Skip to main content

Following The Lamb of God (John 1:35-42)

 John the Baptist says, "Behold, the Lamb of God!" again, and two more of his own disciples follow Jesus. A less humble man would be troubled by this, but he knows exactly who he is, and what he is there to do. He told us there in verse 31: he is baptizing so that the Lamb of God would be revealed to Israel.

Many students would follow rabbis in those days literally everywhere, which is why the two men ask Jesus where he was staying. We might imagine on another occasion that John the Baptist had told his followers, "When I point out the Lamb of God to you, follow him instead of me." He will say very similar things in the actual biblical text later on.

"The tenth hour" is about 4 o'clock, in a 12-hour workday.

There is a spiritual invitation in that, "come and see" from Jesus. Curiosity is one of the ways God uses to draw us closer to Him.

Andrew brings Peter, whose name is actually Simon. "Messiah" in Hebrew means "anointed one," and "Christ" in Greek means the same thing. So this is really interesting: the brothers give Jesus some titles, based on what they understand and what they hope for as Israelites, and in Simon's case, he gets a new name from Jesus. When God changes a name, that person is going to be important in the biblical story. For example, Abraham and Jacob from the book of Genesis are very important to this entire story, and they had their names changed. Let's just say, you might want to keep your eye on Peter. (Abram became Abraham, because he would be the father of many nations; Jacob's name became "Israel," which means, "he wrestles with God." Israelites therefore are literally the sons of Jacob. And Jesus has more to say later about the sons of Abraham, both true and false sons.)

"Peter" in Greek means "rock," and "Cephas" is Aramaic (the language Jesus spoke) for "rock." 


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

We Don't Need No Magisterium: (Jason's Version) (But Actually, We Do)

Hilarious Com-Box Quote of The Day: "I was caught immediately because it is the Acts of the Apostles, not the Acts of the Holy Spirit Acting Erratically."--Donald Todd, reacting to the inartful opposition of the Holy Spirit and the Magisterium. Mark Galli, an editor at Christianity Today, had suggested that today's "confusion" in evangelicalism replicates a confusion on the day of Pentecost. Mr. Todd commented after this reply , and the original article is here. My thoughts: By what means was this Church-less "consensus" formed? If the Council did not possess the authority to adjudicate such questions, who does? If the Council Fathers did not intend to be the arbiters, why do they say that they do? At the risk of being rude, I would define evangelicalism as, "Whatever I want or need to believe at any particular time." Ecclesial authority to settle a particular question is a step forward, but only as long as, "God alone is Lord of the con...

Dear Alyse

 Today, you’re 35. Or at least you would be, in this place. You probably know this, but we’re OK. Not great, but OK. We know you wouldn’t want us moping around and weeping all the time. We try not to. Actually, I guess part of the problem is that you didn’t know how much we loved you. And that you didn’t know how to love yourself. I hope you have gotten to Love by now. Not a place, but fills everything in every way. I’m not Him, but he probably said, “Dear daughter/sister, you have been terribly hard on yourself. Rest now, and be at peace.” Anyway, teaching is going well, and I tell the kids all about you. They all say you are pretty. I usually can keep the boys from saying something gross for a few seconds. Mom and I are going to the game tonight. And like 6 more times, before I go back to South Carolina. I have seen Nicky twice, but I myself haven’t seen your younger kids. Bob took pictures of the day we said goodbye, and we did a family picture at the Abbey. I literally almost a...

Who Is Out Here Having Sex And Children With People They Don’t Like?

 And look, I’m not married. I’ve never been married. I have no children. I didn’t choose that; things just worked out that way. If you must know, I haven’t had sexual intercourse either. I probably should say “coitus,” so I am not arguing with some progressive activist about what “sexual intercourse” means. But I figured out from influencer videos or something what a “dead bedroom” was. Unless a couple mutually agrees that they don’t want to have sex/coitus anymore (hopefully to pray and serve) this is usually bad. I’ve known enough couples that it’s probably an indicator of trouble, especially for couples who are still able to have children. Is it really that wild to at least hope that Mr. and Mrs. Vance love each other? That a fourth child yet born at least might indicate that they enjoy each other?  Children are definitely not responsible for their parents’ happiness. That’s absolutely true. But wouldn’t any child hope their parents were happy, when they came into being? As...