Contrasting Nathaniel and Peter's Confessions

  • Thread starter Thread starter Fidelis
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
F

Fidelis

Guest
When comparing and contrasting Nathaniel’s confession of faith in John 1:45-51 and Peter’s in Matthew 16:13-19, what would you say is the theological significance of each? Specifically, why do we see Peter’s confession of faith as being significant enough to lead Jesus to promise him primacy and infallibility (and the Church’s indefectibility), but not Nathaniel’s?
Jesus saw Nathanael coming toward him and said of him, “Here is a true Israelite. There is no duplicity in him.” Nathanael said to him, “How do you know me?” Jesus answered and said to him, “Before Philip called you, I saw you under the fig tree.” Nathanael answered him,** “Rabbi, you are the Son of God; you are the King of Israel.”** Jesus answered and said to him, “Do you believe because I told you that I saw you under the fig tree? You will see greater things than this.” And he said to him, “Amen, amen, I say to you, you will see the sky opened and the angels of God ascending and descending on the Son of Man.”
(John 1:45-51)
Click to expand...
When Jesus went into the region of Caesarea Philippi he asked his disciples, “Who do people say that the Son of Man is?” They replied, “Some say John the Baptist, others Elijah, still others Jeremiah or one of the prophets.” He said to them, “But who do you say that I am?” Simon Peter said in reply, “You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God.” Jesus said to him in reply, “Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah. For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my heavenly Father. And so I say to you, you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of the netherworld shall not prevail against it. I will give you the keys to the kingdom of heaven. Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.”
(Matthew 16:13-19)
Click to expand...
Links to any articles would be helpful too. Thanks!
 
Wow, no replies, speculations or thoughts on this? :eek: Let me rephrase it this way:

If Nathaniel said pretty much the same thing as Peter, why is Peter the first Pope and not Nathaniel?
 
I would guess that Christ didn’t choose Peter to be the first Pope only because of his words. There had to be other reasons.
 
Jesus had already chosen Peter before Nathaniel arrived on the scene.

John 1:42 He brought him to Jesus. Jesus looked at him and said, “So you are Simon the son of John? You shall be called Cephas” (which means Peter).
This occurred at least one day prior to Nathaniel’s arrival - vs. 43

I take Jesus’ mentioning Simon’s future name change as showing it was already decided who would be the Rock on which His Church would be built. The choice was made before either of them had made a profession of faith. I don’t think it was the profession of faith that determined who would be chosen.

Nita
 
One thing did catch my eye: apparently the reasons for each were different as well. Specifically, after Nathaniel’s confession, our Lord says, “Do you believe because I told you that I saw you under the fig tree?” This would indicate to me that Nathaniel’s profession was based on the fact that Jesus saw him.

Contrast that to was said after Peter’s confession. Our Lord states “Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah. For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my heavenly Father.” Peter was given this knowledge through the grace of God. I guess you could say in Nathaniel’s confession “flesh and blood” revealed it to him.

Whether this knowledge was given to Peter so that he would be the rock, or, as Nita points out, it was given to him because he was already chosen to be the rock, I don’t know.
 
If you look at what Jesus is saying, “I saw you under the fig tree”. This is an allusion to Isaiah’s book. There is a part of Isaiah where someone is sitting under a fig tree reading of the coming Messiah (I think around chapter 20 or so). Nathaniel is sitting under the fig tree reading Isaiah (one can assume) when his brother comes and tells him about Christ.

Christ would have been out of “eyesight” but still saw Nathaniel and knew what he was doing. This would have given Nathaniel clear understand of Who this Man was standing in their midst.
 
I heard someone (Scot Hahn, I think) say that Peter’s confession of faith was what determined the timing of Our Lord’s appointing him as head of the Church. Peter’s profession was the prerequisite, or cue, so to speak, that the proper time had arrived.

Nita
 
mtr01 said:
One thing did catch my eye: apparently the reasons for each were different as well. Specifically, after Nathaniel’s confession, our Lord says, “Do you believe because I told you that I saw you under the fig tree?” This would indicate to me that Nathaniel’s profession was based on the fact that Jesus saw him.

Contrast that to was said after Peter’s confession. Our Lord states “Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah. For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my heavenly Father.” Peter was given this knowledge through the grace of God. I guess you could say in Nathaniel’s confession “flesh and blood” revealed it to him.

Whether this knowledge was given to Peter so that he would be the rock, or, as Nita points out, it was given to him because he was already chosen to be the rock, I don’t know.
Click to expand...
I agree and I also would say St. Peter’s statement was packed with much more meaning.

Peace,
David
 
I once saw a paraphrase of Jesus’ response to Peter: "Hey that is an infallible statement. You must be the Pope."
 
Where does it say that Nathaniels’ recognition of who Jesus was, was reveal to him by God?
 
It seems if someone understands the Jewish religious festivals, they’d come to understand that Peter issued this on the “Day of Atonement”, which was the first day (?) of the 8 day “Festival of Tabernacles”. I don’t remember the particulars of the timing, but Jewish tradition said that this is the only day of the year that the High Priest of Israel was able to utter the sacred word, “Yahweh”.

Here, Peter is acting as the future High Priest of the New Covenant Church as he proclaims “You are the Christ, the Son of the Living God”.
 
epostle said:
Where does it say that Nathaniels’ recognition of who Jesus was, was reveal to him by God?
Click to expand...
It doesn’t. But Nathaniel was able to put two and two together. Notice Jesus isn’t around when Philip comes to tell Nathaniel of Him. Nathaniel realizes that Jesus was Supernatural, evidently.
 
epostle said:
Where does it say that Nathaniels’ recognition of who Jesus was, was reveal to him by God?
Click to expand...
Nathan’a-el said to him, “How do you know me?” Jesus answered him, “Before Philip called you, when you were under the fig tree, I saw you.”
49] Nathan’a-el answered him, “Rabbi, you are the Son of God! You are the King of Israel!”
Click to expand...
John 1:48-49

I have seen it suggested that Nathanael was alone and praying under the fig tree. It was a secluded spot. Thus he knew that only God saw him there.
 
NotWorthy said:
… “Day of Atonement”, … I don’t remember the particulars of the timing, but Jewish tradition said that this is the only day of the year that the High Priest of Israel was able to utter the sacred word, “Yahweh”.
.
Click to expand...
Had never heard of that before. Do you have a verifying source?
What I’ve always read was that it was only on the Day of Atonement that the High Priest could enter the Holy of Holies. (Priests were never allowed to enter.)

Nita
 
Nita said:
Had never heard of that before. Do you have a verifying source?
What I’ve always read was that it was only on the Day of Atonement that the High Priest could enter the Holy of Holies. (Priests were never allowed to enter.)

Nita
Click to expand...
It was in Scott Hahn’s “Catholic for a Reason - I”. I have it at home, so I’ll look it up tonight.

If I remember it correctly, the Day of Atonement was the first day of the Festival of Booths. Then, we read in Matthew 17:1, After six days Jesus took Peter, James, and John his brother, and led them up a high mountain by themselves. We know that this scene took place during the Festival of Tabernacles, and 8 day festival. I know I’m missing some minor details. I’ll see if I can find more on it.
 
Started a google search and just found it here.

yahweh.com/PWMags/PW11-04/theName2.html
THE PROHIBITION OF USE OF THE NAMES OF GOD. The prohibition applies both to the pronunciation of the name of God and its committal to writing, apart from its use in sacred writings. The prohibition against the pronunciation of the name of God applies only to the Tetragrammaton, which could be pronounced by the high priest only once a year on the Day of Atonement in the Holy of Holies (cf. Mishnah Yoma 6:2), and in the Temple by the priests when they recited the Priestly Blessings (Sot. 7:6; see also Ch. Albeck (ed.), Seder Nashim (1954), 387).

(Underlining mine).
Appears the priests could also use it in limited situations.

Nita
 
And when is the Day of Atonement in relation to the Festival of Booths?

OK, I found it. Google is a wonderful tool.

The Day of Atonement is the 10th day of the 7th month.
The Festival of Booths starts on the 15th day of the 7th month and lasts 7 days.

Matthew 17 shows that the Transfiguration was “on the 6th day” after Peter’s proclamation. The booths were to be lived in the entire 7 days of the festival, so if Peter was wanting to build a booth, it would have been on the 1st day of the festival - the 15th day of the 7th month.

Since the bible rarely has “coincidences” that are not “God-incidences”, it’s pretty safe to assume that Peter’s Confession happened on the 10th day of the 7th month, which would have placed it on the Day of Atonement - the day when the High Priest of Israel could utter the sacred name of God - Yahweh.

In any event, I’ll check the essay in “Catholic for a Reason” to verify this.

Thanks for your patience!!!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top