Nathanael: an interpretation to the problem Jn 1:43-51 (corrected)

[Gloria_de_G]

Let us see what Nathanael was doing before Philip meets him and calls him to go to encounter Jesus. Jn 1:43-51

Among the Israelites there was a great desire and expectation for the Messianic age, the times of the Messiah, the famous millennium, which was an era of peace where people of all the world will be living in peace; there will be no more wars. This will be the millennial reign of the Messiah, when **every Jew will be able to seat under the fig tree eating the fruit of the vine **. cf. Micah 4:3-4

Well, what happen is, I imagine, that before Philip found him, Nethanael was going somewhere and was walking dreaming, thinking in the Messianic age and **he imagined himself under the fig tree **eating the produce of the vine in those beautiful times to come, when suddenly he met Philip who asked Nathanael to come with him because they have found the Messiah of whom Moses, the law and prophets spoke about. And Philip added, Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Joseph. So Nathanael doubted that anything good could come from Nazareth. It was a little town never mention in the Old Testament and also belonging to Galilee (of the gentiles). Which prophet could come from there? He was not at all impressed by what Philip said, so Philip had to push and say ‘come and see’.

On arriving Philip and Nathanael, Jesus told to the others gather there: “Behold, an Israelite indeed, in whom is no deceit!”, because he knew what he was thinking before Philip met him, and only a good Israelite will desire so much in his heart to have those days of peace to come.

We know that Philip was already with Jesus before he went to look for Nathanael, therefore Jesus was thinking in Nathanael and perceived that he was thinking in the Messianic age and saw what he was imagining.

We know that Jesus could read the thoughts of others (like when he went to the house of the Pharisee who wonder in his hart that if Jesus was a prophet he will know the type of woman who was cleaning his feet with her tears and drying them with her hair and Jesus gave an answer to his thoughts!!! Lk 39:40) also Jesus cured people at a distance, like the servant of the centurion Mt 8:8.

Now when Jesus spoke so well of Nathanael to the others, Nathanael asked Jesus: "How do you know me?" really, as to speak like that of him.

And we know what Jesus answered him:
“Before Philip called you, when you were under the fig tree, I saw you.”

YOU ARE THE SON OF GOD, YOU ARE THE KING OF ISRAEL, Nathanael answered.

You can oppose my imaginations if you have a better one; I am note re-writing Scripture, just giving a new interpretation to a difficult passage.
(I really try to do my best not to have spelling mistakes because English is not my mother tongue, but Spanish, therefore have patience with me please!)

In the love of Christ,
Gloria

.

 

[po18guy]

The Catena Aurea contains some interesting comments and light to shed on these passages:

CHRYS. Nathanael, in difficulty as to Christ coming out of Nazareth, showed the care with which he had read the Scriptures: his not rejecting the tidings when brought him, showed his strong desire for Christ’s coming. He thought that Philip might be mistaken as to the place. It follows, Jesus saw Nathanael coming to Him, and said of him, Behold an Israelite indeed, in whom is no guile! There was no fault to be found with him, though he had spoken like one who did not believe, because he was more deeply read in the Prophets than Philip. He calls him guileless, because he had said nothing to gain favor, or gratify malice.

AUG. What means this, In whom is no guile? Had he no sin? Was no physician necessary for him? Far from it. No one was ever born, of a temper not to need the Physician. It is guile, when we say one thing, and think another. How then was there no guile in him? Because, if he was as a sinner, he confessed his sin; whereas if a man, being a sinner, pretends to be righteous, there is guile in his mouth. Our Lord then commended the confession of sin in Nathanael; He did not pronounce him not a sinner.

THEOPHYL. Nathanael however, notwithstanding this praise, does not acquiesce immediately, but waits for further evidence, and asks, Whence know You me?

CHRYS. He asks as man, Jesus answers as God: Jesus answered and said to him, Before that Philip called you, when you were under the fig tree, I saw you: not having, beheld him as man, but as God discerning him from above. I saw you, He says, that is, the character of the life, when you were under the fig tree: where the two, Philip and Nathanael, had been talking together alone, nobody, seeing them; and on this account it is said, that on seeing him a long way off, He said, Behold an Israelite indeed; whence it appears that this speech was before Philip came near, so that no suspicion could attach to Christ’s testimony. Christ would not say, I am not of Nazareth, as Philip told you, but of Bethlehem; in order to avoid an argument: and because it would not have been sufficient proof, had He mentioned it, of His being the Christ. He preferred rather proving this by His having been present at their conversation.

AUG. Has this fig tree any meaning? We read of one fig tree which was cursed, because it had only leaves, and no fruit. Again, at the creation, Adam and Eve, after sinning, made themselves aprons of fig leaves. Fig leaves then signify sins; and Nathanael, when he was under the fig tree, was under the shadow of death: so that our Lord seems to say, O Israel, whoever of you is without guile, O people of the Jewish faith, before that I called you by My Apostles, when you were as yet under the shadow of death, and saw Me not, I saw you.

GREG. When you were under the fig tree, I saw you; i.e. when you were yet under the shade of the law, I chose you.

AUG. Nathanael remembered that he had been under the fig tree, where Christ was not present corporeally, but only by His spiritual knowledge. Hence, knowing that he had been alone, he recognized our Lord’s Divinity.

CHRYS. That our Lord then had this knowledge, had penetrated into his mind, had not blamed but praised his hesitation, proved to Nathanael that He was the true Christ: Nathanael answered and said to Him, Rabbi, You are the Son of God, You are the King of Israel: as if he said, You are He who was expected, you are He who was sought for. Sure proof being obtained, he proceeds to make confession; herein showing his devotion, as his former hesitation had shown his diligence.

ID. Many when they read this passage, are perplexed at finding that, whereas Peter was pronounced blessed for having, after our Lord’s miracles and teaching, confessed Him to be the Son of God, Nathanael, who makes the same confession before, has no such benediction. The reason is this. Peter and Nathanael both used the same words, l but not in the same meaning. Peter confessed our Lord to he the Son of God, in the sense of very God; the latter in the sense of mere man; for after saying, You are the Son of God, he adds, You are the King of Israel; whereas the Son of God was not the King of Israel only, but of the whole world. This is manifest from what follows. For in the case of Peter Christ added nothing, but, as if his faith were perfect, said, that he would build the Church upon his confession; whereas Nathanael, as if his confession were very deficient, is led up to higher things: Jesus answered and said to him, Because I said to you, I saw you under the fig tree, believe you? You shall see greater things than these. As if He said, What I have just said has appeared a great matter to you, and you have confessed Me to be King of Israel; what will you say when you see greater things than these? What that greater thing is He proceeds to show: And He said to him, Verily, verily, I say to you, Hereafter you shall see heaven open, and the angels of God ascending and descending upon the Son of man. See how He raises him from earth for a while, and forces him to think that Christ is not a mere man: for how could He be a mere man, whom angels ministered to? It was, as, as it were, saying, that He was Lord of the Angels; for He must be the King’s own Son, on whom the servants of the King descended and ascended; descended at His crucifixion, ascended at His resurrection and ascension. Angels too before this came and ministered to Him, and angels brought the glad tidings of His birth. Our Lord made the present a proof of the future. After the powers He had already shown, Nathanael would readily believe that much more would follow.

(cont.)

 

[po18guy]

(cont) My comments in blue. Augustine notes the connection with Jacob’s dream in Genesis 28.

AUG. Let us recollect the Old Testament account. Jacob saw in a dream a ladder reaching from earth to heaven; the Lord resting upon it, and the angels ascending and descending upon it. Lastly, Jacob himself understanding what the vision meant, set up a stone, and poured oil upon it. When he anointed the stone, did he make an idol? No: he only set up a symbol, not an object of worship You see here the anointing; see the Anointed also. He is the stone which the builders refused. If Jacob, who was named Israel, saw the ladder, and Nathanael was an Israelite indeed, there was a fitness in our Lord telling him Jacob’s dream; as if he said, Whose name you are called by, his dream has appeared to you: for you shall see the heaven open, and the angels of God ascending and descending upon the Son of man. If they descend upon Him, and ascend to Him, then He is both up above and here below at the same time; above in Himself, below in His members.

Genesis 28:16

Douay-Rheims 1899 American Edition (DRA)
16 And when Jacob awaked out of sleep, he said: Indeed the Lord is in this place, and I knew it not. Parallel and prophecy of Nathanael’s exclamation?

AUG. Good preachers, however, who preach Christ, are as angels of God; i.e. they ascend and descend upon the Son of man; as Paul, who ascended to the third heaven, and descended so far even as to give milk to babes. He said, We shall see greater things than these: because it is a greater thing that our Lord has justified us, whom He has called, than that He saw us lying under the shadow of death. For had we remained where He saw us, what profit would it have been? It is asked why Nathanael, to whom our Lord bears such testimony, is not found among the twelve Apostles. We may believe, however, that it was because he was so learned, and versed in the law, that our Lord had not put him among the disciples. He chose the foolish, to confound the world. Intending to break the neck of the proud, He sought not to gain the fisherman through the orator, but by the fisherman the emperor. The great Cyprian was an orator; but Peter was a fisherman before him; and through him not only the orator, but the emperor, believed.

 

[Augustine3]

AUG. Nathanael remembered that he had been under the fig tree, where Christ was not present corporeally, but only by His spiritual knowledge. Hence, knowing that he had been alone, he recognized our Lord’s Divinity.

This is why I love St Augustine! Once again he hit the nail on the head.

Notice in verse 48 Jesus said “Before Philip called you, I saw you under the fig tree”? Jesus was obviously not with Philip when Philip called Nathanael to “come and see” Jesus; hence Jesus showed Nathanael his supernatural knowledge.

 

[po18guy]

This is why I love St Augustine! Once again he hit the nail on the head.

Notice in verse 48 Jesus said “Before Philip called you, I saw you under the fig tree”? Jesus was obviously not with Philip when Philip called Nathanael to “come and see” Jesus; hence Jesus showed Nathanael his supernatural knowledge.

Augustine believed, so as to understand. Other than “Do whatever He tells you”, what better advice is there?

 

[antonabe]

When Jesus said to Nathaniel that he had seen him under the Fig in Nathaniels mind had recognised something great, his Divinity and that is the reason why he said that Nathaniel will see greater things,we are entering into another area of conflict I thought Nathaniel was also called Batholomew the Apostle

 

[Gloria_de_G]

(cont) My comments in
Parallel and prophecy of Nathanael’s exclamation?

Many thanks for all the parallel explanations. I am sorry that I am not going to go one by one telling you where I do not believe they got it, but they say many other nice things.

Please see my interpretation to the problem with Nathanael statement here, and you will see why I do not agree with many things:

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=843795

But really I appreciate so much your contribution…

And if you have objections to my interpretation I will be very grateful if you tell me.

In the love of Christ,
Gloria

.

 

[Gloria_de_G]

When Jesus said to Nathaniel that he had seen him under the Fig in Nathaniels mind had recognised something great, his Divinity and that is the reason why he said that Nathaniel will see greater things,we are entering into another area of conflict I thought Nathaniel was also called Batholomew the Apostle

But this is not the reason why Nathanael said You are the Son of God, You are the King of Israel.

Please I have already gave an interpretation here:

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=843795

If you find any objection after you read it, I will appreciate very much if you let me know.

As for Bartholomew being Nathanael, well, in Mt 10:3 ; Mk 3:18 and Lk 6:14 where the list of the 12 Apostles is specified, they all mention Philip follow by the name Bartholomew, so it could be yes, but I really can not give you an answer to your question. May be tradition believes that yes Nathanael and Bartholomew are the same.

In the love of Christ,
Gloria

.

 

[Gloria_de_G]

This is why I love St Augustine! Once again he hit the nail on the head.

Notice in verse 48 Jesus said “Before Philip called you, I saw you under the fig tree”? Jesus was obviously not with Philip when Philip called Nathanael to “come and see” Jesus; hence Jesus showed Nathanael his supernatural knowledge.

mmm… not very convincing your argument… that will not prompt Nathanael’s answer.

I proposed an interpretation here:

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=843795

If you have any objections I will appreciate very much if you let me know.

In the love of His Word,
Gloria

.

 

[57Bill]

This is why I love St Augustine! Once again he hit the nail on the head.

Notice in verse 48 Jesus said “Before Philip called you, I saw you under the fig tree”? Jesus was obviously not with Philip when Philip called Nathanael to “come and see” Jesus; hence Jesus showed Nathanael his supernatural knowledge.

John’s theme is showing the divinity of Jesus, and with po18guy.

Gloria de G, my comprehension is not as good as yours. I can’t comment intelligently. Sorry for being a knot in the Cedar. No disrespect intended or implied.

I just “see” these verses as John’s way of showing the Divinity of Jesus.

 

[Augustine3]

mmm… not very convincing your argument… that will not prompt Nathanael’s answer.

I proposed an interpretation here:

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=843795

If you have any objections I will appreciate very much if you let me know.

In the love of His Word,
Gloria

.

Nathanael was told implicitly by Philip Jesus was the Son of God, the King of Israel in verse 45 “We have found the one about whom Moses wrote in the law, and also the prophets”. But Nathanael did not believe this would be possible because Jesus was from Nazareth. Deuteronomy 18:18 speaks of the one to expect. God spoke through Nathan in 2 Samuel 7:14 of his son who will be the king of Israel. The Messiah to come was to be a Davidic king and Son of God.

Notice in verse 47 Jesus called Nathanael an Israelite? That term was uncommon back then as it is now because the ten tribes had been lost ever since the deportation. Nathanael would have been commonly called a Jew. By calling him an Israelite signifies Jesus’ intention to reunite the twelve tribes of Israel. The same intention is also manifested by noticing Nathanael under the fig tree. You have already pointed out Malachi used a fig tree to symbolise Israel, as does Jeremiah. By noticing a Jew standing under a fig tree (Israel) is a message and perhaps Nathanael’s desire to reunite the twelve tribes of Israel which was why he was there in the first place in quite prayer. Jesus was not there when Nathanael was standing under the fig tree yet he knew about it which only could have been known by divine knowledge.

 

[TimothyH]

No, I do not think you are right because Nathanael will not have asked Jesus “How do you know me?" This means that he did not know him. In fact when Philip tells Nathanael: “We have found him of whom Moses in the law and also the prophets wrote, Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Joseph.” 46 Nathanael said to him, “Can anything good come out of Nazareth?
Therefore he was not thinking that he was the Messiah just because they told him, him wanted to test him himself.

Sorry… you did not get it,
In the love of Christ,
Gloria

.

Nathaniel was not able to see Jesus as the fulfillment of the Hebrew Scriptures until he met him.

Nathaniel’s profound understanding of the Hebrew Scriptures (under the fig tree) allowed him to be instantly aware of it’s fulfillment as soon as he met and spoke with Jesus. His knowledge of the Hebrew Scriptures allowed him to very quickly discern that Jesus was the culmination of God’s plan as laid out in the Old Testament law and prophets.

The same is true of Paul who was an expert scholar of the Hebrew Scriptures. He was unable to see it until he met Jesus, and because he correctly understood the Hebrew Scriptures, he knew right away that Jesus was the Messiah.

They both had to have a profound encounter with Christ first. Their understanding of the scriptures made it instantly clear with whom they were speaking.

-Tim-

 

[po18guy]

Many thanks for all the parallel explanations. I am sorry that I am not going to go one by one telling you where I do not believe they got it, but they say many other nice things.

Please see my interpretation to the problem with Nathanael statement here, and you will see why I do not agree with many things:

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=843795

But really I appreciate so much your contribution…

And if you have objections to my interpretation I will be very grateful if you tell me.

In the love of Christ,
Gloria

.

As John Baptist was not worthy to untie Jesus’ sandal straps, I am also not worthy to analyze or critique the thoughts of the Church fathers. I choose only to learn from them. The problem is always our egos - we become convinced that something makes sense to us and that we were granted some unusual understanding of God’s word. Much more often I find thatI have been wrong all along and that I must seek to understand those who are greater than I. We err if we place our opinions above those of the Church fathers. As I see it, it is far better if we read them and pray for understanding, as God chose them to teach us, not the other way round.

 

[Bruce_Killian]

Gloria,
I have meditated many hours trying to understand this question.
Nathanael was under a fig tree but he thought no one knew about it, so most likely it was dark and his presence under the fig tree was in secret. Prayer in secret is proper and doing so in the night would/could be keeping watch. If it was dark, then he could not be reading but he could be praying/meditating. Since Jesus saw him, He (Jesus) was also keeping watch/praying in the night somewhere nearby again also in secret.
I agree with the one who noted that the fig tree was the tree of the knowledge of good and evil (first because they sewed fig leaves). I don’t believe that its fruit was to be forever forbidden but only until Adam and the Woman were mature enough to eat of it, because at creation, all was very good. Much as we don’t let a five year old play with matches unsupervised. I believe a reason that Jesus cursed the fig tree and it withered (rather than for instance going up in flame or being cast into the sea) was to make its wood available for the crosses of the two thieves crucified with Jesus. Jesus death and resurrection was reversing the effects of the sin in the garden and He died and was buried in a garden. Jesus was the fruit of the tree of life, so His cross was the tree of life.
How did Jesus know that Nathanael had no guile? It must have been revealed by the Holy Spirit as was the sign that they would see the next evening. The sign that Jesus spoke about of the angels ascending and descending on the son of man, links back to Jacob’s ladder in Genesis 28, and that sign occurred and was seen early the next evening by Jesus and His first six disciples see www.scripturescholar.com/LambofGod.pdf All Israel anticipated that the messiah would soon come and Nathanael was apparently one of the very few who realized the Messiah would the Son of God (nearly all looked for the Messiah as the King of Israel. So, Nathanael realized that Philip was correct in saying that we have found the Christ. My best thought on why Nathanael identified Jesus as the son of God is that while he was meditating under the fig tree, God revealed that He was watching over him and directing him.
Grace and peace,
Bruce

 

[Gloria_de_G]

Nathaniel was not able to see Jesus as the fulfillment of the Hebrew Scriptures until he met him.

Nathaniel’s profound understanding of the Hebrew Scriptures (under the fig tree) allowed him to be instantly aware of it’s fulfillment as soon as he met and spoke with Jesus. His knowledge of the Hebrew Scriptures allowed him to very quickly discern that Jesus was the culmination of God’s plan as laid out in the Old Testament law and prophets.

The same is true of Paul who was an expert scholar of the Hebrew Scriptures. He was unable to see it until he met Jesus, and because he correctly understood the Hebrew Scriptures, he knew right away that Jesus was the Messiah.

They both had to have a profound encounter with Christ first. Their understanding of the scriptures made it instantly clear with whom they were speaking.

-Tim-

You know Timothy, if you were right and as soon as Nathanael saw Jesus he realized that Jesus was the Messiah, just because some suggest that he was a scholar of the Hebrew Scriptures, then why to the Pharisees and the Sadducees and Scribes did not happen the same, they all were Hebrew Scholars as it were???

Not even Thomas, who was one of the 12 believed the others that Jesus has resurrected… not to mention that after Jesus’ death they even went back to fishing (Peter) like if nothing had happen…???

And do you want me to believe that Nathanael just like that believed in Jesus, just by seeing him??? Even before they saw miracles?? No, I do not take it, and if Nathanael was a Hebrew Scholar or not I do not know, and I believed no one knows, is a speculation to give an answer to the problem.

By the way I gave an interpretation here if you would like to see it, and if you have objections let me know. It is build only on the poor details that we have of the encounter and Jewish expectations for the messianic age.

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=843795

In the love of Christ
Gloria,

.

 

[Gloria_de_G]

Gloria,
I have meditated many hours trying to understand this question.
Nathanael was under a fig tree but he thought no one knew about it, so most likely it was dark and his presence under the fig tree was in secret.

Dear Bruce, many thanks for all your thoughts, we never waist time meditating in the Scriptures. As for being dark, I do not agree with that because we are told that Jesus called Philip and then he decided to go and call Nathanael, if it was dark he will have hard time to find him, and the least hiding seating under a fig tree. They were in the wild, it is not like here that you get light posts all over the place, it will have been not easy to come back then to see Jesus. Then the ones with Jesus will have had fire torches to be able to see each other, and if the light was where Jesus and the others were Jesus will not have been able to see the two approaching and said what he said of Nathanael.

Prayer in secret is proper and doing so in the night would/could be keeping watch. If it was dark, then he could not be reading but he could be praying/meditating. Since Jesus saw him, He (Jesus) was also keeping watch/praying in the night somewhere nearby again also in secret.

Therefore I can not believe that Jesus was near by and saw him under the tree if it was dark. And even when Jesus told Nathanael ““**Before **Philip called you, when you were under the fig tree”, this means to me that when Philip meet Nathanael he was not under a fig tree.

About the meaning of the fig tree, I do not understand why we have in this case to get so complicated when we are talking about the Messiah and it is more proper to take the seating under the fig tree as a messianic happiness as explained in Micah 4:3-4

"And he shall judge among many people, and rebuke strong nations afar off; and they shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruning hooks: nation shall not lift up a sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any more.

4** But they shall sit every man under his vine and under his fig tree**; and none shall make them afraid: for the mouth of the Lord of hosts hath spoken it."

I agree with the one who noted that the fig tree was the tree of the knowledge of good and evil (first because they sewed fig leaves).

If this was true, when it says that they took leaves from the fig tree, will have said that they took leave from the tree of good an evil that they ate from…

How did Jesus know that Nathanael had no guile? It must have been revealed by the Holy Spirit as was the sign that they would see the next evening. The sign that Jesus spoke about of the angels ascending and descending on the son of man, links back to Jacob’s ladder in Genesis 28, and that sign occurred and was seen early the next evening by Jesus and His first six disciples see www.scripturescholar.com/LambofGod.pdf

I could not open the link not in crome not even in explorer!
So I really can not answer but the saying of Jesus about the angels to me occurred exactly after what Nathanael answered, in that moment and not next day…

All Israel anticipated that the messiah would soon come and Nathanael was apparently one of the very few who realized the Messiah would the Son of God (nearly all looked for the Messiah as the King of Israel. So, Nathanael realized that Philip was correct in saying that we have found the Christ.

Why Nathanael should realized that, if he doubted so much about something good coming
from Nazareth.

My best thought on why Nathanael identified Jesus as the son of God is that while he was meditating under the fig tree, God revealed that He was watching over him and directing him.
Grace and peace,
Bruce

If this was true, and I explain you why I do not believe he was really under a fig tree, and really God revealed that to him, when Philip arrived and told him that they found the Messiah, Nathanael will have got up very quickly and run with him to see him. But we know that Philip had to struggle to convinced him to come to see Jesus.

Did you really read the answer that I gave in this thread, the first post??? Because I am open to objections but you did not seem to object to something there. This is the thread of the solution to the problem that I proposed, there is another thread for the question about Nathanael where every one was pouring their ideas and I was objecting…

But many thanks, how lovely to meditate in Scripture and bring all sort of other things into it!!!
Many thanks for your contribution,
Gloria

.

.

 

[antonabe]

We can argue till the cows come home and speculate but you cannot say one is wrong and the other is right.We are all speculating on all the information available.When Phillip brought Nathaniel to Jesus he said here comes a honest man a true son of Israel.The name Israel was given for the first time to Jacob and that is the reason I inferred that Jesus could have in his divine power seen that Nathaniel was reading Scripture and perhaps the passage about Jacobs ladder.I must congratulate everyone for their excellent contributions and the attempt to Discern the mind of our Divine Saviour.God Bless You All

 

[Hieronymi]

Dear OP, Gloria de G New Member,

Please carefully and prayerfully study the two posts by

po18guy, Forum Elder, Prayer Warrior, Radio Club Member

Post #21 & Post #32

 

[Gloria_de_G]

Dear Hieronymi, I thank you very much for your advice but I already have done it, you can see may post #26, but yours is really a good advice so thanks again.

And by the way did you read my interpretation to the problem, is another thread, here it is:

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=843795

You can always post your objections to me from what I wrote: that will be nice.

Any way again many thanks for your advice,

In the love of the bearers of the living Word of God,

Gloria

.

 

[Hieronymi]

I am sorry that I am not going to go one by one telling you where I do not believe they got it. Post #26 Gloria de G

Reading the above quote (post #26) I had the impression that posts 21, 22, & 32 made by po18guy Forum Elder, Prayer Warrior, Radio Club Member were dismissed out of hand.

It is good the material was studied. Forum Elder po18guy cited commentary taken from
Catena Aurea which is COMMENTARY ON THE FOUR GOSPELS, COLLECTED OUT OF THE WORKS OF THE FATHERS, BY ST. THOMAS AQUINAS.

I thought by saying, “I am not going to go one by one telling you where I do not believe they got it” you believed the writings of the likes of** St. Augustine or St John Chrysostom** were not germane or helpful to your interpretation of John 1:48.

mea culpa