2. Son of David, born at Jerusalem (2S 5%, 1 Ch 144). According to 1 Ch 3° he was third son of Bathshua (Bathsheba), Solomon being fourth. But we should naturally infer from 28 12” that Solomon was the first son of Bathsheba’s that lived for any time. The princely family of Nathan is mentioned in Zec 12}3 as a specific division of the house of David. St. Luke (3831) traces the descent of our Lord from David through Nathan rather than through Solomon, as is done by St. Matthew. 3. Father of Igal (2S 23%), or brother of Joel (1 Ch 1138), who was one of David’s heroes. The text of Chronicles is preferred by Rawlinson, but seems a corruption a that of Samuel. 4 A Judahite (1 Ch 2%), 5, One of the deputation sent by Ezra to request Iddo to provide Levites, ete., for the temple (Ezr 818,1 Es 8#). 6. One of those who had taken strange wives (Ezr 10*), called in 1 Es 95) Nathanias. N. J. D. WHITE.
NATHANAEL.—1. (Ναθαναήλ) one of the ‘cap- tains over thousands,’ who played a prominent part at Josiah’s passover, 1 Es 13, 2. (B Ναθανάηλος, A om.) a priest who had married a foreign wife, 1 Es 9®=NETHANEL of Ezr 10”. 3. (Ναθαναήλ) an ancestor of Judith, Jth 81, 4. See next article.
NATHANAEL (Ναθαναήλ, equivalent to x3n) (‘God has given’; ef. the names Dorotheus, Dositheus, Theodore], Nethanel [which see], Nu 18 etc.).—A man of Cana of Galilee (Jn 21°), whom Philip, after having himself been called by Christ, induced to come into the Master’s presence (Jn 1"), Our Lord describes him as ‘an Israelite indeed,’ i.e. one who valued the spiritual privileges, and sought to realize the ideal life of an Israelite ; and as a man ‘in whom there is no guile,’ 7.e. not sinless, but sincere and candid, open-minded, and single-hearted, one who was free from the guile of Jacob before he attained to the nobility of Israel. Nathanael showed his candour (1) by not allowing himself to be deterred from coming to see Jesus
NATHANAEL
NATURAL 489
through his natural reluctance* to accept Nazareth, an insignificant townlet, mentioned by no prophet, as the place whence the expected Messiah would come forth; (2) by at once surrendering his pre- judice when adequate evidence of Christ’s super- natural power was received. His eventual faith in the Messiahship of Jesus could hardly have been due to the mere fact that Christ, unseen by Nathanael, had beheld him under the fig-tree, even assuming that he was seen there engaged in devotion or religious meditation. Christ alludes, doubtless, to some recent crisis or special incident in Nathanael’s spiritual experience which had taken place while he sat under the fig-tree—an awakening, perhaps, to a higher ideal of life and duty, or a successful struggle with some strong temptation, or a devout longing for the coming of Messiah and His kingdom. He who had then not only seen, but seen into him, must be ‘ He that should come,’ the Son of God (in Messianic sense, ef. Ps 27), and the (spiritual) king of Israel (Is 97). The name of Nathanael occurs only once again in the Gospel history, namely, in Jn 21°, where he is one of the seven to whom the risen Jesus manifested Himself at early dawn after a night of fruitless fishing. One expects to find Nathanael included (like the other disciples who were simul- taneously called) among the Twelve apostles. Aug. (Hom. vii. on the Gosp. of Jn.) accounts for his non-selection by the assumption that Nathanael was learned in the law, and that Christ ‘desired to transform the world through unlearned’ apostles. Somewhat similarly, Gregory the Great (Mor. 33. 21) represents our Lord as ‘ passing over Nathanael in order to show, by the choice of apostles who had nothing praiseworthy of their own, that their eee came not from themselves, but from above.’ The now widely accepted t+ identification of Nathanael with Bartholomew is not known to have been adopted until the 9th cent., by the Nestorian Elias, ot Damascus (Assem. B.O. iv. p. ν).Σ To the considerations already adduced under BAR- THOLOMEW in favour of this suggestion, may be added (1) Nathanael’s apparent inclusion (Jn 21?) among the ‘disciples,’ by whom, in the context (Jn 20“ 214), the evangelist seems to mean apostles ; (2) the fact of most of the other apostles bearing two names, and, in particular, the parallel case of Levi, who is so called in Mk 2", Lk 5”, and whose other name, Matthew, signifies ‘ gift of Jeho- vah,’ almost equivalent to Nathanael. The identifi- cation, however, cannot be regarded as more than a plausible conjecture, against which the absence of any hint of the identity in any early writer tells strongly, although not decisive ΛΕ ἘΠ anaal has also been identified with (1) the friend of Cleopas in Lk 24 Jools Her, 23, without reason given) ; (2) Matthew (Thoma in Genes. d. Jn. Ev.), a supposi- tion negatived by the diverse circumstances of Nathanael’s call ; (3) John himself (Spaeth in Hilg. Zeitsch. 1868), Jn 21? being treated as a mistake of the alleged ‘supplementer’ ; (4) Matthias (Hilg. NT extra Can. iv., and, doubtfully, Jn. Lightf. Com. Ac. in, loc., who elsewhere, in his Comm. on
* Some early writers, however (eg. Cyril of Alex. Comm. in éoc.), interpret Nathanael’s words in Jn 14, not interrogatively, but as an acquiescence in Philip's statement contanied in v.45, Augustine (in loc.), while giving both interpretations, appears to prefer ‘ azareth some rox might come,’ and deduces from the answer that Nathanael was a learned man, who had ‘looked well into the prophets,’ and perceived a hidden refer- ence to Nazareth in their writings.