John 2
Joh 2:1 On the third day a wedding took place at Cana in Galilee. Jesus’ mother was there,
On the third day - John completes his account of the happenings during this momentous week at the beginning of Jesus’ ministry. 1:43-51 refers to the fifth day, then there was a 6th day (presumably in travel), and then comes this seventh day. It was probably a Wednesday, for that was the usual day for a wedding.
Jesus’ mother was there - John nowhere refers either to himself or to Mary by name. Remember that Mary was entrusted to John’s care and became like a mother to him, 19:26f. We can surmise from this passage that Mary was a friend or even a relative of the bride or groom. It is also to be noted that Joseph is not mentioned at all: the most probable explanation is that he was deceased.
Joh 2:2 and Jesus and his disciples had also been invited to the wedding.
Jesus and his disciples had also been invited to the wedding - The disciples are those mentioned in the previous chapter: Andrew, Simon Peter, Philip, Nathanael, and one other (probably John himself). So Jesus was present at, and took part in, a marriage feast. He is concerned about all aspects of our lives, and social relationships and family celebrations can alike be graced by his presence and blessed by his approval. There is a time to eat, to drink, to laugh, and to be joyful, notwithstanding the prevailing poverty and sadness around us. Only let these things be kept in their rightful place.
Joh 2:3 When the wine was gone, Jesus’ mother said to him, “They have no more wine.”
When the wine was gone - marriage feasts like the one referred to here were important and joyous occasions, and might last up to a week. It would be a serious embarrassment for the wine to run out. ‘For a Jewish feast wine was essential. “Without wine,” said the Rabbis, “there is no joy.” It was not that people were drunken, but in the East wine was an essential. Drunkenness was in fact a great disgrace, and they actually drank their wine in a mixture composed of two parts of wine to three parts of water. At any time the failure of provisions would have been a problem, for hospitality in the East is a sacred duty, but for the provisions to fail at a wedding would be a terrible shame for the bride and the bridegroom. That indeed would have been a humiliation.” (William Barclay)
Jesus’ mother said to him, “They have no more wine” - Jesus’ mother is never named in this Gospel, possibly to avoid confusing her with various other women of the same name. Exactly what she hoped that Jesus would do is unclear. What is clear is that she believed that he could do something. On the one hand, it is unlikely that Mary expected her son to perform some kind of miracle, for v11 states that the present miracle was the very first (contrary to some far-fetched apocryphal stories about Jesus’ childhood). On the other hand, it is probably that Joseph had died by this time, and that Mary had learned to rely on her eldest son. See also v5.
Joh 2:4 “Dear woman, why do you involve me?” Jesus replied. “My time has not yet come.”
“Dear woman” - NIV softens the address, which is simply ‘woman’ in the original. However, no impatience or discourteousness is intended, as is apparent in the parallel expression in 19:26, which is obviously most tender and loving. Cf. 20:15. On the other hand, the fact that Jesus does not refer to Mary as ‘Mother’ does call for comment: it may be that now, at the outset of his public ministry, he is encouraging her to see him in a new way, a way that transcends the physical and social ties of parenthood and sonship.
“Why do you involve me?” - this is firm, but not brusque. Perhaps Barclay is right when he renders this, “Let me handle this in my own way.”
“My time has not yet come” - Jesus was not prepared to deviate from his God-given plan. Jesus’ ‘time’ was, no doubt, the time of his public manifestation. This did, indeed, reach a certain stage in v11, but was to further unfold according to the divine plan and purpose, Joh 12:23,32.
Joh 2:5 his mother said to the servants, “Do whatever he tells you.”
“Do whatever he tells you” - Mary knows that Jesus can be trusted, even when the outcome is as yet unknown. See v3.
Joh 2:6 Nearby stood six stone water jars, the kind used by the Jews for ceremonial washing, each holding from twenty to thirty gallons.
Six stone water jars…used by the Jews… - John explains the purpose of these large containers for the benefit of his non-Jewish readers, cf Mr 7:3-4.
Joh 2:7 Jesus said to the servants, “Fill the jars with water;” so they filled them to the brim.
“Fill the jars with water” - the point is emphasised that at the time of the miracle, the jars contained nothing but water.
Joh 2:8 Then he told them, “Now draw some out and take it to the master of the banquet.” They did so,
The master of the banquet - either the head waiter or an honoured guest.
Joh 2:9 and the master of the banquet tasted the water that had been turned into wine. He did not realize where it had come from, though the servants who had drawn the water knew. Then he called the bridegroom aside
Joh 2:10 and said, “Everyone brings out the choice wine first and then the cheaper wine after the guests have had too much to drink; but you have saved the best till now.”
“You have saved the best till now” - And so an acute embarrassment is transformed into a happy triumph, the bridegroom having not only sufficient wine but also being complimented on its unusually high quality.
Joh 2:11 This, the first of his miraculous signs, Jesus performed at Cana in Galilee. He thus revealed his glory, and his disciples put their faith in him.
The first of his miraculous signs - There is always something important about the first in a series; and this first miracle, be it noted, was performed, not in Jerusalem, but in Galilee; not amongst the high and mighty, but in the presence of ordinary people. Various words are used in the NT of miracles: the word ‘sign’ is often used by John, and its purpose is to draw our attention away from the thing performed to the one who performs it, and to encourage us to see through the physical deed to the underlying spiritual principle. Therefore John adds,
He thus revealed his glory, and his disciples put their faith in him - The five disciples were led to a deeper and more settled appreciation of who he was. The light was dawning in their hearts. The day was coming when they would be able to confess, Joh 1:14, ‘We have seen his glory, the glory of the one and Only, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth.’
John, in recording this miracle, undoubtedly wants us to see something deeper in it. Hence his use of the word ‘sign’. And the deeper message surely relates to the transforming power of Jesus. ‘He changes the water of Judaism into the wine of Christianity, the water of Christlessness into the wine of the richness and the fulness of eternal life in Christ, the water of the law into the wine of the gospel’ (Morris). And the transformation is abundantly generous, both in quantity, v6 and quality, v10. Cf. Joh 1:16.
‘”Signs” are precisely what the Johannine miracles are, for in very concrete, physical ways they point to the deep and crucial truth about Jesus (and God), namely, that he is the absolutely unique Son of God who descended from heaven to reveal the Father and through whose “lifting up” on the cross, resurrection and return to the Father believers receive the Holy Spirit and thus eternal life. The signs, in other words, point to the present glory of the exclusive mediator of eschatological salvation and also portend the salvation to be enjoyed by the beneficiaries of the completion of his messianic work.’ {cf. Joh 7:37-39} (DJG)
The following reasons have been suggested for this being the first of Christ’s miracles:-
- To bless the first of God’s ordinances with the first of Christ’s miracles
- To follow with a feast Christ’s recent experience of a fast.
- To show that although he would not turn stones into bread to satisfy Satan, he would willingly turn water into wine to show forth his own glory.
- As the first miracle by man was one of transformation, Ex 7:9, so was the first miracle by the Son of man.
- To contrast the ministry of John the Baptist, who kept to a strict diet, with that of Christ.
‘For John the miracles are all “signs.” They point beyond themselves. This particular miracle signifies that there is a transforming power associated with Jesus. He changes the water of Judaism into the wine of Christianity, the water of Christlessness into the wine of the richness and the fulness of eternal life in Christ, the water of the law into the wine of the gospel.’ (Leon Morris)
‘The term sign is used more often by John than by the other Gospel-writers. It indicates a miracle viewed as a proof of divine authority and majesty. Hence, it leads the attention of the spectator away from the deed itself to the divine Doer. Often, too, the sign, a work of power in the physical realm, illustrates a principle that is operative in the spiritual realm; that which takes place in the sphere of creation points away from itself to the sphere of redemption.’ (Hendriksen)
Some modern scholars, of course, scorn the idea that a genuine miracle took place at all. ‘The difficulty of believing that St John intended us to take it literally is not the mere size of the miracle involved…but rather its somewhat unreasonable character. We must frankly face the difficulty that to create such a quantity of good wine “when men have drunk freely” is hardly an act of common sense, and makes a poor “beginning of miracles” for the Good Teacher of the Christian tradition.’ (Alan Richardson, The Miracle-Stories of the Gospels, 121).
‘The miracles of Jesus ain the canonical gospels are sober, restrained, unsensational and spiritually significant…Moreover, they are evenly distributed through the four gospels and their sources, so that they are widely attested; the time elapsing between the public ministry of Jesus and the publication of the gospels was not long enough for the development of legends; and many eyewitnesses would have been wtill alive to refute (if the stories were not true), for example, the restoration to Malchus of his right ear and the Bartemaeus of his eyesight.’ (Stott, Authentic Christianity, 387)
John 2:12 After this he went down to Capernaum with his mother and brothers and his disciples. There they stayed for a few days.
John 2:13 When it was almost time for the Jewish Passover, Jesus went up to Jerusalem.
John 2:14 In the temple courts he found men selling cattle, sheep and doves, and others sitting at tables exchanging money.
John 2:15 So he made a whip out of cords, and drove all from the temple area, both sheep and cattle; he scattered the coins of the money changers and overturned their tables.
John 2:16 To those who sold doves he said, “Get these out of here! How dare you turn my Father’s house into a market!”
Joh 2:17 his disciples remembered that it is written: “Zeal for your house will consume me.”
What is zeal? ‘Numb 25:2:’Phinehas has turned my wrath away, while he was zealous for my sake.’ Zeal is a mixed affection, a compound of love and anger; it carries forth our love to God, and our anger against sin in an intense degree. Zeal is impatient of God’s dishonour; a Christian fired with zeal, takes a dishonour done to God worse than an injury done to himself. Re 2:2. ‘Thou canst not bear them that are evil.’ Our Saviour Christ thus glorified his Father; he, being baptized with a spirit of zeal, drove the money-changers out of the temple. Joh 2:14-17. ‘The zeal of thine house has eaten me up.’ (Thomas Watson)
John 2:18 Then the Jews demanded of him, “What miraculous sign can you show us to prove your authority to do all this?”
Joh 2:19 Jesus answered them, “Destroy this temple, and I will raise it again in three days.”
See Mt 26:61
Joh 2:20 The Jews replied, “It has taken forty-six years to build this temple, and you are going to raise it in three days?”
“Forty-six years” - ‘The temple in which they then were was that which was commonly called the second temple, built after the return of the Jews from Babylon. This temple Herod the Great commenced repairing, or began to rebuild, in the eighteenth year of his reign-that is, sixteen years before the birth of Christ (Jos. Ant., b. xv. 1). The main body of the temple he completed in nine years and a half (Jos. Ant., xv. 5, 6), yet the temple, with its outbuildings, was not entirely complete in the time of our Saviour. Herod continued to ornament it and to perfect it even till the time of Agrippa (Jos. Ant., b. xx. ch. viii. _ 11). As Herod began to rebuild the temple sixteen years before the birth of Jesus, and as what is here mentioned happened in the thirtieth year of the age of Jesus, so the time which had been occupied in it was forty-six years. This circumstance is one of the many in the New Testament which show the accuracy of the evangelists, and which prove that they were well acquainted with what they recorded. It demonstrates that their narration is true. Impostors do not trouble themselves to be very accurate about names and dates, and there is nothing in which they are more liable to make mistakes.’ (Barnes)
John 2:21 But the temple he had spoken of was his body.
John 2:22 After he was raised from the dead, his disciples recalled what he had said. Then they believed the Scripture and the words that Jesus had spoken.
Joh 2:23 Now while he was in Jerusalem at the Passover Feast, many people saw the miraculous signs he was doing and believed in his name.
Many people saw the miraculous signs he was doing… - John reminds us that Jesus did many miracles which are not specifically recorded, Joh 20:30 21:25. Nicodemus refers to these in Joh 3:2.
…and believed in his name - Obviously an intellectual assent, a recognition that Jesus was a great prophet, rather than a heartfelt, saving belief. There is a vital difference between the two. The former is the kind of belief that Simon Magus had, Ac 8:13,18-23.
We see here both the purpose and the limitations of miraculous signs. They draw attention to the power and grace of God, but do not in themselves form a basis for saving faith.
Joh 2:24 But Jesus would not entrust himself to them, for he knew all men.
Jesus would not entrust himself to them - A remarkable twofold use of ‘pisteuo’ here: many trusted him (v23), but he was not entrusting himself (i.e. the fulness of his self-revelation; his cause) to them. ‘Jesus of all people will not be misled by outward professions of loyalty which do not involve true repentance and heart commitment.’ (Milne)
He knew all men - he knew their hearts, and in the case of these admirers, knew that they were like the stony ground, and their faith shallow and temporary. The omniscience which is testified to here is a divine attribute, 1Sa 16:7 1Ch 28:9 Jer 17:10 Mr 2:8 Joh 16:30-31.
Joh 2:25 he did not need man’s testimony about man, for he knew what was in a man.
He did not need man’s testimony about man - he did not need people’s approval. He travelled his own path, unswayed by transitory applause of men. Let us likewise learn not to set too much store by the approval or applause of men. Lu 6:26.
He knew what was in a man - The rabbis had taught that there were seven things hidden from man, including ‘what is in the heart of his neighbour.’ However, Jesus’ penetrating gaze looked right into a person’s heart. Here is a bold assertion of Christ’s divine omniscience. {cf. 1Ki 8:39} ‘Some men of genius can read men better than others, but not in the sense meant here’ (Robertson). Our Lord did not need to be told about people, he required no references or testimonials, because he knew all about them already. ‘He knew all men, not only their names and faces, as it is possible for us to know many, but their nature, dispositions, affections, designs, as we do not know any man, scarcely ourselves. He knows all men, for his powerful hand made them all, his piercing eye sees them all, sees into them. He knows his subtle enemies, and all their secret projects; his false friends, and their true characters; what they really are, whatever they pretend to be. He knows them that are truly his, knows their integrity, and knows their infirmity too. He knows their frame.’ (Henry)
The last 100 years have seen amazing activity and progress in the human sciences (i.e. anthropology, psychology, social psychology, sociology, self-awareness, counselling, and so on). And yet human nature remains as much an enigma and a problem as it ever has been. And so it will remain until we humbly accept Christ’s infallible insight, which asserts on the one hand a basic moral flaw (we pollute God’s temple; we refuse him his rightful worship; we cannot be trusted); and on the other hand an infinite value (his mission was motivated not only by zeal for his Father’s glory, but but a deep love for his people; this concern leads to his desire to establish true worship in anticipation of that which will be offered in the new world, Re 21:22 22:6). (On this, see Milne, 73-74)
