The Second Sign (John 4: 46-54)

Welcome to Wondercafe2!

A community where we discuss, share, and have some fun together. Join today and become a part of it!

Register Log in
unsafe said:
I say
Many people were only interested in the signs and miracles that Jesus preformed ----they didn't care that they pointed to him being their Messiah who could just speak and a fever would have to obey His Words ---the signs pointed to Jesus' messages were complete truth ---

The Miracles Jesus did were signs that He is God and they were a sign that He could take away their sins and all who believed in Him would enter God's Kingdom ----
BUT
All they wanted was the healing and the making of wine out of water ---they cared less about the real thing that Jesus could give then which was eternal life ---

This is the same today we like reading about the Miracles and Healings Jesus preformed and how He ate and associated with sinners and the low class -----but when it come to the More important message of His Preaching which is how to have eternal life ----we take offense and refuse to acknowledge the real reason why Jesus was sent here -----which is to save souls --
Click to expand...
How would this apply to us today? I am not sure the signs and miracles mean a lot to us these days. At least not in the liberal circles I travel with.

Agree that we like the stories about Jesus associating with sinners and outcasts.
 
unsafe said:
My View
The Centurion had Faith in Jesus to heal his servant and his Faith was not based on signs and miracles that Jesus did ---- it came from a position humbleness and submission ------sending the elders to Jesus who said this person was worthy to have this healing ------and he wasn't asking for Jesus Himself but just His Word as he said he himself wasn't worthy to have Jesus under his roof -----

The Royal Official's Faith in Jesus to heal came from seeing Jesus signs and wonders ---and his attitude was one of just expecting Jesus to come and heal his son -----

Jesus addresses the issue here when He says ----
“So Jesus said to him, ‘Unless you people see signs and wonders you will never believe.’
Click to expand...
I think the story about the Centurion and his servant really focuses on faith. I agree with your comments above.

The story of the royal official and his son focuses on the healing powers of Jesus.

Although the two stories seem similar they are not making the same point.
 
paradox3 said:
How would this apply to us today? I am not sure the signs and miracles mean a lot to us these days. At least not in the liberal circles I travel with.
Click to expand...

I am talking about reading the Scriptures -----we like to read about the Miracles ---and the soft parts of the Scripture --- but like to skip over the most important reason why Jesus came -----to save the Spiritual sick so they have eternal life ---many do not want to entertain that part of scripture ----is what I am referring to --
 
paradox3 said:
I thought he was referring to the Galileans.
Click to expand...
Yeah, that was my thought. Fact is, at this point in his ministry, the vast majority of people he meets are unbelievers. That's why I wonder if he was stating a fact or being a bit cheeky or even snarky.
 
Waterfall said:
Was Jesus referring to unbelievers as "you people"?
Click to expand...

My view on this ----
I don't think Jesus was speaking to unbelievers ----I think He was speaking to Galilean Jews and Jews in general as they had a measure of the right Faith to believe that Jesus could do signs and wonders but their faith was little ----like Thomas who had to see to Believe ----

The Royal Official didn't believe Jesus could just send His Word and Heal his son from afar--- so he travelled from Capernaum to Cana to get to Jesus to go to his son personally -----when Jesus could have done it in Capernaum for the Royal Official ------

This annoyed Jesus and so He speaks to all the Jews there ----stating

"Unless you people see miraculous signs and wonders," Jesus told him, "you will never believe."
 
Jesus definitely seems annoyed here. But I wonder if John is emphasizing this aspect of the story because he, too, feels annoyed.

John is convinced already that Jesus is the divine son of God. Perhaps it's frustrating to feel the need to convince others of this fact.

John uses both the miraculous signs and the I AM statements to educate us about Jesus and his nature.

I am intrigued about his selection of six particular signs. Why did expect them to be so convincing?

There is the water into wine, three miraculous healings, the feeding of the 5000 and the raising of Lazarus from the dead.

With the exception of turning the water into wine at Cana, there are similar stories in the other gospels. Not identical but similar.

The feeding of the 5000 is the closest parallel to the synoptics. This story is covered in all 4 gospels.

Why did John make this particular selection of stories?
 
One must be loyal to what you believe ... no matter what --- Donald What's-his-name!

I read of an incident where an evangelist announced walking on water at a given time and place. A great crowd gathered in faith; when asked if they believed, the answer was positive so no need to continue with that operation ... sometimes a mire a clae ... or clae torus? Fecund for a giggle ... thus the diversion ... you are not allowed to laugh in the presence of experts, or authority ... they could be offended for rationale unknown!

Ponder that as if it came from a league of peculiar stacked gnomes ... eruptions in the garden? If there's life there will be odd noises ... chatter! The character of the great mutter Eire ... some complaint about a deposit? Natural exchanges ... happens with fish too ... ﻝ ... Arabic Lamb in isolated form ... no bate attached ... Skye Hook for when hung up on the light ... leads to lamp lighters ... casting shades!
 
Last edited:
paradox3 said:
Why did expect them to be so convincing?
Click to expand...
They themselves found them to be convincing? I find people who are highly certain in their beliefs tend to assume that what they find convincing will be convincing to everyone. Which just isn't so as we see time and again on threads here as someone argues that this or that "convincing" anecdotal evidence should convince all of us. Conspiracy theorists are bad for this, too, not just religious people.
 
Mendalla said:
They themselves found them to be convincing? I find people who are highly certain in their beliefs tend to assume that what they find convincing will be convincing to everyone. Which just isn't so as we see time and again on threads here as someone argues that this or that "convincing" anecdotal evidence should convince all of us. Conspiracy theorists are bad for this, too, not just religious people.
Click to expand...
Why these particular six stories then? Why did John pick them over others he could have chosen just as easily? If these signs are especially convincing, I wonder why.
 
Mendalla said:
They themselves found them to be convincing? I find people who are highly certain in their beliefs tend to assume that what they find convincing will be convincing to everyone. Which just isn't so as we see time and again on threads here as someone argues that this or that "convincing" anecdotal evidence should convince all of us. Conspiracy theorists are bad for this, too, not just religious people.
Click to expand...


Yet some state anything we come up with is theory because of the obliteration by excessive lies laid out by political protocol ... one lie needing a countering myth! Few as discern ... thus the divining! Evidently often denied ... as evidence is tossed ... thus the nemesis ... it does come down for overturning! The vision from all sides ... when exposed up there ...

If bear in the woods or rye in the field stay down ... watch from out there ... animism!
 
paradox3 said:
Why these particular six stories then? Why did John pick them over others he could have chosen just as easily? If these signs are especially convincing, I wonder why.
Click to expand...
Maybe we can't know. What is convincing to one person is not to another. I don't find the current story from John 4 especially convincing, as I already indicated. In the end, it is just an anecdotal account of a healing. I think that in the modern period, a lot of people find it convincing because it is Jesus rather being convinced about Jesus because of it. If it was Brian of Cana, we would probably shrug it off as the rather slight story that it is.
 
paradox3 said:
Why these particular six stories then? Why did John pick them over others he could have chosen just as easily? If these signs are especially convincing, I wonder why.
Click to expand...

I think God knew what signs and wonders to get John to write about that would have an impact on people who would eventually read the Scriptures in the New Testament -----God gave us an imagination and we can picture these signs and wonders in our minds ----so it is like we can see them from the pictures in our minds

It is mind blowing to read that Jesus feeds 5 thousand with a 2 piece fist dinner and still have buckets left over -----to read that God could make water come out of a rock ----could clam the water ---walk on water ----change Water into Wine -all these are pretty powerful things to grasp in our worldly intellect ----

It has to impact us in some way -----today ----I would think
 
I don't find myself convinced of anything with these signs. Other than being convinced that John appreciated them a great deal.

How complelling do we find them? How interesting or intriguing? That's another question.

I am the most drawn to the first miracle which took place at the wedding at Cana. I have already hosted a BPoTW on this very story.

Maybe because it is first and unique. Maybe it's the Johnny Cash song or all of the symbolism in the text. Not sure but it is becoming one of my favorite gospel stories.
 
@unsafe
John is also a very descriptive writer!

I agree with being able to picture the scenes quite easily in my mind.
 
As I read the last few posts here, one question that comes to my mind is, 'If I weren't already a Christian, would this passage help convince me to become one?' I'm not so sure they would. I get the impression that John's gospel was written for an 'inside' group, people who were already convinced, as sort of a confirmation guide to articulate what they already believed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top