Please carefully note that the letters/epistles of the Inner Circle (Peter, James and John) are deliberately placed ahead of Paul's own letters/epistles because they were regarded as possessing a higher authority. Why? Because they knew the mortal Messiah, Paul did not. They were taught by the mortal Messiah viva voce - by word of mouth using their ears, and by observation using their eyes and sensing with their spirits. Paul was not. What Paul obtained was by direct revelation and by thinking things through based on his extensive knowledge of the Tanakh (Old Testament). Moreover, he was trained by the Ruach (Spirit) to be an apostle solely, it would seem, for the benefit of the Gentiles unschooled in the Torah. The Roman Church, which was a Gentile institution, then reshuffled the order of the New Testament books because it wished to assign a new, different authority to Paul whose message was to the gentiles, something Paul would have been appalled by, for he always had the humility to regard himself as "the least [in rank] of the [12] apostles" (1 Cor.15:9) because of his shameful rôle as a former persecutor of believers. Inevitably, if the shorter epistles of Peter, James and John are strung on to the end of Paul's writings, then simply by their positioning they will come to be regarded as 'lesser' when in fact they had been deliberately demoted. You only have to recall that Martin Luther wanted to get rid of James' 'Straw Epistle' (as he contemptuously called it), 2 Peter and even the Book of Revelation. Do you see something wrong here - a flaw in Luther's discernment?

Now you may wonder why James, who was #2 in the Inner Circle, appears before Peter and John in the Aramaic ordering. I believe that was because of the high respect accorded him by the Aramaic-speaking Messianic Community as the half-brother of Yah'shua (Jesus). So in the Aramaic tradition, James' epistle is set right after Acts. Thus to know what the mystical, esoteric tradition of the early Messianic Community (Church) was we are compelled to turn to Peter, James and John, but mostly to John who was the final apostolic witness, a reason his Book of Revelation appears as the last book of the New Testament as a kind of final 'seal'. Matthew, Mark and Luke knew nothing of many of Yah'shua's (Jesus') deeper teachings. So neither of the two arrangements are chronological. If they had been, 3 John would have appeared at the very end as the last book of the Bible.

Let's return to the main theme of Part 2 of this series and make tracks for the little village Cana in Galilee and a mysterious wedding. Here, in the first account of Yah'shua's (Jesus') public ministry, we shall find the most important clues to the whole Johannine tradition. It's an absolute spiritual treasure trove, a veritable vein of gold ore that I have been mining more or less continually for decades. And it never seems to run out. It is, moreover, a very strangely worded account and leaves many unanswered questions. To begin with, this is not a Western wedding which is usually all over in a day. Israelite weddings last a whole week during which time the guests had to be 'wined and dined'. The wedding feast was therefore very important indeed. To fail to show proper hospitality was regarded as a serious social offense so when the wine ran out this was more than a minor social embarrassment. The host family had an obligation to provide a feast of the required standard irrespective of how poor they were. Because the range of beverages was limited, the people mostly drank either wine or water.

When the wine ran out Mary, the mother of Yah'shua (Jesus) who was the hostess, was in a panic, and turned to her son for help. Then the miracle followed, which for John was one of the many 'signs' of, or 'clues' to, Yah'shua's (Jesus') messiahship and deity because he was always more interested in the significance of actions or the 'bigger picture' than he was in the actions themselves because the actions revealed his Master's glory (Jn.4:54; 6:14; 9:16; 11:47; 1:14, cp. Is.35:1-2; Joel 3:18; Amos 9:13). In other words, as one expert on John's Gospel, C.K.Barrett wrote, "the deeds and words of Jesus (Yah'shua) are the deeds and words of God (Elohim); [and] if this be not true the book [of John] is blasphemous" [2]. Quite so, and this is important to remember, something that those messianics - and Arians like the Jehovah's Witnesses - who deny the deity of Messiah need to take note of. For John the external actions are merely pointers to the real reason the miracle was done, to prepare the world for the amazing truth that Yah'shua (Jesus) was Elohim-in-the-flesh...God incarnate, something the Judahites (Jews) of that time were expecting of their anticipated Messiah as the paraphrase, commentary or targum of Isaiah demonstrates conclusively. Only later, after they had rejected Yah'shua (Jesus), did they insist either that the Messiah was a mere man or collective Israel itself, i.e. they themselves! In addition to the miracles themselves, the text is peppered with esoteric (inner) clues as to what John is hinting at at ever deeper levels of truth...for those with the eyes to see and with the keeness to know more of the ways of Elohim (God). We're going to take a look at them one by one.

The marriage at Cana is not, strictly speaking, a public event, but semi-public (Jn.2:9) even though it quite possibly involved the whole of the little village of Cana and people from neighbouring settlements. It is a wedding to which only selected guests are invited to witness a consecration. In it Yah'shua (Jesus) not only gave the first of His signs but also "manifested His glory" (Jn.2:11, NASB). As the first of His known miracles it must therefore be directly compared with the last of His miracles because of the chiastic way esoteric or inner truths are arranged in Hebrew story-telling. The last great miracle before His arrest was the raising of Lazarus and as we read that, we are supposed to reflect back on the first miracle that took place at Cana and to look forward to Yah'shua's (Jesus') own raising to which both events were pointing and anticipating. On the primary level, this is all about the physical resurrection of the dead.

Here, then, are juxtaposed the two 'pillars' of His ministry, the alef and taw, or alpha and omega, the Beginning and End, the 'A' and the 'Z' of His works, which are intended to illuminate one another, works that took place, respectively, at Cana and Bethany-beyond-the-Jordan. There is therefore supposed to be a direct link between marriage (Cana) (which transforms the two being joined together like plain water being turned to rich wine) and the resurrection which saw the raising of Lazarus from the dead (Bethany). This is deliberate juxtapositioning. Different things are being linked together. New relationships are being shown us. Marriage and resurrection are connected but you'll not see this relationship if you only look at Scripture superficially. Ultimately they are pointing to both eternal marriage and the Mystical Marriage of Messiah that describes the saved and glorified as an allegorical Bride of Christ. What is revealed in the Book of Revelation, John's last or Omega testimony, is being anticipated in his Gospel, his first or Alpha testimony, the Gospel of John. The Gospel starts with a marriage and the Book of Revelation ends with a marriage.

One could write a book on this one incident alone and maybe one day, if I live long enough, I will, Yahweh permitting. It is jam-packed with hidden spiritual truths. And we find yet another connection with Mark for in the latter's Gospel, Yah'shua (Jesus) refers to Himself as the Bridegroom (Mk.2:18-22), the wine representing (on one level) the new relationship between Elohim (God) and man, which Yah'shua (Jesus) has brought about - what in John 1:17 is called "grace and emet (truth)". But that is not all. Here is a locus where hundreds of potent symbols flow together in a cascade of divine revelation. The Marriage at Cana is also a shadow of the Last Supper and the wine which is Yah'shua's (Jesus') own pure blood, hinting at hidden processes concealed within the symbolism on a number of different levels.

The six stone jars of John 2:6 should be compared with the six days in which Lazarus spent alone with Yah'shua (Jesus) in the secret Gospel of Mark. But what were these stone jars? They weren't used for storing water for drinking. No, they were used for the Mosaic rites of purification such as foot washing. Now that's an interesting fact which ought not to be missed, because when Yah'shua (Jesus) washed His followers' feet, as recorded in John 13, He taught Peter that the feet represented the whole body (v.10) - thus there was no need for Him to wash their hands and head as Peter had excitedly asked Him to do (v.9)! Thus the wine which Yah'shua (Jesus) gives in place of the water of purification at a wedding is supposed to represent eternal marriage which is the new order of grace and emet (truth), the gift of everlasting chayim (life) - our allegorical marriage to Christ (the whole Body of true believers) and our own personal marriages to our spouses. Like water to wine, marriage in mortality is transformed supernaturally into marriage for eternity.

We now have a pot of jumbled up jigsaw pieces with one or two fitting together. Let us keep filling that pot or we shall end up with only half the puzzle. Once two pieces have been fitted together, it becomes progressively easier to fit all the rest, as any jigsaw-puzzler will tell you. This is how progressive revelation happens too. This is how we learn through prayerful study and contemplation. It's also how detective work is done. You begin with a single fact or truth and more truth or facts accrete round the first one. This miracle took place on the "third day" of Yah'shua's (Jesus') public ministry, a symbolism you will, I hope, not ignore, since Christ rose on the Third Day after His death by crucifixion. A quick flashback to the beginning of John's Gospel will help, to chapter 1, verse 29:

"Behold, the Lamb of Elohim (God) who taketh away the sin of the world" (Jn.1:29, NASB).

Now let's take a quick look forward and you will remember that Yah'shua (Jesus) arose from the dead on the "third day". The marriage at Cana and the resurrection draw closer together with all the same ingredients - wine (blood of atonement), a miraculous transformation of water to wine (resurrection transformation of the mortal to the immortal), the transformation of the Mosaic Torah (Law) (stone jars of water) to the New Covenant Torah (Law) of Messiah (jars of wine).

With everything pointing to Yah'shua (Jesus), why is it that in the claimed 'Petrine' (Peter) tradition of the Catholic, Protestant and Eastern Orthodox churches [3] it is assumed that the wedding at Cana had nothing directly to do with Yah'shua (Jesus) save, perhaps, as a near relative? The signs point to the eschatological [4] Wedding Feast of the Lamb made possible by the resurrection and yet we are told that the wedding at Cana has nothing directly to do with Yah'shua (Jesus) at all. His presence, they say, is simply coincidental but He uses it to make some symbolic prophetic pointers.

It continues to remain a mystery why the Synoptic Gospel writers make no mention of the wedding at Cana especially since "His talmidim (disciples) had been invited to the wedding" (Jn.2:2, NRSV). Who exactly they were we don't know. But by this time we know that Simon Peter, Andrew, Philip and Nathanael were already followers (Jn.1:35ff.) and even if none of these actually wrote a Gospel they were in close contact with those who did. So the claim by some that not one of the apostles witnessed this wedding does not hold water, nor that it was a private affair attended by only a few people as once I believed. Cana was a neighbouring village to Nazareth (they were about 7 miles from each other) so there must have been close ties between the two. For John to have been able to write in such detail, especially gaining access 'behind the scenes', would have required the acquaintance of Mary the mother of Yah'shua (Jesus). And since John was the official custodian of Yah'shua's (Jesus') mother, appointed such while Messiah hung on the cross (Jn.19:27), then the source of the material becomes clearer. Mary lived in John's household in Ephesus where she is believed by many to have died, though there is a second tradition too we'll speak of later. John could have obtained a complete account of what happened in that wedding from Mary.

Our memory of events can sometimes be lacking especially if suffient time has passed and we have been busy as the disciples were during the crammed ministry days of their walk with Christ for three intense years. The Gospel of John was written as late as 100 A.D., long after the Synoptists (Matthew, Mark & Luke) had written theirs. There were clearly things he knew that were held back - and what he did share in his Gospel was, like the best wine, held back until last too (cp. Jn.2:10). I myself have similar precious things that I have never shared because they are reserved for later, some of which I am starting to share in my latter days. John himself figures as the fourth Evangelist too - chronologically the last, but it is the best - the others, important though they are, are as water by comparison, a diluted, simpler form of the Davar Chayim (Word of Life) for the masses, prepared for audiences only able, or willing, to receive so much. Many of Christ's early followers melted away when greater demands were placed on their discipleship.

Like Sherlock Holmes carefully examining clues with his magnifying glass, we must now back-peddal to the 'sandwich' material from John 1:18-51 where we find reference to a certain "Nathanael", the sceptical yet scrupulously honest Israelite with "no guile", deceit or falsehood in him (Jn.1:47, KJV), who confessed the Messiahship of Yah'shua (Jesus) (vv.45-51). Do you remember him? Why has John chosen to mention this man? Why is he there at that point in John's recounting of his Gospel? The Synoptists are silent about him. Why? Because there were probably thousands of such incidences with a variety of people and Nathanael simply got overlooked. As a preacher I face the problem of choosing between thousands of potential examples to illustrate points. But it is not hard to understand why John has included him in this story. Why? Because the name "Nathanael" literally means "gift of El (God)" and John is talking about Yahweh's supernatural gifts to mankind, specifically, the gift of Himself as an incarnated human being. What an amazing gift! To be able to talk to Elohim (God) face-to-face. To be able to know what the Heavenly Father is like:

"Philip (the apostle) said, 'Master, show us the Father and that will be enough for us.' Yah'shua (Jesus) answered: 'Don't you know Me, Philip, even after I have been among you such a long time? Anyone who has seen Me has seen the Father. How can you say, 'Show us the Father'? Don't you believe that I am in the Father, and that the Father is in Me?'" (John 14:8-10, NIV).

Furthermore, Cana was Nathanael's home village so he makes an obvious candidate for John's illustrative purposes. He is almost certainly at the wedding if for no other reason that the whole of the village of Cana, plus others from neighbouring villages, must have been. This was an intimate, extended family affair. And those of you will know who come from, or have lived in, villages there is usually extensive inter-marriage of villagers from the same rural location. And as Nazareth was but 7 miles away, it could also explain why Mary was there as some sort of relative, and why an invitation had been extended to Yah'shua's (Jesus') talmidim (disciples). True, it's an assumption based on a set of assumptions but it's pretty reasonable. I think Sherlock Holmes would have nodded in agreement.

But Cana was also the site of a second miracle a little later when Yah'shua (Jesus) raised a nobleman's son from the dead (Jn.4:46-54). John calls this thaumaturgy [4] a "second sign" (v.54). By this time and in this place Yah'shua's (Jesus') reputation as a miracle-worker is well and truly established. Is this not confirmation that we are to see in the "first sign" a pointing-forward to the resurrection of Christ and of all mankind? For the Nobleman respresents, on one level, our Heavenly Father, Yahweh, who raises His Son Yah'shua (Jesus) from the dead. But what of the word "Cana" itself?

Our English spelling 'Cana' is Greek. The ruins of this place are found in a village today called Kafr Kanna even though there is a rival archaelogical site which in Arabic is called Kana-el-jelil. Could there be a relationship between "Cana" and the Hebrew kenath meaning a "companion"? If so, who or what is this "companion"? And are there any other clues to indicate that a "companion" has anything to do with this miracle? And what might a "gift of El (God)" (Nathanael) have to do with it? For John nothing is coincidental. If someone or something is 'there' in a narrative that is essentially prophetic overall, then the details are undoubtedly prophetic too, and John is good at assembling them and crafting a prophetic narrative out of them. Is it any wonder Yahweh used him to write the Book of Revelation which has more symbols packed into it than any other book in the Bible?

On the obvious level, marriage is not only a gift of Elohim (God) to mankind beginning with Adam but has to do with companionship. We need companionship. We don't do well alone. Alone we tend to lose a sound persepective on reality. We were created for companionship. Do a New Testament word search on 'companion', 'companions' and 'companionship' and you'll find a good 20 references. On the level of the Messianic Community (Church) or Body, this too is about a "companionship" of believers who are allegorically married to Messiah in a plural, communal or polygamous relationship. We, who are the saved and become His friends through consistent obedience, are the companions of Messiah by His blood purchase of us at Calvary that is symbolically represented by wine. However, of what are we the allegory? Of what are we the type? What is the literal marriage? An anonymous wedding at a little village called Cana? Or something more intimately connected to Christ and us to which the marriage at Cana is pointing?

First, some more data is needed as it's too soon to draw further conclusions. The Greek word for "waiters" or "servants" in John 2:5,9 is diakonoi which literally translates to "Deacons" in English. It is the Deacons (Shammashim in Hebrew) who traditionally distribute the Master's (Lord's) Supper after it has been consecrated by the Eldership. The Deacons are under the authority of a Head Deacon paralleled by the Head Servant or Waiter in the Cana account whose responsibility is to taste the wine before its serving to the guests to make sure it is good. The Deaconate is a servant ministry. Yah'shua (Jesus) came as a servant to us and may rightly be described as the Arch-Deacon. As servants mature, they become friends. And as friends mature they become, allegorically-speaking, marriage companions, which is the ultimate form of intimacy. More puzzle pieces have been added to the pot and some are fitting together nicely.

And now a vital key. Notice that there are TWO TYPES OF WINE in this story, not one. There is natural or ordinary wine (which runs out) and there is supernatural wine (which doesn't) and the 'best' wine is kept until last, until the very end of the week of celebrations. This is hinting at there being two Master's Suppers - one which is natural and symbolic, which the Protestant branch of the Messianic Community (Church) has been using for centuries, and the other a last days Master's Supper in which the wine is created supernaturally from water, as it were. For those of you familiar with Messianic Evangelical teaching on this end-time Master's Supper which turns the blood of the person who drinks it into the blood of Messiah and the Father and which confers immunity to disease, the administration of it is by the same method - or some method like it - as in Cana. He who has authority blesses water and it is turned supernaturally into wine. This was the Master's Supper administered by John at Ephesus. Again, I will have much more to say about this at a later time when it is needed, as I wish only to prepare you mentally for what is to come lest you be taken by surprise and overtaken by either unbelief or are tempted to invent fables as the Catholics have done in claiming their priests are able to change wine into the literal blood of Christ like a conjurer even though this can be neither seen nor tasted and therefore never verified.

I wish to state for the record that I am not advocating a Catholic Transsubstantiation doctrine, nor ever will. We have always held to the Lutheran Consubstantiation teaching for the symbolic Master's Supper. For those who don't know what this is, it is the belief that the substance of the bread and wine coexists with the body and blood of Christ in the Eucharist. We have talked a little about this in recent times, back in 2019, when I spoke at length about the illusive Agapé Meal or 'Love Feast' as the Sukkot Meal-to-come, an aspect of the Marriage Supper of the Lamb. If you want to research this more fully, you can read the whole series called Ancient Connections when I first introduced you to the Eastern Orthodox concept of the Phronema. That's all we have time to talk on this subject matter today as there are more puzzle pieces yet we need to uncover but I at least wanted to remind you of it so that you can privately follow up on this if you wish.

As I said earlier, the water in the six stone jars was used traditionally for ritual washing - the washing of the feet of dusty travellers, and of hands before meals - and for other ritual purposes. Note that six is the number of imperfection in scripture - ritual washing - and that includes water baptism - which cannot cleanse your soul and can only ever be a symbolic representation of what the Ruach haQodesh (Holy Spirit) does invisibly and supernaturally (cp. Heb.7:19) yet it produces outward signs in terms of changed behaviour and character. Why "stone" jars? Why has John gone to the trouble to point out what they were made of? Think back on the new name Yah'shua (Jesus) gave to Simon at Caeraera Philippi, renaming him 'Kefa' or 'Cepha' in Aramaic (which means 'a firm foundation' - in some Bible versions the Latin, 'Cephus' is used). As we saw last week and at the beginning of today's message, the Greek Petros (from which we get the English 'Peter'), means a 'detatched stone' or 'pebble'. Remember this isn't just the name of the first presiding Apostle or Patriarch but simultaneously and prophetically describes a foundational principle of salvation so that we may know who the true believers are and who the nominal or fake ones are. The Johannine connection thus becomes much clearer, for the 6 water-filled stone jars are the vessel or container in which the miraculous transformation from water to wine takes place in which Yah'shua the Messiah (Jesus Christ) is seen to be both Elohim (God) and the human Head Deacon or Chief Servant! For as Mark wrote:

"For even the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give His life as a ransom (atonement) for many" (Mk.10:45, NIV).

There is a cascade of prophetic symbols forming up and combining together here, a kind of prophetic writing for which John is famous. We could spent several days unpacking this further but again we don't have time today. I merely wish to prep you, to give you something to chew on and explore yourself.

I think I have given you enough to chew on for one day - it gets much more meaty and deeper still but that, I think, should wait until next week or you will start suffering from information overload and not be able to process anything more. As it is, I recommend you go over this material several times, make notes, and pick out parts to meditate on and pray over, listening carefully to what Yahweh tells you. In any case you need to do your own research and check up my references, to be convinced that I am speaking truly and to give yourself this opportunity to let everything sink in otherwise next week's material will be harder to fathom. Preparing the Remnant for gathering takes a lot of time because we are slow learners, we tend only to be able to process small chunks of information at a time. We also have many prejudices to ovecome and many lies taught by the churches to be dethroned. It takes courage to follow through with the truth because those who seek and embrace truth are most definitely persecuted. So be wise with what you do, and don't, share. The flesh always wants to take the course of least resistance - to take short cuts. Resist the temptation to be lazy. But this is too big and intricate for that. This really is only for those who have a good foundation in Christ because you need that to be able to properly process everything and not go and minunderstand and - Yah forbid - misrepresent it. This is why I have not brought all of this into the public gaze until now.

I hope in sharing this with you today that you will give all the glory to Yah'shua (Jesus) and come to appreciate Him and what he has done for us more and more. So until next week, when we look at the third part of Part 2, may the grace of our Master Yah'shua the Messiah (Jesus Christ) go with you and Yahweh bless you. Amen.

Endnotes

[1] I have not attached Hebrews to the Pauline corpus even though I believe him to have been the author of that epistle as there is not a consensus. Others believe a disciple of Paul wrote this letter so I feel justified in putting this in the 11th position for now
[2] C.K.Barrett, The Gospel According to St.John: An Introduction with Commentary and Notes on the Greek (SPCK, London: 1956), p.156
[3] Remember the special status that the Roman Church assigns to Peter to jusify its claim to legal authority as the 'true Church'. As a result the Johannine tradition gets further marginalised and de-emphasised.
[4] Concerning the doctrine of death, judgment, heaven and hell
[5] A wonder or miracle ordinarily not possible by natural human means

This page was created on 6 April 2000 Last updated on 30 April 2024

Copyright © 1987-2024 NCAY - All Rights Reserved