Who Called the First Disciples?

The term “saved” is used many ways in the Bible. It’s easy to understand terms as one-dimensional. When we read that someone “believed” in Jesus… it is easiest to think of an “initial faith experience”, but that’s not always the case.

For many of the people in the gospels… their “faith” in Jesus was not when they began “believing” in God.

In the first chapter of John there is a quick succession of “first encounters” with Jesus. It begins in John 1:35 and continues through verse 51. Let’s take a quick look at these people and see if the text gives us any clue as to whether any of these people could have been justified “believers in God” prior to meeting Jesus.

The setting is “the wilderness”… the desert. John the Baptist is dressing very oddly, eating weird stuff, and saying some very strange things… all in a very remote and desolate place. John was either crazy… or he was a prophet sent from God. Many would conclude the former. No matter what people thought of him, the Baptist was saying things that piqued the interest of everyone in Israel.

John 1:35 (NASB95)

Again the next day John was standing with two of his disciples…

The first two people we will look at are these two disciples of John the Baptist. First, let’s acknowledge something; these two were not just on a day trip to check out the freak show that John had become. The text says they were “disciples” of John the Baptist. What does that mean?

We find out in verse 40 that one of these two people is Andrew (Simon Peter’s brother) and most understand the other person (unidentified in the text) to be John, the author of the gospel. These two worked as fishermen on the Sea of Galilee… but they had taken time away from their jobs… traveled away from home… and followed John the Baptist around, at least long enough to be considered his disciples.

It seems most logical to conclude that these two were not just “interested” in what John was saying. They had certainly bought-in and truly believed that John the Baptist was anointed with God’s message.

I would propose that these two were already justified through their faith in a “coming Messiah”. Let’s see how they responded when introduced to Jesus.

John the Baptist points to Jesus and introduces Him as the “Lamb of God”. Their first response is to leave John and follow Jesus (John 1:37). Then, the next thing Andrew does is find his brother Simon. Notice what Andrew says to Simon.

John 1:41 (NASB95)

 He found first his own brother Simon and said to him, “We have found the Messiah”…

I have to sarcastically say… “It’s almost like these people were expecting the Messiah to show up.” In fact, they were. They had read the promises in the Old Testament, believed them, and were expecting God to fulfill His promise.

Peter follows Andrew back to meet Jesus… and the very first thing Jesus does is to give Simon a new name. Now, in the Bible, how many times does God give someone a new name? The list is pretty short. There was Abram (changed to Abraham), Jacob (changed to Israel), and now Simon (Peter). Peter’s immediate response is not recorded, but we know that he doesn’t “run away”. Peter sticks around.

Then Jesus asked Peter and Andrew’s friend Philip to join the group. The first thing Philip does is to find Nathanael. Listen carefully to what Philip says to Nathaniel. “We have found Him of whom Moses in the Law and also the Prophets wrote—Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Joseph.”

Nathanael was initially skeptical of Phillip’s description… but he followed his friends to meet Jesus and… before saying anything else… Jesus described Nathanael.

John 1:47 (NASB95)

Jesus saw Nathanael coming to Him, and said of him, “Behold, an Israelite indeed, in whom there is no deceit!”

The New American Standard Bible says “an Israelite indeed”. Other English versions translate it as, “a true Israelite”, “a real Israelite”, “a true son of Israel”, and “a genuine son of Israel”.

Jesus is not talking about Nathanael’s physical lineage. If that were the case… He would have said this to just about everyone he met. Instead, Jesus is describing the one thing He could see that no one else could… the state of Nathanael’s heart. Nathanael was already a person of faith in God… and that made him a true descendent of Israel (Galatians 3:7)… and Israelite indeed! It would also explain the last part of the sentence, “in whom there is no deceit”.

How did Nathanael respond to what Jesus said?

John 1:49 (NASB95)

Nathanael answered Him, “Rabbi, You are the Son of God; You are the King of Israel.”

Nathanael immediately recognized Jesus as the Messiah.

In these verses, we see several “first encounters” with Jesus. Each of these people immediately recognize Jesus as the One they have been eagerly expecting.

Many people today read about the public ministry of Jesus and understand it as largely evangelistic in nature. But a contextual reading of the gospels suggests that the majority of Jesus’ ministry was not an attempt to convert “unbelievers” to faith in God. Rather, Jesus spent most of His public ministry introducing himself to people who already believed in the Father’s promise.

I’ll admit… it almost sounds heretical… so let me say it again. It may take a while for this idea to sink in…

The main focus of Jesus’ public ministry was not an attempt to convert “unbelievers”.

Jesus was much more focused on connecting with those who already believed He was coming. Jesus understood that “the remnant” must recognize Him as Messiah, while still alive, so they could eventually understand His ultimate mission of death and resurrection.


4 thoughts on “Who Called the First Disciples?

  1. I agree with aspects of the post. Indeed, there were some that already trusted God for salvation but were waiting for the revealing of the Messiah, who were likely already “saved”. However, there were many others who weren’t. I think there is ample reason to believe that Nicodemus later in chapter 3 was a religious Jew… but did not really trust God at the time of that encounter. And in chapter 4, while the Samaritan woman at the well was looking for some kind of future Messiah, the text seems largely concerned with exhibiting not only her conversion, but the conversion of many of the samaritans in that city. For sure they had some vaguely “Jewish” religious system… but the text seems to clearly communicate that she was converted then and there.

    And that just scratches the surface. To say that many people Jesus called were already “justified” through faith in God’s promise of salvation, and were being called to recognize Jesus as Messiah is true. To say that this was his main focus seems to me to be highly reductionistic and flys in the face of many other passages.

    The main purpose of Jesus’ ministry seems instead to be the declaration that the Kingdom of God is at hand, which imports the messianic promise of redemption by God throughout history, and the fulfillment of his role in securing that salvation through his life, death, and resurrection. Because of that, the declaration is audience independent. To those that already trusted in God’s promise, he called them to believe that He was the messiah. To those that didn’t trust in God’s promise, he called them to believe that He was the messiah and that God wants to save them if they will repent and believe. Seems to me the audience is whoever is at hand. Jesus was declaring this truth to all that would listen, regardless of what they believed or didn’t believe before hand.

    If I’m wrong, or misunderstood your point, I’d love to hear.

    • studioix…

      Thanks for the comment. I’m glad that you are at least tracking with the concept of a “believing remnant” that was alive during Jesus’ public ministry. Interestingly, the mention of the “believing remnant” seems almost non-existent in the majority of well-known gospel commentaries (if you can find one that mentions it… let me know). Not including this group in one’s analysis of the text seems “highly reductionistic” as well. So maybe… as you suggest… the pendulum should land somewhere in the middle.

      Interesting that you mentioned Nicodemus and the Samaritan woman as examples of “conversions”. I’ve got future blogs planned to look at both of those passages. Remember that Nicodemus was talking to Jesus as a representative of the Pharisees. We know this because some of the statements made use the plural “you” and are addressing the larger group… and some use the singular “you” and address Nicodemus as an individual. (We don’t get to see that distinction in the English translations). A great example of this is John 3:11. The following parenthetical statements are my thoughts…

      John 3:11 (NASB95) – “Truly, truly, I say to you (singular… said directly to Nicodemus), we speak of what we know and testify of what we have seen, and you (plural… speaking of the Pharisees as a group) do not accept our testimony.”

      Along the same lines, the Samaritan woman is, at times, spoken to as a representative of the Samaritan people. The “you” statements that Jesus makes in John 4:21-22 are plural in the Greek. He was speaking to her as a representative of the Samaritans as a whole… not to her as an individual.

      The vast majority of commentaries conclude that these two (Nicodemus and the Samaritan woman) are brought to initial faith during their interactions with Jesus. I guess I would just challenge you to come to those stories (and any other interactions Jesus has with people) with a fresh set of eyes… asking whether or not they “could have been” one saved through faith prior to meeting the Savior.

      Some things to consider when looking at Jesus’ interactions and conversations with people…

      1. Hold loosely to the pericopes (section headings) as they are commentary added later and may or may not be correct. Just because the section heading says someone was “converted” doesn’t necessarily mean that’s what’s happened.

      2. Think about what requirements one would have needed to be “saved by faith” at the time of Jesus. Was there any latitude that Jesus gave in his teachings? Just like today… there were essentials of faith… and non-essentials. What were they for that particular generation? For example… Jesus gave much latitude in what people understood about Messiah… for even Peter was (literally) “fighting against” the idea of the “death of the Messiah” just hours before it happened. Yet, even then, Peter was a man “saved” by faith.

      3. Closely examine all the questions asked and answers given to determine if they give a clue as to the state of the person’s soul.

      4. Always consider the context and historical setting of the story.

      5. Don’t assume someone is “saved” because they are an observant Jew… but on the flip side… don’t assume they are “unsaved” just because they are an unobservant gentile. Jesus clearly teaches that some of the most pious scribes and Pharisees were spiritually dead (Matthew 23:13)… but some of the most unobservant gentiles had incredible faith (Matthew 8:10).

      It truly was a unique time of transition in the gospel. A time when people lived among the shadows of the Old Testament… and the substance of the Christ (Colossians 2:16-17).

      Thanks again for your thoughts.


  2. Pingback: You Just Had to Go There… | TransitionalGospel

  3. Pingback: Nick… at Night | TransitionalGospel

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s