perceived as Jesus' initial negative reaction to His mother gave way to Mary's persistent insistence. In the Chosen, she seemed to repeat a phrase that John, the baptizer, said, when she said, if not now, when?

If now is not your time, then when?

This next statement has me rather gobsmacked, as my wife's British relatives might say.

“But his mother told the servants, 'Do whatever he tells you.”
(John 2:5 NLT)

Consider the conversational circumstances.

He had just responded to His mother's statement, “they have no wine.” His response has always taken me back a bit, as by my standards He responded rather poorly. saying “Woman, why does this concern us?” [Berean Study Bible.] Only moments ago, we looked at the word Woman, and because of that,t I can now understand that He meant no disrespect.

How did Mary know what He was capable of doing?

I asked my wife this same question. Her response leaned toward the idea that Mary knew what His capabilities were merely because He was the Son of God. If that is true, then what do you do with passages like this:

• “Therefore the Lord Himself will give you a sign: Behold, the virgin will be with child and will give birth to a son, and will call Him Immanuel.”
  (Isaiah 7:14 BSB)

This conversation that we see in Isaiah came about because King Ahaz, the King of Judah, demonstrated little to no faith in God. A virgin giving birth to the Son of God should have changed all that.

• “But after he had pondered these things, an angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream and said, 'Joseph, son of David, do not be afraid to embrace Mary as your wife, for the One conceived in her is from the Holy Spirit. She will give birth to a Son, and you are to give Him the name Jesus, because He will save His people from their sins.” All this took place to fulfill what the Lord had said through the prophet: “Behold, the virgin will be with child and will give birth to a son, and they will call Him Immanuel” (which means, “God with us”). When Joseph woke up, he did as the angel of the Lord had commanded him, and embraced Mary as his wife.”
  (Matthew 1:20-24 BSB)

Joseph, to say the least, was beside himself; we know this because he was willing to quietly put Mary away. Thus, we have this conversation above.

• “So the angel told her, 'Do not be afraid, Mary, for you have found favor with God. Behold, you will conceive and give birth to a son, and you are to give Him the name Jesus. He will be great and will be called the Son of the Most High. The Lord God will give Him the throne of His father David, and He will reign over the house of Jacob forever. His kingdom will never end!” “How can this be,” Mary asked the angel, “since I am a virgin?” The angel replied, “The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you. So the Holy One to be born will be called the Son of God.”
  (Luke 1:30-35 BSB)

From a human point of view, the principal view that we seem to understand is this: virgins cannot have babies. Clearly, there was no human intervention, but there was a female virgin willing to carry that pre-fertilized egg.

From the garden expulsion forward, all of humanity, through Adam and Eve, was tainted by sin and passed that sin on to everyone.
It seems clear that this drive to sin is inherited. God bypassed that genetic sin problem by producing His own fertilized egg and found a young lady willing to carry it to birth. Jesus was thus born without sin.

So while I may struggle with anger issues, Jesus was NOT driven to anger by sin. Nothing Jesus did was driven by sin. So when my acquaintances tell me, " You need to love like Jesus loved, they might as well be speaking another language.

Sure, I get that the Apostle Paul wrote extensively about our freedom from sin, but my belief in Jesus Christ does not remove the embedded driving force that can only happen on that day, in the twinkling of an eye, when we shall be changed. Sorry, but that means we all have to die. When the sin-infested flesh dies, all sin goes with it. All that will be left is the body, which is made in the image of the Father, God.

Let's get back to Mary's understanding that Jesus's abilities were limitless.
Scripture says nothing that strictly applies to turning water into wine; it does, however, inform us that, at the command of the Father, Moses and Aaron turned, what we assume to be all the potable water that the Egyptians had available, into blood.
I choose to accept this as factual. Perhaps one of the reasons to accept that this happened was that the wizards of the Egyptian court also turned some potable water, which they had, into blood by their wizardry.

Hopefully, you understand that this turning of water into blood also means that God can turn water into grape juice (even if it is delicately blended and refined)

Mary had seen Jesus in action; we don't know, but it seems like a logical assumption.

Does the scripture tell us this?

No, but clearly Mary had examples.
This train of thought creates havoc when Mary, along with Jesus half brothers, such as James and Jude, stood outside the house where Jesus, who had been teaching (scripture does tell us that they thought He had lost His mind,) is interrupted by a paralyzed man being let down through the hole that his friends had created, causing Jesus to stop what He was doing and resolve this man's issue.

“Then Jesus went home, and once again a crowd gathered, so that He and His disciples could not even eat. When His family heard about this, they went out to take custody of Him, saying, “He is out of His mind.”
(Mark 3:20-21 BSB)

Home would not have been with Mary; their attitude toward Him tends to support that understanding. So the question then becomes whose house is He now living in?

The answer to this question is not essential to our salvation, but I have an inquiring mind, and we have clues, and they come from the disciples themselves.

For even His own brothers did not believe in Him.” (John 7:5 BSB)

“Brothers”, in this case, are His half brothers. If that confuses you, consider that Jesus is the Son of God. His brothers would have been the sons of Joseph and Mary.

A layman's commentary on John 1:47-51. What was it that captured Nathanael's attention and caused him to believe?

 Since I managed to lose my first attempt at this commentary on John 1:47-51, I will try once again.

Jesus saw Nathanael coming to Him, and *said of him, "Behold, an Israelite indeed, in whom there is no deceit!" 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." Nathanael answered Him, "Rabbi, You are the Son of God; You are the King of Israel." Jesus answered and said to him, "Because I said to you that I saw you under the fig tree, do you believe? You will see greater things than these." And He *said to him, "Truly, truly, I say to you, you will see the heavens opened and the angels of God ascending and descending on the Son of Man."
(John 1:47-51 NASB)

This conversation was initiated with Philip, excitedly looking for Nathanael. Nathanael, it seems, comes back at Philip with the rather notorious statement, What good thing can come out of Nazareth. In spite of his bad attitude, he follows Philip to see Jesus; thus, we see the narrative above, where Jesus now sees Nathanael, and like the prodigal's son, He comes toward Nathanael.

I would not, even for a second, tell you that I see Nathanael as anything other than another Israelite who is willing to fight to preserve his right to be entrenched in the law.

And yet, what does Nathanael say in response?

How do you know me?

This is another of those events where we are not given the precise details. How much would your attitude change if you found out that Jesus may have run to Nathanael, arms outstretched, demonstrating the love He had for this young man?

Because Jesus said, I saw you under the fig tree, Nathanael declares, “Rabbi, you are the Son of God; ...the King of Israel.”

Jesus replied, Because I said to you that I saw you under the fig tree, do you believe? You will see greater things than these." And He *said to him, "Truly, truly, I say to you, you will see the heavens opened and the angels of God ascending and descending on the Son of Man."

What was it that captured Nathanael's attention and caused him to believe?

It was the Signs, which were carried out through words and wonders.

I know many of you want to argue that there were no signs involved with the drawing of Nathanael. If that is what you believe, and it is based upon religious tradition, we can only fix that by adhering to the word of God.

The concept of signs is entwined in words, and everything Jesus said to Nathanael can be found in the Torah and the Tanach. The impact of signs is found in the 10 plagues.

“Moses told Aaron all the words of the LORD with which He had sent him, and all the signs that He had commanded him to do. Then Moses and Aaron went and assembled all the elders of the sons of Israel; and Aaron spoke all the words which the LORD had spoken to Moses. He then performed the signs in the sight of the people.”
(Exodus 4:28-30 NASB)

In Genesis 1:14, we see the Hebrew word for signs – 'ôth. It means a signal, beacon, evidence, a mark or a sign.

Genesis 1:14-15 NKJV Then God said, "Let there be lights in the firmament of the heavens to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs and seasons, and for days and years; (15) and let them be for lights in the firmament of the heavens to give light on the earth"; and it was so.

If God is explaining His actions to an entity, who would that entity be?

In our foolishness, we like to claim that it was Jesus or humanity. The problem with that thought process is that Jesus is God, and John's gospel tells us that He was the creative force that spoke everything into existence.

John 1:1-3 NKJV In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. (2) He was in the beginning with God. (3) All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made.

If you are going to cling to the idea that it was man or humanity, then your argument is pointless, for we have no evidence, by scriptural standard, that there was any trace of humanity upon the earth at this time.

In Deuteronomy 6, we see the LORD showing signs.

Deuteronomy 6:22 NKJV and the LORD showed signs and wonders before our eyes, great and severe, against Egypt, Pharaoh, and all his household.

Those words, passed through Moses, became the plagues (signs) that were poured out upon Pharaoh and Egypt.

Moses tells Aaron what he heard. Aaron believes and responds by performing the actions he is compelled to do.

“You are to speak all that I command you, and your brother Aaron is to tell Pharaoh to let the Israelites go out of his land. But I will harden Pharaoh’s heart, and though I will multiply My signs and wonders in the land of Egypt, Pharaoh will not listen to you. Then I will lay My hand on Egypt, and by mighty acts of judgment I will bring the divisions of My people the Israelites out of the land of Egypt.” (Exodus 7:2-4 BSB)

“In time “... the Egyptians will know that I am the LORD, when I stretch out My hand against Egypt and bring the Israelites out from among them.”
(Exodus 7:5 BSB)

The Berean Study Bible announces this plague to be the first.

“So Moses and Aaron went to Pharaoh and did just as the LORD had commanded. Aaron threw his staff down before Pharaoh and his officials, and it became a serpent. But Pharaoh called the wise men and sorcerers and magicians of Egypt, and they also did the same things by their magic arts. Each one threw down his staff, and it became a serpent. But Aaron’s staff swallowed up the other staffs.” (Exodus 7:10-12 BSB)

Is the event with the staff the first plague?

The answer to that question is not defined for us. However, is it possible that this is the first because God later says to Moses, “take the staff that was changed into a snake.”

The next thing we see is Aaron, at Moses' command, throwing down Moses' staff before Pharaoh and the wise men and sorcerers and magicians of Egypt. They, in turn, did the same thing, but Moses' staff, which had turned into a serpent, consumed all of their staffs, which had also turned into serpents. Quite impressive.

I suppose that for an event to qualify as a plague, it would have to touch the population. An event, such as turning all the water into blood, would have such an effect on the nation.

• Water Turned to Blood. The First Plague.

  “Go to Pharaoh in the morning as you see him walking out to the water. Wait on the bank of the Nile to meet him, and take in your hand the staff that was changed into a snake. Then say to him, ‘The LORD, the God of the Hebrews, has sent me to tell you: Let My people go, so that they may worship Me in the wilderness. But you have not listened until now. This is what the LORD says: By this you will know that I am the LORD. Behold, with the staff in my hand I will strike the water of the Nile, and it will turn to blood. The fish in the Nile will die, the river will stink, and the Egyptians will be unable to drink its water.’” (Exodus 7:15-18 BSB)

I think it is fair to say that this plague, right off the bat, puzzles me. It seems that God expressly speaks of the Nile River, and that would make sense, for how could God affect the water, in pots, in their homes?

What a ridiculous question to ask. God is not constrained by physics or our walled buildings in which we store our water jugs, no matter what they are made of. Besides that, consider that Jesus walked through a locked door when He came to be with the disciples who were gathered in the upper room.

John 20:19-20 BSB It was the first day of the week, and that very evening, while the disciples were together with the doors locked for fear of the Jews, Jesus came and stood among them. “Peace be with you!” He said to them. (20) After He had said this, He showed them His hands and His side. The disciples rejoiced when they saw the Lord.

This demonstration by signs in Egypt continues.

“And the LORD said to Moses, 'Tell Aaron, ‘Take your staff and stretch out your hand over the waters of Egypt—over their rivers and canals and ponds and reservoirs—that they may become blood.’ There will be blood throughout the land of Egypt, even in the vessels of wood and stone.”
(Exodus 7:19 BSB)

So, nothing was excluded. If that is the case, then explain to me how this next phase of this plague happened.

“But the magicians of Egypt did the same things by their magic arts. So Pharaoh’s heart was hardened, and he would not listen to Moses and Aaron, just as the LORD had said.” (Exodus 7:22 BSB)

Where did the wizards get clean water so that they could make it bloody and useless?

Aside from the disgusting after effects, you would think that there was no fresh water left in the region, and yet, Pharaoh's sorcerers found some clean water and turned it into blood.
Where did they find fresh water?

I cannot imagine.

• Frogs, the second plague.

By themselves, or in small quantities, they might almost be tolerable, but to have frogs in everything would be unbearable.

So the river shall bring forth frogs abundantly, which shall go up and come into your house, into your bedroom, on your bed, into the houses of your servants, on your people, into your ovens, and into your kneading bowls.”
(Exodus 8:3 NKJV)

Just a couple of fun side notes:

And the magicians did so with their enchantments, and brought up frogs on the land of Egypt. (Exodus 8:7 NKJV)

What verse 7 tells me is that the dark work of the demonic is not to be toyed with.

Did you ever pay attention to how God got rid of them?

“Then Moses and Aaron went out from Pharaoh. And Moses cried out to the LORD concerning the frogs which He had brought against Pharaoh. So the LORD did according to the word of Moses. And the frogs died out of the houses, out of the courtyards, and out of the fields. They gathered them together in heaps, and the land stank. But when Pharaoh saw that there was relief, he hardened his heart and did not heed them, as the LORD had said.” (Exodus 8:12-15 NKJV)

• The Third Plague: Gnats.

“So the LORD said to Moses, "Say to Aaron, 'Stretch out your rod, and strike the dust of the land, so that it may become lice throughout all the land of Egypt.' " And they did so. For Aaron stretched out his hand with his rod and struck the dust of the earth, and it became lice on man and beast. All the dust of the land became lice throughout all the land of Egypt.”
(Exodus 8:16-17 NKJV)

How could gnats be such a problem? The answer is easily understood just in numbers alone. There is dust everywhere. If you have been bothered by them while fishing or working around livestock. They will enter every available orifice on your body.

• The land is ruined by flies. Plague #4.

  “Or else, if you will not let My people go, behold, I will send swarms of flies on you and your servants, on your people and into your houses. The houses of the Egyptians shall be full of swarms of flies, and also the ground on which they stand. And in that day I will set apart the land of Goshen, in which My people dwell, that no swarms of flies shall be there, in order that you may know that I am the LORD in the midst of the land. I will make a difference between My people and your people. Tomorrow this sign shall be." ' " And the LORD did so. Thick swarms of flies came into the house of Pharaoh, into his servants' houses, and into all the land of Egypt. The land was corrupted because of the swarms of flies.” (Exodus 8:21-24 NKJV)

This is right there with gnats in terms of annoyance. Aside from their ability to bite or lay eggs that can infest your body. The eggs can turn into meat-eating larvae. They are associated with death.

• The Egyptian Livestock Die. The Fifth Plague:

“then the hand of the LORD will bring a severe plague on your livestock in the field—on your horses, donkeys, camels, herds, and flocks. But the LORD will make a distinction between the livestock of Israel and the livestock of Egypt, so that no animal belonging to the Israelites will die.’”
(Exodus 9:3-4 BSB)

Unlike the plague that is to come, where the “death” angel kills the firstborn of all who were NOT covered by the blood on the doorposts, it is possible that Moses had a hard time convincing the Israelites that God could do such things. He not only could but would.

“And the next day the LORD did just that. All the livestock of the Egyptians died, but not one animal belonging to the Israelites died.”
Exodus 9:6 BSB

• The Sixth Plague: Boils

  “So the LORD said to Moses and Aaron, 'Take for yourselves handfuls of ashes from a furnace, and let Moses scatter it toward the heavens in the sight of Pharaoh. And it will become fine dust in all the land of Egypt, and it will cause boils that break out in sores on man and beast throughout all the land of Egypt." Then they took ashes from the furnace and stood before Pharaoh, and Moses scattered them toward heaven. And they caused boils that break out in sores on man and beast. And the magicians could not stand before Moses because of the boils, for the boils were on the magicians and on all the Egyptians.”
  (Exodus 9:8-11 NKJV)

• Hail, the seventh plague.

I feel like I am boring you with this information about all the plagues. If you wish, look them up for yourselves, as there are three more.

Why was God doing all this?

Exodus 9:13-16 NKJV Then the LORD said to Moses, "Rise early in the morning and stand before Pharaoh, and say to him, 'Thus says the LORD God of the Hebrews: "Let My people go, that they may serve Me, (14) for at this time I will send all My plagues to your very heart, and on your servants and on your people, that you may know that there is none like Me in all the earth.

15. Now if I had stretched out my hand and struck you and your people with pestilence (so that you die), then you would have been cut off from the earth.

And finally, the 16^th verse speaks to us as well. When it says, “that My name may be declared in all the earth.” Open your mouth and declare the wonders.

15. But indeed for this purpose I have raised you up, that I may show My power in you, and that My name may be declared in all the earth.

“Now here is a genuine son of Israel—a man of complete integrity.” John 1:47, 48. A layman's commentary on the book of John.

 In a sense, Nathanael started the fight by saying, “can any good thing come out of Nazareth.” Whether Jesus perceived that Nathanael was initiating a fight or not when the two of them met, is irrelevant. I assume that Jesus would have been sinning if He had become retaliatory; it would have been if I had done it.

Philip had said to Nathanael to come and see; the next thing we see is Philip's friend walking toward Jesus; that alone speaks volumes.

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

The NLT expresses what Jesus said in this manner.

“Now here is a genuine son of Israel—a man of complete integrity.”

It is apparent that Jesus already had a small group near him; they, of course, were Jews.

Lacking an audience and then going on a rant, while looking up at the clouds as though you were talking to God, tends to make you look like a fool. I can envision Jesus turning to those around him, drawing their attention, and then directing them to pay attention to Nathanael. At this point, if He says, “Now here is a genuine son of Israel,” this statement can be taken several directions. On that note, Jesus adds how Nathanael is one in whom there is no deceit, or, a man of complete integrity.

If Jesus decided to square off with “ a man of no deceit.” Wouldn't you be wondering how He could possibly know anything about this man and his background. Considering that they did not have high speed internet, cells phones, nor computers - checking someone's background would have bordered on impossible, unless of course you are actively hearing the Father's voice.

To refer to Nathanael as an Israelite, to me, is peculiar. The Word Study dictionary had this to say:

"Israelite" is a name of honor. It is to be distinguished from both "Hebrew [Hebraíos {G1445}]" being, at least in NT times, a Jew with purely national sympathies who spoke the native Hebrew. or Aramaic dialect of Palestine, and "Jew [Ioudaíos {G2453}]", one who belonged to the ancient race wherever he might be settled and whatever his views. However, every Jew regarded himself as a true Israelite and prided himself on the privileges which he as a member of the favored nation had received when other nations had been passed by. Paul refers to these privileges when he describes his "kinsmen according to the flesh" as Israelites to whom "the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the law, and the service of God, and the promises" apply” (Rom_9:4).”

So, it seems that Nathanael would already have an attitude of pride.

Paul, in writing to the church in Rome, conveyed the idea that he understood the high mindedness.

“For I could wish that I myself were accursed from Christ for my brethren, my countrymen according to the flesh, who are Israelites, to whom pertain the adoption, the glory, the covenants, the giving of the law, the service of God, and the promises;” (Romans 9:3-4 NKJV)

John 1:48 enforces the suspicion, on the part of Nathanael, that Jesus might have had background information about him. He did not, but Jesus did have an understanding and communication with the Father, that surpasses anything I have ever experienced.

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."
(John 1:48 NKJV)

You can almost feel the alarm in his voice. Jesus, it tells us, answered Nathanael by saying, “Before Philip called you, when you were under the fig tree, I saw you."

We see something comparable in John 2:24.

“But Jesus didn’t trust them, because he knew all about people.”
(John 2:24 NLT)

Who is He talking about and why didn't He trust them?

The answer lies in John 2:23.

“Now when He was in Jerusalem at the Passover, during the feast, many believed in His name when they saw the signs which He did.”
(John 2:23 NKJV)

So, with them, the Jews, in Jerusalem, at the Passover, many “believed” in His name when they saw the signs which He did.

Interesting, but I saw something comparable when the Vineyard church movement erupted in Southern California in the early 1990s. John Wimber, the pastor of the Anaheim Vineyard (church), displayed a willingness to give the Holy Spirit the freedom to have it's way.

Little did we know that we would only have John for about seven more years. I suppose it would be appropriate for me to tell you that Pastor Wimber began this quest for the Holy Spirit while holding down a pastorate in the Quaker church. (I knew nothing about John Wimber back then.) Wikipedia has an extensive background on Pastor Wimber on their website. John Wimber - Wikipedia One of the things that alarmed me was how profoundly he acceded himself to Fuller Theological Seminary. To be honest I know little about the Seminary, but I have had abominable interactions with several people who did attended Fuller. One of those religious zealots held a Doctorate from that school and was nothing short of rude, while at the same time he was pushing our small church body to prepare for a global collapse due to Y2K scares; the other human example had attained a Masters degree from the seminary and took great pleasure in talking over, at least, my head.

The affects of the Holy Spirit was seen and felt in the lives of many of the people who came to the Anaheim Vineyard. Sure, there is no doubt that many came because it was a good show, but best of all, church was not boring (having spent most of my life in organized church I can attest to the fact that much of what happened there put me to sleep.) My parents began to follow their sons (me and a couple of others) as we were going down to Anaheim to jump into the river.

Question: Was baby Jesus born with the Spirit Of God fully developed within Him to the point that He had all knowledge of everything going on around Him?

We find the answer in Philippians.

“Let this mind be in you which was also in Christ Jesus: Who, existing in the form of God, did not consider equality with God something to be grasped, but emptied Himself, taking the form of a servant, being made in human likeness. And being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself and became obedient to death— even death on a cross.”
(Philippians 2:5-8 BSB)

Paul describes Jesus as:

• Emptying Himself.

  He was born as baby who, like every other baby, needed a mother to take care of His every need.

• The NLT tells us “Though he was God, he did not think of equality with God as something to cling to. (Philippians 2:6 NLT).

  When would Jesus have had this thought process? The only place would be prior to creation when He was with the Father. So we can correctly assume that He was born at the lowest of ranks, just as we are. Let's assume that you are born in India and find yourself born into the caste system. If you cannot wipe the spit off your own face or wipe off your own behind then you are the lowest of ranks. By the way, your caste system does not guarantee your place in eternity; you still have to accept the price that Jesus paid for your behalf.

• While this next aspect tends to apply to someone with at least a little bit of maturity, He took on the form of a servant.

  We, as a men's group, watched five seasons of the Chosen. Out of all the episodes we watched the only thing that leaned toward Jesus being a servant applied to the evening in the upper room when Jesus washed the feet of the disciples.

  If being born through natural human interaction is what made Him a servant, at least servants have the right to resign. Did Jesus have the right to resign? Certainly He did, but for our sakes He chose not to.

  Once again, Paul explains in his letter to the church at Philippi.

  “Instead, he gave up his divine privileges; he took the humble position of a slave and was born as a human being. When he appeared in human form, he humbled himself in obedience to God and died a criminal’s death on a cross.”
  (Philippians 2:7-8 NLT)

  Jesus, because of Satan's temptations, had the opportunity to resign, much like Adam did; the difference being, Adam submitted to temptation, Jesus, did not.

It is safe to assume that Jesus was born normal, just as we are. If He had the ability to hear from the Father, it is something that developed; and that demonstrates that we can develop those gifts of the spirit, just as Jesus did.