' Believest thou ? ' implies something of surprise at the rapidity of Nathanael's conviction (contrast Mk 6''); but 'thou believest' is perhaps right. Christ approves of his faith and of its basis ; and He forthwith promises him an ampler basis, and therefore the prospect of a loftier faith. This wider basis of ' greater things ' refers to the public signs which are to follow, and which seem to be alluded to in ' the angels of God ascending and descending upon the Son of man.' Angels are instruments of the Divine power in nature (Rev 14'* 16^). Nathanael has believed because of a miracle of knowledge which could be appreciated by himself alone : he is hereafter to witness miracles of power which can be appreciated by a,ll. And here it is to be noted that, while the ' Israelite indeed ' enters upon a new life in recognizing his King by the sign granted to him, the Messiah Himself enters upon a new career in granting the sign. This private sign to Nathanael was a pre- lude to those lJublic miracles in which Christ ' manifested His glory ' to the Jewish nation and through it to all the world. The angels, who are to be instruments of the manifestation, are repre- sented as being already on earth, the ' ascending ' being placed first. They are ready to carry men's prayers to heaven, and to bring down the blessings which prayer wins. But there is a reference to Jacob's dream (Gn 28^2), suggested possibly by ths place ; for Bethel, Mahanaim, and the ford Jabbok all lay close to the route which Christ would take in going from Judaea to Galilee ; and in the narra- tive in Genesis the ascending angels are mentioned first. What Jacob had dreamed was fulfilled in Jesus. Heaven was opened and remained so (per- fect participle) to mankind. Heaven came down to earth in the Person of the Son of God, and, by a regular intercourse between His place of sojourn and His home, man became capable of attaining to heaven. It narrows the meaning far too much when the promise to Nathanael is interpreted of the angels who appeared after the Temptation, at the Agony, and after the Resurrection and Ascension.
The change in the designation of the Messiah is significant. Nathanael had called Him ' the Son of God ' : He calls Himself ' the Son of Man,' and it is the earliest occasion on which He does so. In the Synoptic Gospels the title ' Son of Man ' occurs 69 times, and Christ is represented as usiiig it (always of Himself) on about 40 different occasions. In John the title is used 11 or 12 times, 9^^ being
NATION
NATION
229
doubtful ; and none of these passages is parallel to anything in the Synoptics. Here the point may be that He is come, not to revive the old theocracy, nor to ' restore the kingdom to Israel ' (Ac 1"), but to redeem the whole human race. It may also be that at tlii.s beginning of His ministry Jesus will not delinitejy accept the title 'Son of God.' Without rejecting it, He substitutes for it a title wliicii seems to have been .adopted by Him to veil, rather than to reveal, the fact that He was the Messiah. IJnt here again we must allow for the i>ossibility that the Evangelist is wording Christ's reply according to language which he liad often heard from His lips, but which was not used quite so early in the ministry as this.
In Nathanael we have an instance of a good man hampered by prejudice, but quite willing to be enlightened. He comes to the Light, and is searched, approved, and illuminated. In Christ's treatment of him we have an instance of His knowledge of what was in man ('2'-'*), not only in the case of mankind in general, but with regard to individual character ; also of the working of the law that ' whosoever hath, to him shall be given.'
The narrative of the call of Nathanael, like the rest of Jn 1, strongly confirms the belief that the writer is a Jew of Palestine, well .accjuainted with the Messianic hopes, and with the traditions and phraseology current in Palestine at the time of Christ's ministry ; able also to give a lifelike picture of Christ's first disciples.
LiTKRATURE.— B. F. Wcstcott, Gospcl (if St. John, 20 f., 33 ff. ; R. C. Trench, St.udies in the Gospels, 6G ; H. P. Liddon, Uni- vcrsity Sermona, 2iul ser. 4 ; Phillips Brooks, Mystery of Jn- iijuity, 12!); A. Maclaren, A Year's Ministry, 2ik1 ser. 169; W. Boyd Carpenter, Son of Man, 103 ; J. G. Greenliough, Apostles of o-nr Lord, 74 ; H. T. Purehas, Johannine J'robienis, 68 ; G. Matheson, Representative Men of the N.T. 71 ; Expos. Sth ser. viii. (1898) 336. A. PlUMMER.
NATION.— This word has two meanings, accord- ing as it distinguishes Israel from other peoples, or as it concerns Israel within itself. In the former sense it signifies a State more or less organized, and its keynote is indrpouhnce ; in the latter, a race of common s])eech and religion, and its key- note is inrifi/. There are two pairs of Greek words corresponding to this distinction. 'lovSaiot is used under the former category, and most frequently by John, who wrote wiien the Jewish and Christian conuuunities were decisively separated from one another ; * whereas "IcrpariX is used always with a note of affection and pride by those Avho count themselves as its members, sharers in tiie Divine choice and covenant. There is a similar contrast between the words ^di/o^ and Xao?, the former and t'^i'7; (in the phrase ' all n.'itions') being used gener- ally of political States, to. idvr) has the sjiecial meaning of ' the Gentiles,' the non-Jewish i)eoples (Heb. 0:13), and gradunlly became ethically black- ened, so that AV instinctively translates ' heathen ' (Gal 1'6 2«, cf. Mt 6^ ieviKoi). But the common noun which corresponds with 'laparjX is Xads. It conveys the sense of God's possession and purpose, which are creative of the national unity main- tained by the sacrifices and observances of the Law. Its analogue in Heb. is oy. As '^dvt) sank down into the meaning of heathen, so Xads is at length appropriated by the Christian conscious- ness. The few exce])tions to the above rules should be noted. In I>k 7'^ '2'X', and throughout the Fourth Gospel, idvos is used in the place of Xads ; for, as was just stated, in the later Aj)ostolic circles the old prerogatives of Israel were claimed for the ' Israel of God,' i.e. the Christians. In Lk 2'" Xads