John 2 commentary

JOH 2 COMME TARY
EDITED BY GLE PEASE
Jesus Changes Water Into Wine
1 On the third day a wedding took place at Cana
in Galilee. Jesus’ mother was there,
BAR ES, "And the third day - On the third day after his conversation with
Nathanael.
Cana - This was a small town about 15 miles northwest of Tiberias and 6 miles
northeast of Nazareth. It is now called Kerr Kenna, is under the government of a Turkish
officer, and contains perhaps 300 inhabitants, chiefly Catholics. The natives still pretend
to show the place where the water was turned into wine, and even one of the large stone
water-pots. “A Greek church,” says Professor Hackett (‘Illustrations of Scripture,’ p.
322), “stands at the entrance of the town, deriving its special sanctity, as I understood,
from its being supposed to occupy the site of the house in which the marriage was
celebrated to which Jesus and his friends were invited. A priest to whom we were
referred as the custodian soon arrived, in obedience to our call, and unlocked the doors
of the church. It is a low stone building, pair.” “The houses,” says Dr. Thomson (‘The
Land and the Book,’ vol. ii. p. 126), “were built of limestone, cut and laid up after the
fashion still common in this region, and some of them may have been inhabited within
the last fifty years. There are many ancient cisterns about it, and fragments of water-jars
in abundance, and both reminded us of the ‘beginning of miracles.’ Some of my
companions gathered bits of these water-jars as mementoes witnesses they could hardly
be, for those of the narrative were of ‘stone,’ while these were baked earth.” The place is
now quite deserted. Dr. Thomson says: “There is not now a habitable house in the
humble village where our blessed Lord sanctioned, by his presence and miraculous
assistance, the all-important and world-wide institution of marriage.” It was called
“Cana of Galilee” to distinguish it from another Cana in the tribe of Ephraim, Jos_16:9.
This was the native place of Nathanael, Joh_21:2.
The mother of Jesus - Mary. It is not improbable that she was a relative of the
family where the marriage took place.
CLARKE, "Cana of Galilee - This was a small city in the tribe of Asher, Jos_19:28,
and by saying this was Cana of Galilee, the evangelist distinguishes it from another Cana,
which was in the tribe of Ephraim, in the Samaritan country. See Jos_16:8; Jos_17:9.
Some suppose that the third day, mentioned here, refers to the third day of the
marriage feast: such feasts lasting among the Jews seven days. See Jdg_14:12, Jdg_

14:17, Jdg_14:18, and Bishop Pearce.
The mother of Jesus was there - Some of the ancients have thought that this was
the marriage of John the evangelist, who is supposed to have been a near relative of our
Lord. See the sketch of his life prefixed to these notes.
GILL, "And the third day there was a marriage,.... Either from the second
testimony bore by John the Baptist concerning Christ, and from the call of Simon Peter,
which seem to be of the same date; see Joh_1:35, or from Christ's coming into Galilee; or
from the conversation he had with Nathanael; from either of which the date is taken, it
matters not; the first is as agreeable and plain, as any. There is much dispute, and many
rules with the Jews about the times, and days of marriage:
"a virgin, (they say (z),) marries on the fourth day (of the week), and a widow on the
fifth, because the sanhedrim sit in the cities twice in the week, on the second, and on the
fifth days; so that if there is any dispute about virginity, he (the husband) may come
betimes to the sanhedrim.''
This was a law that obtained since the times of Ezra; for it is said (a),
"before the order of Ezra, a woman might be married on any day;''
but in after times, feast days, and sabbath days, were particularly excepted. One of their
canons is (b).
"they do not marry women on a feast day, neither virgins, nor widows:''
The reason of it was, that they might not mix one joy with another; and lest a man
should leave the joy of the feast, for the joy of his wife. The account Maimonides (c) gives
of these several things is this;
"it is lawful to espouse on any common day, even on the ninth of Ab, whether in the day,
or in the night; but they do not marry wives neither on the evening of the sabbath, nor
on the first of the week: the decree is, lest the sabbath should be profaned by preparing
the feast; for the bridegroom is employed about the feast: and there is no need to say,
that it is unlawful to marry a wife on the sabbath day; and even on the common day of a
feast they do not marry wives, as we have explained; because they do not mix one joy
with another, as it is said in Gen_29:27, "fulfil her week, and we will give thee this also":
but on the rest of the days it is lawful to marry a wife, any day a man pleases; for he must
be employed in the marriage feast three days before the marriage. A place in which the
sanhedrim do not sit, but on the second and fifth days only, a virgin is married on the
fourth day; that if there is any objection to her virginity, he (her husband) may come
betimes to the sanhedrim: and it is a custom of the wise men, that he that marries one
that has been married, he may marry her on the fifth day, that so he may rejoice with her
on the fifth day, and on the evening of the sabbath, (i.e. the sixth,) and on the sabbath
day, and may go forth to his work on the first day.''
But elsewhere it is said (d), that
"now they are used to marry on the "sixth day of the week".''

Yea (e), that
"it is lawful to marry, and to make the feast on the sabbath day.''
But whether this marriage was of a virgin, or a widow, cannot be known; nor with
certainty can it be said on what day of the week it was: if that day was a sabbath day on
which the disciples abode with Christ, as Dr. Lightfoot conjectures, then it must be on
the first day that Christ went into Galilee, and found Philip, and conversed with
Nathanael; and if this third day is reckoned from John's second testimony, it must be on
a Tuesday, the third day of the week; but if from Christ's going into Galilee, then it must
be on a Wednesday, the fourth day of the week, the day fixed by the Jewish canon for the
marriage of a virgin. This marriage was
in Cana of Galilee. The Syriac and Persic versions, read, in "Kotne, a city of Galilee";
and which, in the Jewish map, is called ‫בגליל‬ ‫,קטנא‬ "Katna" in "Galilee", and is placed in
the tribe of Zebulun, which was in Galilee, and not far from Nazareth; and bids fair to be
the same place with this; though it is more generally thought (f), that Cana, in the tribe
of Asher, mentioned in Jos_19:28, which was also in Galilee, is here meant; and is so
called to distinguish it from another Kanah, in the tribe of Ephraim, Jos_16:8. Josephus
(g) speaks of a town, or village, of Galilee, called Cana, which was a day's march from it
to Tiberias, and seems to be the same place: and another Jewish writer (h) says,
"to me it appears that Cepher Chanania, is Copher Cana; or the village of Cans, as is clear
in Misna Sheviith, c. 9. sect. 1. for there is the beginning of lower, Galilee,''
which also accords with this. Now in the case of marriage, there was some difference
between Judea and Galilee, and certain rules were laid down relating thereunto: and it is
said (i),
"there are three countries, for the celebration of marriages; Judea, the country beyond
Jordan, and Galilee;''
that is, that were obliged to marry among themselves; so that if any one married a wife
out of any of these countries, she was not obliged to go along with him from one country
to another (k): hence it follows,
"they do not bring them out from city to city, (i.e. oblige them to go with them from city
to city,) nor from town to town; but in the same country they bring them out from city to
city, and from town to town.''
And it is elsewhere observed (l), that
"in Judea, at first, they joined the bridegroom and bride together an hour before they
went into the bride chamber, that so his heart might be lifted up in her; but in Galilee
they did not do so: in Judea, at first, they appointed for them two companions, one for
him, and another for her, that they might minister to, or wait on the bridegroom, and
bride, when they went into the bride chamber; but in Galilee they did not do so: in
Judea, at first, the companions slept in the house where the bridegroom and bride slept;
but in Galilee they did not do so.''

Next we have an account of the persons that were present at this marriage:
and the mother of Jesus was there; who seems to have been a principal person at
this wedding, and was very officious; when wine was wanted, she signified it to her son,
and ordered the servants to do whatever he bid them: and since she, and Jesus, and his
brethren, were all here, it looks as if it was a relation of hers that was now married: and
since these brethren were the kinsmen of Christ, Simon, Judas, and Joses, the sons of
Cleophas or Alphaeus, whose wife was sister to the mother of our Lord; and since one of
them, to distinguish him from Simon Peter, is called Simon the Canaanite, or an
inhabitant of Cana, as some have thought; hence it is conjectured by Dr. Lightfoot, that
Alphaeus had an house in Cana, and that his family dwelt there, and that it was for one
of his family that this marriage feast was made; see Joh_2:2. Joseph, the husband of
Mary, perhaps, was now dead, since no mention is made of him here, nor any where else,
as alive, after Christ had entered on his public ministry.
HE RY, "We have here the story of Christ's miraculous conversion of water into
wine at a marriage in Cana of Galilee. There were some few so well disposed as to believe
in Christ, and to follow him, when he did no miracle; yet it was not likely that many
should be wrought upon till he had something wherewith to answer those that asked,
What sign showest thou? He could have wrought miracles before, could have made them
the common actions of his life and the common entertainments of his friends; but,
miracles being designed for the sacred and solemn seals of his doctrine, he began not to
work any till he began to preach his doctrine. Now observe,
I. The occasion of this miracle. Maimonides observes it to be to the honour of Moses
that all the signs he did in the wilderness he did upon necessity; we needed food, he
brought us manna, and so did Christ. Observe,
1. The time: the third day after he came into Galilee. The evangelist keeps a journal of
occurrences, for no day passed without something extraordinary done or said. Our
Master filled up his time better than his servants do, and never lay down at night
complaining, as the Roman emperor did, that he had lost a day.
2. The place: it was at Cana in Galilee, in the tribe of Asher (Jos_19:28), of which,
before, it was said that he shall yield royal dainties, Gen_49:20. Christ began to work
miracles in an obscure corner of the country, remote from Jerusalem, which was the
public scene of action, to show that he sought not honour from men (Joh_5:41), but
would put honour upon the lowly. His doctrine and miracles would not be so much
opposed by the plain and honest Galileans as they would be by the proud and prejudiced
rabbies, politicians, and grandees, at Jerusalem.
3. The occasion itself was a marriage; probably one or both of the parties were akin to
our Lord Jesus. The mother of Jesus is said to be there, and not to be called, as Jesus
and his disciples were, which intimates that she was there as one at home. Observe the
honour which Christ hereby put upon the ordinance of marriage, that he graced the
solemnity of it, not only with his presence, but with his first miracle; because it was
instituted and blessed in innocency, because by it he would still seek a godly seed,
because it resembles the mystical union between him and his church, and because he
foresaw that in the papal kingdom, while the marriage ceremony would be unduly
dignified and advanced into a sacrament, the married state would be unduly vilified, as
inconsistent with any sacred function. There was a marriage - gamos, a marriage-feast,

to grace the solemnity. Marriages were usually celebrated with festivals (Gen_29:22;
Jdg_14:10), in token of joy and friendly respect, and for the confirming of love.
4. Christ and his mother and disciples were principal guests at this entertainment. The
mother of Jesus (that was her most honourable title) was there; no mention being made
of Joseph, we conclude him dead before this. Jesus was called, and he came, accepted
the invitation, and feasted with them, to teach us to be respectful to our relations, and
sociable with them, though they be mean. Christ was to come in a way different from
that of John Baptist, who came neither eating nor drinking, Mat_11:18, Mat_11:19. It is
the wisdom of the prudent to study how to improve conversation rather than how to
decline it.
(1.) There was a marriage, and Jesus was called. Note, [1.] It is very desirable, when
there is a marriage, to have Jesus Christ present at it; to have his spiritual gracious
presence, to have the marriage owned and blessed by him: the marriage is then
honourable indeed; and they that marry in the Lord (1Co_7:39) do not marry without
him. [2.] They that would have Christ with them at their marriage must invite him by
prayer; that is the messenger that must be sent to heaven for him; and he will come:
Thou shalt call, and I will answer. And he will turn the water into wine.
JAMIESO , "Joh_2:1-12. First miracle, water made wine - Brief visit to
Capernaum.
third day — He would take two days to reach Galilee, and this was the third.
mother there — it being probably some relative’s marriage. John never names her
[Bengel].
BURKITT, "Verse 1
The former part of this chapter acquaints us with the first miracle which our Saviour
wrought, in turning water into wine; the occasion of it was, his being invited to a
marriage-feast.
Here note, 1. That whenever our Saviour was invited to a public entertainment, he never
refused the invitation, but constantly went; not so much for the pleasure of eating, as for
the opportunity of conversing and doing good, which was meat and drink unto him.
Note, 2. What honour Christ put upon the ordinance of marrige; he honours it with his
presence and first miracle. Some think it was St. John that was now the bridegroom;
others, that it was some near relation of the virgin mother's; but whoever it might be,
doubtless Christ's design was rather to put honour upon the ordinance than upon the
person. How bold is the church of Rome in spitting upon the face of this ordinance, by
denying its lawfulness to the ministers of religion! When the apostle affirms that
marriage is honourable among all. Hebrews 13:4. Neither the prophets of the Old
Testament, nor the apostles of the New, (St. Peter himself not excepted,) did abhor the
marriage-bed, or judge themselves too pure for an institution of their Maker.
Note, 3. That it is an ancient and laudable institution, that the rites of marriage should
not want a solemn celebration. Feasting with friends upon such an occasion is both
lawful and commendable, provided the rules of sobriety and charity, modesty and
decency, be observed, and no sinful liberty assumed. But it must be said, that feasting in

general, and marriage-feasts in particular, are some of those lawful things which are
difficultly managed without sin.
Note, 4. That our Saviour's working a miracle when he was at the marriage-feast, should
teach us, by his example, that in our cheerful and free times, when we indulge a little
more than ordinary to mirth amongst our friends, we should still be mindful of God's
honour and glory, and lay hold upon an occasion of doing all the good we can.
Note lastly, As Christ was personally invited to, and bodily present at this marriage-feast
when here on earth; so he will not refuse now in heaven to be spiritually present at his
people's marriages. They want his presence with them upon that great occasion, they
desire and seek it; he is acquainted with it, and invited to it, whoever is neglected; and
where Christ is made acquainted with the match, he will certainly make one at the
marriage. Happy is that wedding where Christ and his friends (as here) are the invited,
expected, and enjoyed guests.
COFFMAN, "Beginning here and continuing through chapter 12 (John 2-12) is the first
main section of this Gospel, in which seven great signs pointing to the deity of Christ are
recounted. The word "sign," used seventeen times in this Gospel, is the term John used
for "miracle." The seven signs are:
1. Changing the water into wine (John 2).
2. Healing the officer's son (John 4).
3. Healing the cripple (John 5).
4. Feeding the 5,000 (John 6).
5. Walking on Lake Galilee (John 6).
6. Healing the man who was born blind (John 9).
7. Raising Lazarus from the dead (John 11).
Of these, Numbers 2,4, and 5 are also found in the synoptics.
The choice of these particular wonders for inclusion in John evidently was made with
regard to the absolute authority by which each was performed, and also with
consideration for the deeply spiritual overtones in each. The latter fact may not be made
the occasion for denying the true character of these signs as actual miracles, marvelous
occurrences of historical events, in which the most circumstantial details are related, the
names and identity of participants and witnesses provided, and the circumstances so
carefully narrated, that the unbiased reader will invariably receive them, not as mere
dramatic illustrations, but as FACTS. The flood of literature stressing the spiritual

implications of these wonders to the point of denying the factual events upon which the
spiritual teaching is founded is unconvincing and unreasonable.
THE FIRST OF THE SEVEN SIGNS
And the third day there was a marriage in Cana of Galilee; and the mother of Jesus was
there. (John 2:1)
No parable or drama, ever started like this. Cana is distinguished from another village of
the same name in the tribe of Ephraim (Joshua 16:9), and Mary, the mother of Jesus,
was one of the guests.
The third day ... is the third day after Nathaniel became a follower of Jesus; and, in this
implied connection with Nathaniel, there is the probable explanation of how Jesus and
his disciples came to be invited. Nathaniel was a native of Cana (John 21:2); and the
small size of the village makes it quite easy to suppose that he was certainly acquainted
with the bridegroom, or even a relative. Also, Cana was only eight or ten miles northeast
of Nazareth.
COKE, "John 2:1. And the third day there was a marriage— On the third day after Jesus
and his disciples arrived in Galilee, they went to a marriage feast (see on Matthew 22:1-
2.) in Cana; which is mentioned, Joshua 19:28, as situated in the possession of the tribe
of Asher not far from thecity of Sidon, and by consequence in the most northern part of
Galilee. Hence it was called Cana of Galilee, to distinguish it from another Cana in the
tribe of Ephraim, mentioned Joshua 16:8; Joshua 17:9. This latter Cana therefore was at
no great distance from Jerusalem. Here Jesus furnished wine by miracle for the
entertainment, at the desire of his mother, who was also bidden. Dr. Clarke thinks, that
our Lord, in the course of his private life, had sometimes exerted his divine power for the
relief of his friends; and that his mother, having seen and heard of those miracles, knew
the greatness of his power, and so applied to him on this occasion. Or we may suppose
that she had heard him speak of the miracles he was to perform, for the confirmation of
his mission, and the benefit of mankind, and begged him to favour his friends with one
in the present necessity. Probably Mary interested herself in this matter, because she
was a relation, or an intimate acquaintance of the new-married couple, and had the
management of the entertainment committed to her care. Some have supposed that this
marriage was celebrated at the house of Cleophas or Alpheus, whose wife was sister to
the mother of our Lord, (Ch. John 19:25.) and one of whose sons was Simon the
Canaanite, whom some have thought to have been so called from being an inhabitant of
this Cana, Mark 3:18 and this may be considered the more probable, as Mary was not
only present at the feast, but was there—as a person concerned, and was solicitous about
supplying them with wine, which, mixed with water, was the common beverage of the
country: and when the feast was over, we are told, John 2:12 that Jesus was attended, on
his leaving Cana, not only by his disciples, but by his brethren, or nearest kinsmen, who
most likely came thither, as relations, to be present at the marriage. As Mary here is
spoken of alone, it may be reasonable to conclude, that Joseph was now dead, and that
he lived not to the time when Jesus entered on his public ministry; especially as he is
nowhere mentioned in the gospel afterwards.

HAWKER 1-11, "And the third day there was marriage in Cana of Galilee: and the mother
of Jesus was there. (2) And both Jesus was called, and his disciples, to the marriage. (3)
And when they wanted wine, the mother of Jesus saith unto him, They have no wine. (4)
Jesus saith unto her, Woman, what have I to do with thee? mine hour is not yet come.
(5) His mother saith unto the servants, Whatsoever he saith unto you, do it.(6) And
there were set there six water-pots of stone, after the manner of the purifying of the
Jews, containing two or three firkins apiece. (7) Jesus saith unto them, Fill the water-
pots with water. And they filled them up to the brim. (8) And he saith unto them, Draw
out now, and bear unto the governor of the feast. And they bare it. (9) When the ruler of
the feast had tasted the water that was made wine, and knew not whence it was; but the
servants which drew the water knew; the governor of the feast called the bridegroom,
(10) And saith unto him, Every man at the beginning doth set forth good wine. And
when men have well drunk, then that which is worse: but thou hast kept the good wine
until now. (11) This beginning of miracles did Jesus in Cana of Galilee, and manifested
forth his glory: and his disciples believed on him.
The circumstances of this marriage feast, and the miracle Jesus then wrought, are so
beautifully expressed, in the plain and artless language of the Evangelist, as to need no
comment. I only take occasion therefore to observe, how many sweet instructions the
subject ministers to us, in the contemplation of Jesus, and his disciples.
We are told, that this was the beginning of miracles, and most probably the first, the
Lord Jesus wrought, upon his entrance on his public ministry. And certain it is, that it is
the first, and among the highest miracles the Son of God ever wrought in his own
marriage with our nature. Then Jesus indeed turned our water into wine, for everything
then became blessings in Christ. And certainly there was somewhat of significancy in
this miracle. For it is remarkable, that Moses, commissioned by the Lord, turned the
water of Egypt into blood. Our Almighty Moses, whom Jehovah hath sent into the Egypt
of our world, hath turned both our common mercies and our gospel mercies into wine.
Exo_7:19. The miracle of Moses the servant, was for destruction! The miracle of Moses’
Lord was, and is for life everlasting. Sweetly the Church sings to this: Son_1:2; Isa_27:2-
3.
I cannot dismiss the view of this marriage in Cana of Galilee, which the Lord and his
disciples graced with their presence, without observing how much Jesus hath sanctioned
the holy and honorable estate of marriage, by this act. Surely as the Apostle hath said,
Marriage is honorable in all, and the bed undefiled. Heb_13:4. And methinks, I would
take occasion there from, to enforce the same plan the Jewish bridal feast set forth, of
inviting Jesus and his disciples to every godly marriage union. If the Ho 1 y order be
founded in Christ, and each party becomes a true yoke-fellow in the Lord; what a
pleasing prospect it affords of promoting, under his blessing, the truest happiness of the
life that now is, and of that which is to come. And to the wants of this world, where Jesus
dwells, every supply necessary may be hoped for. He that turned water into wine to
answer the momentary feast, can soon convert everything even of evil into good; and
rather than that his redeemed shall want anything needful, will bring resourses from
their enemies’ table. All things shall work together for good to them that love God: to
them that are called according to his purpose. Rom_8:28.
MACLAREN, "And the third day there was marriage in Cana of Galilee: and the mother

3.

3.
And the third day there was marriage in Cana of Galilee: and the mother of Jesus was
there. (2) And both Jesus was called, and his disciples, to the marriage. (3) And when
they wanted wine, the mother of Jesus saith unto him, They have no wine. (4) Jesus
saith unto her, Woman, what have I to do with thee? mine hour is not yet come. (5) His
mother saith unto the servants, Whatsoever he saith unto you, do it.(6) And there were
set there six water-pots of stone, after the manner of the purifying of the Jews,
containing two or three firkins apiece. (7) Jesus saith unto them, Fill the water-pots with
water. And they filled them up to the brim. (8) And he saith unto them, Draw out now,
and bear unto the governor of the feast. And they bare it. (9) When the ruler of the feast
had tasted the water that was made wine, and knew not whence it was; but the servants
which drew the water knew; the governor of the feast called the bridegroom, (10) And
saith unto him, Every man at the beginning doth set forth good wine. And when men
have well drunk, then that which is worse: but thou hast kept the good wine until now.
(11) This beginning of miracles did Jesus in Cana of Galilee, and manifested forth his
glory: and his disciples believed on him.

3.

3.
3.

MACLAREN, "JESUS THE JOY-BRINGER
The exact dating of this first miracle indicates an eye-witness. As Nazareth was some
thirty miles distant from the place where John was baptizing, and Cana about four miles
from Nazareth, the ‘third day’ is probably reckoned from the day of the calling of Philip.
Jesus and His disciples seem to have been invited to the marriage feast later than the
other guests, as Mary was already there. She appears to have been closely connected
with the family celebrating the feast, as appears from her knowledge of the deficiency in
the wine, and her direction to the servants.
The first point, which John makes all but as emphatic as the miracle itself, is the new
relation between Mary and Jesus, the lesson she had to learn, and her sweet triumphant
trust. Now that she sees her Son surrounded by His disciples, the secret hope which she
had nourished silently for so long bursts into flame, and she turns to Him with beautiful
faith in His power to help, even in the small present need. What an example her first
word to Him sets us all! Like the two sad sisters at Bethany, she is sure that to tell Him
of trouble is enough, for that His own heart will impel Him to share, and perchance to
relieve it. Let us tell Jesus our wants and leave Him to deal with them as He knows how.
Of course, His addressing her as ‘Woman’ has not the meaning which it would have with
us, for the term is one of respect and courtesy, but there is a plain intimation of a new
distance in it, which is strengthened by the question, ‘What is there in common between
us?’ What in common between a mother and her son! Yes, but she has to learn that the
assumption of the position of Messiah in which her mother’s pride so rejoiced, carried
necessarily a consequence, the first of the swords which were to pierce that mother’s
heart of hers. That her Son should no more call her ‘mother,’ but ‘woman,’ told her that
the old days of being subject to her were past for ever, and that the old relation was
merged in the new one of Messiah and disciple-a bitter thought, which many a parent
has to taste the bitterness of still, when wider outlooks and new sense of a vocation come
to their children. Few mothers are able to accept the inevitable as Mary did, Jesus’ ‘hour’
is not to be prescribed to Him, but His own consciousness of the fit time must determine
His action. What gave Him the signal that the hour was struck is not told us, nor how
soon after that moment it came. But the saying gently but decisively declares His
freedom, His infallible accuracy, and certain intervention at the right time. We may
think that He delays, but He always helps, ‘and that right early.’
Mary’s sweet humility and strong trust come out wonderfully in her direction to the
servants, which is the exact opposite of what might have been expected after the cold
douche administered to her eagerness to prompt Jesus. Her faith had laid hold of the

little spark of promise in that ‘not yet,’ and had fanned it into a flame. ‘Then He will
intervene, and I can leave Him to settle when.’ How firm, though ignorant, must have
been the faith which did not falter even at the bitter lesson and the apparent repulse, and
how it puts to shame our feebler confidence in our better known Lord, if ever He delays
our requests! Mary left all to Jesus; His commands were to be implicitly obeyed. Do we
submit to Him in that absolute fashion both as to the time and the manner of His
responses to our petitions?
The next point is the actual miracle. It is told with remarkable vividness and equally
remarkable reserve. We do not even learn in what precisely it consisted. Was all the
water in the vessels turned into wine? Did the change affect only what was drawn out?
No answer is possible to these questions. Jesus spoke no word of power, nor put forth
His hand. His will silently effected the change on matter. So He manifested forth His
glory as Creator and Sustainer, as wielding the divine prerogative of affecting material
things by His bare volition.
The reality of the miracle is certified by the jovial remark of the ‘ruler of the feast.’ As
Bengel says: ‘The ignorance of the ruler proves the goodness of the wine; the knowledge
of the servants, the reality of the miracle.’ His palate, at any rate, was not so dulled as to
be unable to tell a good ‘brand’ when he tasted it, nor is there any reason to suppose that
Jesus was supplying more wine to a company that had already had more than enough.
The ruler’s words are not meant to apply to the guests at that feast, but are quite general.
But this Evangelist is fond of quoting words which have deeper meanings than the
speakers dreamed, and with his mystically contemplative eye he sees hints and symbols
of the spiritual in very common things. So we are not forcing higher meanings into the
ruler’s jest, but catching one intention of John’s quotation of it, when we see in it an
unconscious utterance of the great truth that Jesus keeps His best wine till the last. How
many poor deluded souls are ever finding that the world does the very opposite, luring
men on to be its slaves and victims by brilliant promises and shortlived delights, which
sooner or later lose their deceitful lustre and become stale, and often positively bitter!
‘The end of that mirth is heaviness.’ The dreariest thing in all the world is a godless old
age, and one of the most beautiful things in all the world is the calm sunset which so
often glorifies a godly life that has been full of effort for Jesus, and of sorrows patiently
borne as being sent by Him.
‘Full often clad in radiant vest
Deceitfully goes forth the morn,’
but Christ more than keeps His morning’s promises, and Christian experience is steadily
progressive, if Christians cling close to Him, and Heaven will supply the transcendent
confirmation of the blessed truth that was spoken unawares by the ‘ruler’ at that humble
feast.
What effect the miracle produced on others is not told; probably the guests shared the
ruler’s ignorance, but its effect on the disciples is that they ‘believed on Him.’ They had
‘believed’ already, or they would not have been disciples (Joh_1:50), but their faith was
deepened as well as called forth afresh. Our faith ought to be continuously and
increasingly responsive to His continuous manifestations of Himself which we can all
find in our own experience.
Jesus ‘manifested His glory’ in this first sign. What were the rays of that mild radiance?
Surely the chief of them, in addition to the revelation of His sovereignty over matter, to
which we have already referred, is that therein He hallowed the sweet sacred joys of

marriage and family life, that therein He revealed Himself as looking with sympathetic
eye on the ties that bind us together, and on the gladness of our common humanity, that
therein He reveals Himself as able and glad to sanctify and elevate our joys and infuse
into them a strange new fragrance and power. The ‘water’ of our ordinary lives is
changed into ‘wine.’ Jesus became ‘acquainted with grief’ in order that He might impart
to every believing and willing soul His own joy, and that by its remaining in us, our joy
might be full.
CALVI , "1.There was a marriage in Cana of Galilee. As this narrative contains
the first miracle which Christ performed, it would be proper for us, were it on this
ground alone, to consider the narrative attentively; though — as we shall afterwards
see — there are other reasons which recommend it to our notice. But while we
proceed, the various advantages arising from it will be more clearly seen. The
Evangelist first mentions Cana of Galilee, not that which was situated towards Zare-
phath (1 Kings 17:9; Obadiah 1:20; Luke 4:26) or Sarepta, between Tyre and Sidon,
and was called the greater in comparison of this latter Cana, which is placed by
some in the tribe of Zebulun, and by others in the tribe of Asher. For Jerome too
assures us that, even in his time, there existed a small town which bore that name.
There is reason to believe that it was near the city of azareth, since the mother of
Christ came there to attend the marriage. From the fourth chapter of this book it
will be seen that it was not more than one day’s journey distant from Capernaum.
That it lay not far from the city of Bethsaida may also be inferred from the
circumstance, that three days after Christ had been in those territories, the
marriage was celebrated — the Evangelist tells us — in Cana of Galilee. There may
have been also a third Cana, not far from Jerusalem, and yet out of Galilee; but I
leave this undetermined, because I am unacquainted with it.
And the mother of Jesus was there. It was probably one of Christ’s near relations
who married a wife; for Jesus is mentioned as having accompanied his mother.
From the fact that the disciples also are invited, we may infer how plain and frugal
was his way of living; for he lived in common with them. It may be thought strange,
however, that a man who has no great wealth or abundance (as will be made evident
from the scarcity of the wine) invites four or five other persons, on Christ’s account.
But the poor are readier and more frank in their invitations; because they are not,
like the rich, afraid of being disgraced, if they do not treat their guests with great
costliness and splendor; for the poor adhere more zealously to the ancient custom of
having an extended acquaintance.
Again, it may be supposed to show a want of courtesy, that the bridegroom allows
his guests, in the middle of the entertainment, to be in want of wine; for it looks like
a man of little thoughtfulness not to have a sufficiency of wine for his guests. I reply,
nothing is here related which does not frequently happen, especially when people
are not accustomed to the daily use of wine. Besides, the context shows, that it was
towards the conclusion of the banquet thatthe wine fell short, when, according to
custom, it might be supposed that they had already drunk enough; for the master of
the feast thus speaks, Other men place worse wine before those who have drunk
enough, but thou hast kept the best till now. Besides, I have no doubt that all this

was regulated by the Providence of God, that there might be room for the miracle.
BARCLAY, "THE EW EXHILARATIO (John 2:1-11)
2:1-11 Two days after this there was a wedding in Cana of Galilee; and Jesus'
mother was there. And Jesus was invited to the wedding and so were his disciples.
When the wine had run short, Jesus' mother said to him: "They have no wine."
Jesus said to her: "Lady, let me handle this in my own way. My hour has not yet
come." His mother said to the servants: "Do whatever he tens you to do." There
were six stone waterpots standing there--they were needed for the Jewish purifying
customs--and each of them held about twenty or thirty gallons. Jesus said to them:
"Fill the waterpots with water." They filled them up to the very brim. He said to
them: "Draw from them now, and take what you draw to the steward in charge."
They did so. When the steward had tasted the water which had become wine--he did
not know where it came from, but the servants who had drawn the water knew--the
steward called the bridegroom and said to him: "Everyone first sets before the
guests the good wine, and then, when they have drunk their fill, he sets before them
the inferior wine. You have kept the good wine until now."
Jesus did the first of his signs in Cana of Galilee, and displayed his glory; and his
disciples believed on him.
The very richness of the Fourth Gospel presents those who would study it and him
who would expound it with a problem. Always there are two things. There is a
simple surface story that anyone can understand and re-tell; but there is also a
wealth of deeper meaning for him who has the eagerness to search and the eye to see
and the mind to understand. There is so much in a passage like this that we must
take three days to study it. We shall look at it first of all quite simply to set it within
its background and to see it come alive. We shall then look at certain of the things it
tells us about Jesus and his work. And finally we shall look at the permanent truth
which John is seeking to tell us in it.
Cana of Galilee is so called to distinguish it from Cana in Coelo-Syria. It was a
village quite near to azareth. Jerome, who stayed in Palestine, says that he saw it
from azareth. In Cana there was a wedding feast to which Mary went and at
which she held a special place. She had something to do with the arrangements, for
she was worried when the wine ran done; and she had authority enough to order the
servants to do whatever Jesus told them to do. Some of the later gospels which never
got into the ew Testament add certain details to this story. One of the Coptic
gospels tells us that Mary was a sister of the bridegroom's mother. There is an early
set of Prefaces to the books of the ew Testament caged the Monarchian Prefaces
which tell us that the bridegroom was no other than John himself, and that his
mother was Salome, the sister of Mary. We do not know whether these extra details
are true or not, but the story is so vividly told that it is clearly an eye-witness
account.
There is no mention of Joseph. The explanation most probably is that by this time

Joseph was dead. It would seem that Joseph died quite soon, and that the reason
why Jesus spent eighteen long years in azareth was that he had to take upon
himself the support of his mother and his family. It was only when his younger
brothers and sisters were able to look after themselves that he left home.
The scene is a village wedding feast. In Palestine a wedding was a really notable
occasion. It was the Jewish law that the wedding of a virgin should take place on a
Wednesday. This is interesting because it gives us a date from which to work back;
and if this wedding took place on a Wednesday it must have been the Sabbath day
when Jesus first met Andrew and John and they stayed the whole day with him. The
wedding festivities lasted far more than one day. The wedding ceremony itself took
place late in the evening, after a feast. After the ceremony the young couple were
conducted to their new home. By that time it was dark and they were conducted
through the village streets by the light of flaming torches and with a canopy over
their heads. They were taken by as long a route as possible so that as many people
as possible would have the opportunity to wish them well. But a newly married
couple did not go away for their honeymoon; they stayed at home; and for a week
they kept open house. They wore crowns and dressed in their bridal robes. They
were treated like a king and queen, were actually addressed as king and queen, and
their word was law. In a life where there was much poverty and constant hard
work, this week of festivity and joy was one of the supreme occasions.
It was in a happy time like this that Jesus gladly shared. But something went wrong.
It is likely that the coming of Jesus caused something of a problem. He had been
invited to the feast, but he had arrived not alone but with five disciples. Five extra
people may well have caused complications. Five unexpected guests might provide
any festival with a problem, and the wine went done.
For a Jewish feast wine was essential. "Without wine," said the Rabbis, "there is no
joy." It was not that people were drunken, but in the East wine was an essential.
Drunkenness was in fact a great disgrace, and they actually drank their wine in a
mixture composed of two parts of wine to three parts of water. At any time the
failure of provisions would have been a problem, for hospitality in the East is a
sacred duty; but for the provisions to fail at a wedding would be a terrible
humiliation for the bride and the bridegroom.
So Mary came to Jesus to tell him that it was so. The King James Version
translation of Jesus' reply makes it sound very discourteous. It makes him say:
"Woman, what have I to do with thee?" That is indeed a translation of the words,
but it does not in any way give the tone.
The phrase, "What have I to do with thee?" was a common conversational phrase.
When it was uttered angrily and sharply it did indicate complete disagreement and
reproach, but when it was spoken gently it indicated not so much reproach but
misunderstanding. It means: "Don't worry; you don't quite understand what is
going on; leave things to me, and I will settle them in my own way." Jesus was
simply telling Mary to leave things to him, that he would have his own way of

dealing with the situation.
The word woman (gunai, Greek #1135) is also misleading. It sounds to us very
rough and abrupt. But it is the same word as Jesus used on the Cross to address
Mary as he left her to the care of John (John 19:26). In Homer it is the title by which
Odysseus addresses Penelope, his well-loved wife. It is the title by which Augustus,
the Roman Emperor, addressed Cleopatra, the famous Egyptian queen. So far from
being a rough and discourteous way of address, it was a title of respect. We have no
way of speaking in English which exactly renders it; but it is better to translate it
Lady which gives at least the courtesy in it.
However Jesus spoke, Mary was confident of him. She told the servants to do as
Jesus told them to do. At the door there were six great water jars. The word that the
King James Version translates "firkin" (metretes, Greek #3355) represents the
Hebrew measure called the bath (Hebrew #1324) which was a measure equivalent to
between eight and nine gallons. The jars were very large; they would hold about
twenty gallons of water apiece.
John was writing his gospel for Greeks and so he explains that these jars were there
to provide water for the purifying ceremonies of the Jews. Water was required for
two purposes. First, it was required for cleansing the feet on entry to the house. The
roads were not surfaced. Sandals were merely a sole attached to the foot by straps.
On a dry day the feet were covered by dust and on a wet day they were soiled with
mud; and the water was used for cleansing them. Second, it was required for the
handwashing. Strict Jews washed the hands before a meal and between each course.
First the hand was held upright and the water was poured over it in such away that
it ran right to the wrist; then the hand was held pointing down and the water was
poured in such a way that it ran from the wrist to the finger-tips. This was done
with each hand in turn; and then each palm was cleansed by rubbing it with the fist
of the other hand. The Jewish ceremonial law insisted that this should be done not
only at the beginning of a meal but also between courses. If it was not done the
hands were technically unclean. It was for this footwashing and handwashing that
these great stone jars of water stood there.
John commanded that the jars should be filled to the brim. John mentions that
point to make it clear that nothing else but water was put into them. He then told
them to draw out the water and to take it to the architriklinos (Greek #755), the
steward in charge. At their banquets the Romans had a toast-master called the
arbiter bibendi, the arranger of the drinking. Sometimes one of the guests acted as a
kind of master of ceremonies at a Jewish wedding. But our equivalent of the
architriklinos (Greek #755) is really the head-waiter. He was responsible for the
seating of the guests and the correct running of the feast. When he tasted the water
which had become wine he was astonished. He called the bridegroom--it was the
bridegroom's parents who were responsible for the feast--and spoke jestingly.
"Most people," he said, "serve the good wine first; and then, when the guests have
drunk a good deal, and their palates are dulled and they are not in much of a
condition to appreciate what they are drinking, they serve the inferior wine, but you

have kept the best until now."
So it was at a village girl's wedding in a Galilaean village that Jesus first showed his
glory; and it was there that his disciples caught another dazzling glimpse of what he
was.
THE EW EXHILARATIO (John 2:1-11 continued)
We note three general things about this wonderful deed which Jesus did.
(i) We note when it happened. It happened at a wedding feast. Jesus was perfectly at
home at such an occasion. He was no severe, austere killjoy. He loved to share in the
happy rejoicing of a wedding feast.
There are certain religious people who shed a gloom wherever they go. They are
suspicious of all joy and happiness. To them religion is a thing of black clothes, the
lowered voice, the expulsion of social fellowship. It was said of Alice Freeman
Palmer by one of her scholars: "She made me feel as if I was bathed in sunshine."
Jesus was like that. C. H. Spurgeon in his book, Lectures to My Students, has some
wise, if caustic, advice. "Sepulchral tones may fit a man to be an undertaker, but
Lazarus is not called out of his grave by hollow moans." "I know brethren who
from head to foot, in garb, tone, manner, necktie and boots are so utterly parsonic
that no particle of manhood is visible.... Some men appear to have a white cravat
twisted round their souls, their manhood is throttled with that starched rag." "An
individual who has no geniality about him had better be an undertaker, and bury
the dead, for he will never succeed in influencing the living." "I commend
cheerfulness to all who would win souls; not levity and frothiness, but a genial,
happy spirit. There are more flies caught with honey than with vinegar, and there
will be more souls led to heaven by a man who wears heaven in his face than by one
who bears Tartarus in his looks."
Jesus never counted it a crime to be happy. Why should his followers do so?
(ii) We note where it happened. It happened in a humble home in a village in
Galilee. This miracle was not wrought against the background of some great
occasion and in the presence of vast crowds. It was wrought in a home. A.H. .
Green Armytage in his book, A Portrait of St. Luke, speaks of how Luke delighted
to show Jesus against a background of simple, homely things and people. In a vivid
phrase he says that St. Luke's gospel "domesticated God"; it brought God right into
the home circle and into the ordinary things of life. Jesus' action at Cana of Galilee
shows what he thought of a home. As the Revised Standard Version has it, he
"manifested forth his glory," and that manifestation took place within a home.
There is a strange paradox in the attitude of many people to the place they call
home. They would admit at once that there is no more precious place in all the
world; and yet, at the same time, they would also have to admit that in it they claim
the right to be far more discourteous, far more boorish, far more selfish, far more
impolite than they would dare to be in any society of strangers. Many of us treat the

ones we love most in a way that we would never dare to treat a chance acquaintance.
So often it is strangers who see us at our best and those who live with us who see us
at our worst. We ought ever to remember that it was in a humble home that Jesus
manifested forth his glory. To him home was a place for which nothing but his best
was good enough.
(iii) We note why it happened. We have already seen that in the East hospitality was
always a sacred duty. It would have brought embarrassed shame to that home that
day if the wine had run done. It was to save a humble Galilaean family from hurt
that Jesus put forth his power. It was in sympathy, in kindness, in understanding
for simple folk that Jesus acted.
early everyone can do the big thing on the big occasion; but it takes Jesus to do the
big thing on a simple, homely occasion like this. There is a kind of natural human
maliciousness which rather enjoys the misfortunes of others and which delights to
make a good story of them over the teacups. But Jesus, the Lord of all life, and the
King of glory, used his power to save a simple Galilaean lad and lass from
humiliation. It is just by such deeds of understanding, simple kindliness that we too
can show that we are followers of Jesus Christ.
Further, this story shows us very beautifully two things about Mary's faith in Jesus.
(i) Instinctively Mary turned to Jesus whenever something went wrong. She knew
her son. It was not till he was thirty years old that Jesus left home; and all these
years Mary lived with him. There is an old legend which tens of the days when Jesus
was a little baby in the home in azareth. It tells how in those days when people felt
tired and worried and hot and bothered and upset, they would say: "Let us go and
look at Mary's child," and they would go and look at Jesus, and somehow all their
troubles rolled away. It is still true that those who know Jesus intimately
instinctively turn to him when things go wrong--and they never find him wanting.
(ii) Even when Mary did not understand what Jesus was going to do, even when it
seemed that he had refused her request, Mary still believed in him so much that she
turned to the serving folk and told them to do whatever Jesus told them to do. Mary
had the faith which could trust even when it did not understand. She did not know
what Jesus was going to do, but she was quite sure that he would do the right thing.
In every life come periods of darkness when we do not see the way. In every life
come things which are such that we do not see why they came or any meaning in
them. Happy is the man who in such a case still trusts even when he cannot
understand.
Still further, this story tells us something about Jesus. In answer to Mary he said:
"My hour has not yet come." All through the gospel story Jesus talks about his
hour. In John 7:6; John 7:8 it is the hour of his emergence as the Messiah. In John
12:23 and John 17:1, and in Matthew 26:18; Matthew 26:45 and in Mark 14:41 it is
the hour of his crucifixion and his death. All through his life Jesus knew that he had
come into this world for a definite purpose and a definite task. He saw his life not in

terms of his wishes, but in terms of God's purpose for himself. He saw his life not
against the shifting background of time, but against the steady background of
eternity. All through his life he went steadily towards that hour for which he knew
that he had come into the world. It is not only Jesus who came into this world to
fulfil the purpose of God. As someone has said: "Every man is a dream and an idea
of God." We, too, must think not of our own wishes and our own desires, but of the
purpose for which God sent us into his world.
THE EW EXHILARATIO (John 2:1-11 continued)
ow we must think of the deep and permanent truth which John is seeking to teach
when he tells this story.
We must remember that John was writing out of a double background. He was a
Jew and he was writing for Jews; but his great object was to write the story of Jesus
in such a way that it would come home also to the Greeks.
Let us look at it first of all from the Jewish point of view. We must always
remember that beneath John's simple stories there is a deeper meaning which is
open only to those who have eyes to see. In all his gospel John never wrote an
unnecessary or an insignificant detail. Everything means something and everything
points beyond.
There were six stone waterpots; and at the command of Jesus the water in them
turned to wine. According to the Jews seven is the number which is complete and
perfect; and six is the number which is unfinished and imperfect. The six stone
waterpots stand for all the imperfections of the Jewish law. Jesus came to do away
with the imperfections of the law and to put in their place the new wine of the gospel
of his grace. Jesus turned the imperfection of the law into the perfection of grace.
There is another thing to note in this connection. There were six waterpots; each
held between twenty and thirty gallons of water; Jesus turned the water into wine.
That would give anything up to one hundred and eighty gallons of wine. Simply to
state that fact is to show that John did not mean the story to be taken with crude
literalness. What John did mean to say is that when the grace of Jesus comes to men
there is enough and to spare for all. o wedding party on earth could drink one
hundred and eighty gallons of wine. o need on earth can exhaust the grace of
Christ; there is a glorious superabundance in it.
John is telling us that in Jesus the imperfections have become perfection, and the
grace has become illimitable, sufficient and more than sufficient for every need.
Let us look at it now from the Greek point of view. It so happens that the Greeks
actually possessed stories like this. Dionysos was the Greek god of wine. Pausanias
was a Greek who wrote a description of his country and of its ancient ceremonies. In
his description of Elis, he describes an old ceremony and belief: "Between the
market-place and the Menius is an old theatre and a sanctuary of Dionysos; the
image is by Praxiteles. o god is more revered by the Eleans than Dionysos is, and

they say that he attends their festival of the Thyia. The place where they hold the
festival called the Thyia is about a mile from the city. Three empty kettles are taken
into the building and deposited there by the priests in the presence of the citizens
and of any strangers who may happen to be staying in the country. On the doors of
the buildings the priests, and all who choose to do so, put their seals. ext day they
are free to examine the seals, and on entering the building they find the kettles full
of wine. I was not there myself at the time of the festival, but the most respectable
men of Elis, and strangers too, swore that the facts were as I have said."
So the Greeks, too, had their stories like this; and it is as if John said to them: "You
have your stories and your legends about your gods. They are only stories and you
know that they are not really true. But Jesus has come to do what you have always
dreamed that your gods could do. He has come to make the things you longed for
come true."
To the Jews John said: "Jesus has come to turn the imperfection of the law into the
perfection of grace." To the Greeks he said: "Jesus has come really and truly to do
the things you only dreamed the gods could do."
ow we can see what John is teaching us. Every story tells us not of something Jesus
did once and never again, but of something which he is for ever doing. John tens us
not of things that Jesus once did in Palestine, but of things that he still does today.
And what John wants us to see here is not that Jesus once on a day turned some
waterpots of water into wine; he wants us to see that whenever Jesus comes into a
man's life, there comes a new quality which is like turning water into wine. Without
Jesus, life is dull and stale and flat; when Jesus comes into it, life becomes vivid and
sparkling and exciting. Without Jesus, life is drab and uninteresting; with him it is
thrilling and exhilarating.
When Sir Wilfred Grenfell was appealing for volunteers for his work in Labrador,
he said that he could not promise them much money, but he could promise them the
time of their lives. That is what Jesus promises us. Remember that John was writing
seventy years after Jesus was crucified. For seventy years he had thought and
meditated and remembered, until he saw meanings and significances that he had not
seen at the time. When John told this story he was remembering what life with Jesus
was like; and he said, "Wherever Jesus went and whenever he came into life it was
like water turning into wine." This story is John saying to us: "If you want the new
exhilaration, become a follower of Jesus Christ, and there will come a change in
your life which will be like water turning into wine."
LIGHTFOOT, "1. And the third day there was a marriage in Cana of Galilee; and
the mother of Jesus was there:
[And the third day there was a marriage, &c.] A virgin marries on the fourth day of
the week, and a widow on the fifth. "This custom came not in but from the decree of
Ezra, and so onward: for the Sanhedrim doth not sit but on the second and the fifth
days; but before the decree of Ezra, when the Sanhedrim assembled every day, then

was it lawful to take a wife on any day." There is a twofold reason given for this
restraint:
I. The virgin was to be married on the fourth day of the week because the assembly
of the twenty-three met on the fifth: so that if the husband should find his wife to be
no virgin, but already violated, he might have recourse to the consistory in the heat
of his displeasure, and procure just punishment for her according to law. But why
then might they not as well marry on the first day of the week, seeing the Beth Din
met on the second as well as the fifth?
II. Lest the sabbath should be polluted by preparations for the nuptials: for the
first, second, and third days of the week are allowed for those kind of preparations.
And the reason why the widow was to be married on the fifth day was, that her
husband might rejoice with her for three days together, viz. fifth, sixth, and the
sabbath day.
If therefore our bride in this place was a virgin, then the nuptials were celebrated on
the fourth day of the week, which is our Wednesday: if she was a widow, then she
was married on the fifth day of the week, which is our Thursday. Let us therefore
number our days according to our evangelist, and let it be but granted that that was
the sabbath in which it is said, "They abode with him all that day," chapter 1, verse
39; then on the first day of the week Christ went into Galilee and met with
athanael. So that the third day from thence is the fourth day of the week; but as to
that, let every one reckon as he himself shall think fit.
[A marriage.] I. The virgin to be married cometh forth from her father's house to
that of her husband, "in some veil, but with her hair dishevelled, or her head
uncovered."
II. If any person meets her upon that day, he gives her the way; which once was
done by king Agrippa himself.
III. They carry before her a cup of wine, which they were wont to call the cup of
Trumah, which denoted that she, for her unspotted virginity, might have married a
priest, and eaten of the Trumah.
IV. Skipping and dancing, they were wont to sing the praises of the bride. In
Palestine they used these words "She needs no paint nor stibium, no plaiting of the
hair, or any such thing; for she is of herself most beautiful."
V. They scattered some kind of grain or corn amongst the children; that they, if
occasion should serve, might bear witness hereafter that they saw that woman a
married virgin.
VI. They sprinkled also or sowed barley before them, by that ceremony denoting
their fruitfulness. Whether these sports were used at the wedding where our Saviour
was present, let others inquire.

VII. In Sotah there is mention of crowns which the bride and bridegroom wore; as
also what fashion they were of, and of what materials they were made.
VIII. Because of the mirth that was expected at nuptial solemnities, they forbade all
weddings celebrating within the feasts of the Passover, Pentecost, and Tabernacles,
"because there were great rejoicings at nuptials, and they must not intermingle one
joy with another"; that is, the joy of nuptials with the joy of a festival.
IX. The nuptial festivity was continued for the whole seven days; which we also see
of old, Judges 19:12.
[And the mother of Jesus was there.] The mother of Jesus was there, not invited (as
it should seem) with Christ and his disciples, but had been there before the
invitation made to them.
You may conceive who were the usual nuptial guests by those words of Maimonides:
"The bridegroom and his companions, the children of the bridechamber, are not
bound to make a tabernacle."
I. In a more general sense, denotes a friend or companion, as in the Targum, Judges
14:2; 2 Samuel 13:3: but it is more particularly applied to those friends that are the
nuptial guests.
II. But in a most strict sense to those two mentioned Chetubb. fol. 12. 1: "Of old
they appointed two Shoshbenin, one for the bridegroom, the other for the bride,
that they should minister to them especially at their entry into the bridal chamber."
They were especially instituted for this end, that they should take care and provide
that there should be no fraud nor deceit as to the tokens of the bride's virginity. So
Gloss upon the place. The Rabbins very ridiculously (as they almost always do) tell a
trifling story, that Michael and Gabriel were the two Shoshbenin at Adam and Eve's
wedding.
III. But as to the signification of this nuptial term in a more large sense, we may see
farther: "If any amongst the brethren make a Shoshbenuth while the father is yet
alive, when the Shoshbenuth returns, that also is returned too; for the Shoshbenuth
is required even before the Beth Din; but if any one send to his friend any measures
of wine, those are not required before the Beth Din; for this was a deed of gift? or
work of charity."
The words are very obscure, but they seem to bear this sense, viz.: This was the
manner of the Shoshbenuth: some bachelor or single person, for joy of his friend's
marriage, takes something along with him to eat and be merry with the bridegroom:
when it comes to the turn of this single person to marry, this bridegroom, to whom
he had brought this portion, is bound to return the same kindness again. ay, if the
father should make a wedding for his son, and his friends should bring gifts along
with them in honour of the nuptials, and give them to his son [the bridegroom], the

father was bound to return the same kindness whenever any of those friends should
think fit to marry themselves. But if any one should send the bridegroom to
congratulate his nuptials, either wine or oil, or any such gift, and not come himself
to eat and make merry with them, this was not of the nature of the Shoshbenuth,
nor could be required back again before the tribunal, because that was a free gift.
IV. Christ therefore, and five of his disciples, were not of these voluntary
Shoshbenin at this wedding, for they were invited guests, and so of the number of
those that were called the children of the bridechamber, distinguished from the
Shoshbenin. But whether our Saviour's mother was to be accounted either the one
or the other is a vain and needless question. Perhaps she had the care of preparing
and managing the necessaries for the wedding, as having some relation either with
the bridegroom or the bride.
PI K 1-11, "First of all we will give a brief and simple Analysis of the passage
before us:—
1. The Occasion of the Miracle: a marriage in Cana, verse 1.
2. The Presence there of the Mother of Jesus, verse 1.
3. The Savior and His Disciples Invited, verse 2.
4. Mary’s Interference and Christ’s Rebuke, verses 3, 4.
5. Mary’s Submission, verse 5.
6. The Miracle Itself, verses 6-8.
7. The Effects of the Miracle, verses 9-11.
We propose to expound the passage before us from a threefold viewpoint: first, its
typical significance, second, its prophetic application, third, its practical teaching. It
is as though the Holy Spirit had here combined three pictures into one. We might
illustrate it by the method used in printing a picture in colors. There is first the
picture itself in its black-edged outline; then, on top of this, is filled in the first
coloring—red, or yellow, as the case may be; finally, the last color—blue or
brown—may be added to the others, and the composite and variegated picture is
complete. To use the terms of the illustration, it is our purpose to examine,
separately, the different tints and shadings in the Divine picture which is presented
to our view in the first half of John 2.
I. The typical significance.
It is to be carefully noted that this second chapter of John opens with the word
"and," which indicates that its contents are closely connected with what has gone
before. One of the things that is made prominent in John 1 (following the
Introduction, which runs to the end of verse 18) is the failure of Judaism, and the
turning away from it to Christ. The failure of Judaism (seen in the ignorance of the
Sanhedrin) is made plain by the sending of priests and Levites from Jerusalem to
enquire of John who he was (John 1:19). This is made still more evident by the
pathetic statement of the Baptist, "There standeth one among you, whom ye know
not" (John 1:26). All this is but an amplication of that tragic word found in John
1:11—"He came unto his own, and his own received him not." So blind were the
religious leaders of Israel, that they neither knew the Christ of God stood in their
midst, nor recognized His forerunner to whom the Old Testament Scriptures bore
explicit witness.

John 2 commentary

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Viewers also liked

Viewers also liked (12)

Similar to John 2 commentary

Similar to John 2 commentary (20)

More from GLENN PEASE

More from GLENN PEASE (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

John 2 commentary