Water to Wine
Water to Wine
John 2:1-11
Setting
1 On the third day a wedding took place at Cana in Galilee. Jesus' mother was there, 2 and Jesus and his disciples had also been invited to the wedding.
Some have attempted to connect the idea of a wedding on the 'third day' to 2 Peter 3:8 and the idea of a 3,000 year church history followed by the return of the bridegroom, but this is surely not the meaning of the time-stamp. Much more like, the third day conveys a three day journey to Cana or, simply, that Jesus arrived on a Tuesday. What is possible, however, is that John is purposefully linking this beginning of Jesus' ministry in miracles to the greatest miracle, namely, the resurrection itself. We can also dismiss the erroneous Mormon interpretation that this was Jesus' very own wedding, especially considering an invitation to a bridegroom is a bit redundant. What we can say positively about the background to this miracle is that Jewish weddings were important cultural celebrations, often a week in length. That Jesus was invited and that He accepted speaks of the kind of man that He was and wasn't.
Problem
3 When the wine was gone, Jesus' mother said to him, "They have no more wine." 4 "Dear woman, why do you involve me?" Jesus replied, "My time has not yet come." 5 His mother said to the servants, "Do whatever he tells you."
That the wine ran out was a cultural conundrum. This would have caused considerable embarrassment to the host and/or wedding party. In this sense, Jesus' miracle can be classified with the other miracles of compassion, as opposed to a miracle of luxury (as some have claimed). The question of why Jesus' mother sought to involve Him in this dilemma is a good one. Speculation has ranged from the idea that it was Jesus wedding (Mormonism); that His followers were a large group and were, therefore, responsible for the lack of supply; that this was an opportunity for Jesus to give a wedding gift; or simply that Mary knew Jesus could and wanted her Son to perform a miracle. Jesus' reply can come across too sharply in English translations, but we can gather from it that Jesus recognized the significance of miraculous signs and that if He were to perform one it would start Him down a road with a bloody end (His 'time' referring to The Passion). His initial refusal is not without parallel in John's Gospel (4:46-54, 7:1-10). That it was gentle, though, can't be denied considering Mary persists in her plan to involve Jesus in the solution to the wine problem. One author states that 'This mixture of incomprehension and compliance is surely part of the meaning of the story' and that Mary is a representative of 'those for whom misunderstanding is not a permanent obstacle to discipleship.'
Solution
6 Nearby stood six stone water jars, the kind used by the Jews for ceremonial washing, each holding from twenty to thirty gallons. 7 Jesus said to the servants, "Fill the jars with water"; so they filled them to the brim. 8 Then he told them, "Now draw some out and take it to the master of the banquet." They did so, 9 and the master of the banquet tasted the water that had been turned into wine.
Jesus did not choose, apparently, to re-fill the existing wine containers. Nor did He choose to fill the water jars with wine. Instead, Jesus chose to fill large water jars with water and, then, to turn the water into wine. The intended meaning of the miracle lies in Jesus motivation for making these choices. As to why He didn't re-fill the old wine containers with new wine, we certainly think of the reference in the synoptic Gospels to the matter-of-fact principle against doing that very thing (along with the interpretation of that passage). We can easily see the significance of his selection of the jars used for ceremonial washing and His transformation of water into wine. Jesus was showing that the Jewish rituals were insufficient and in need of replacement and transformation. Water only changes the external cleanliness and is void of any power to cleanse within. Wine, on the other hand, transforms the mind of those who drink it. It is rightly said of this miracle that 'Jesus is replacing the old purificatory rites of the Jews with His new wine.' The Jewish law and religion had failed and Jesus, through His gift of a liberal supply of wine, was introducing a new eschatological kingdom.
Result
He did not realize where it had come from, though the servants who had drawn the water knew. Then he called the bridegroom aside 10 and said, "Everyone brings out the choice wine first and then the cheaper wine after the guests have had too much to drink; but you have saved the best till now." 11 This, the first of his miraculous signs, Jesus performed in Cana of Galilee. He thus revealed his glory, and his disciples put their faith in him.
The master of the banquet tells us the pattern of the world. It was, apparently, customary for the best wine to be served first and then, as the senses of the guests deteriorated, to serve the lackluster wine as the celebration continued. Because of Jesus' miracle, the bridegroom (apparently responsible for the wine) was given credit by the master of the banquet (the bride's father?) for a reversal of the cultural trend. This speaks to the contrast between the pattern of the world's kingdoms and the pattern of God's kingdom. The world offers an instant gratification that fades quickly, but with God the best is always yet to come. We are also given, here, a statement as to the broader effect of this miracle. The miracle revealed his glory (revealed a bit of who He was and what He was in the business of doing) and provoked His followers to become believers.
John 2:1-11
Setting
1 On the third day a wedding took place at Cana in Galilee. Jesus' mother was there, 2 and Jesus and his disciples had also been invited to the wedding.
Some have attempted to connect the idea of a wedding on the 'third day' to 2 Peter 3:8 and the idea of a 3,000 year church history followed by the return of the bridegroom, but this is surely not the meaning of the time-stamp. Much more like, the third day conveys a three day journey to Cana or, simply, that Jesus arrived on a Tuesday. What is possible, however, is that John is purposefully linking this beginning of Jesus' ministry in miracles to the greatest miracle, namely, the resurrection itself. We can also dismiss the erroneous Mormon interpretation that this was Jesus' very own wedding, especially considering an invitation to a bridegroom is a bit redundant. What we can say positively about the background to this miracle is that Jewish weddings were important cultural celebrations, often a week in length. That Jesus was invited and that He accepted speaks of the kind of man that He was and wasn't.
Problem
3 When the wine was gone, Jesus' mother said to him, "They have no more wine." 4 "Dear woman, why do you involve me?" Jesus replied, "My time has not yet come." 5 His mother said to the servants, "Do whatever he tells you."
That the wine ran out was a cultural conundrum. This would have caused considerable embarrassment to the host and/or wedding party. In this sense, Jesus' miracle can be classified with the other miracles of compassion, as opposed to a miracle of luxury (as some have claimed). The question of why Jesus' mother sought to involve Him in this dilemma is a good one. Speculation has ranged from the idea that it was Jesus wedding (Mormonism); that His followers were a large group and were, therefore, responsible for the lack of supply; that this was an opportunity for Jesus to give a wedding gift; or simply that Mary knew Jesus could and wanted her Son to perform a miracle. Jesus' reply can come across too sharply in English translations, but we can gather from it that Jesus recognized the significance of miraculous signs and that if He were to perform one it would start Him down a road with a bloody end (His 'time' referring to The Passion). His initial refusal is not without parallel in John's Gospel (4:46-54, 7:1-10). That it was gentle, though, can't be denied considering Mary persists in her plan to involve Jesus in the solution to the wine problem. One author states that 'This mixture of incomprehension and compliance is surely part of the meaning of the story' and that Mary is a representative of 'those for whom misunderstanding is not a permanent obstacle to discipleship.'
Solution
6 Nearby stood six stone water jars, the kind used by the Jews for ceremonial washing, each holding from twenty to thirty gallons. 7 Jesus said to the servants, "Fill the jars with water"; so they filled them to the brim. 8 Then he told them, "Now draw some out and take it to the master of the banquet." They did so, 9 and the master of the banquet tasted the water that had been turned into wine.
Jesus did not choose, apparently, to re-fill the existing wine containers. Nor did He choose to fill the water jars with wine. Instead, Jesus chose to fill large water jars with water and, then, to turn the water into wine. The intended meaning of the miracle lies in Jesus motivation for making these choices. As to why He didn't re-fill the old wine containers with new wine, we certainly think of the reference in the synoptic Gospels to the matter-of-fact principle against doing that very thing (along with the interpretation of that passage). We can easily see the significance of his selection of the jars used for ceremonial washing and His transformation of water into wine. Jesus was showing that the Jewish rituals were insufficient and in need of replacement and transformation. Water only changes the external cleanliness and is void of any power to cleanse within. Wine, on the other hand, transforms the mind of those who drink it. It is rightly said of this miracle that 'Jesus is replacing the old purificatory rites of the Jews with His new wine.' The Jewish law and religion had failed and Jesus, through His gift of a liberal supply of wine, was introducing a new eschatological kingdom.
Result
He did not realize where it had come from, though the servants who had drawn the water knew. Then he called the bridegroom aside 10 and said, "Everyone brings out the choice wine first and then the cheaper wine after the guests have had too much to drink; but you have saved the best till now." 11 This, the first of his miraculous signs, Jesus performed in Cana of Galilee. He thus revealed his glory, and his disciples put their faith in him.
The master of the banquet tells us the pattern of the world. It was, apparently, customary for the best wine to be served first and then, as the senses of the guests deteriorated, to serve the lackluster wine as the celebration continued. Because of Jesus' miracle, the bridegroom (apparently responsible for the wine) was given credit by the master of the banquet (the bride's father?) for a reversal of the cultural trend. This speaks to the contrast between the pattern of the world's kingdoms and the pattern of God's kingdom. The world offers an instant gratification that fades quickly, but with God the best is always yet to come. We are also given, here, a statement as to the broader effect of this miracle. The miracle revealed his glory (revealed a bit of who He was and what He was in the business of doing) and provoked His followers to become believers.
posted by matthew at 11:21 AM
0 comments
