The Significance of Jesus’ First Sign-Miracle in John

By Stephen S. Kim

[Stephen S. Kim is Professor of Bible, Multnomah Biblical Seminary, Portland, Oregon.]

One unique feature of the Fourth Gospel is the Evangelist’s purposeful and strategic use of the word σημεῖον. In fact it is the key word in the author’s purpose statement: “Jesus did many other miraculous signs [σημεῖα] in the presence of his disciples, which are not recorded in this book. But these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name” (John 20:30-31).[1] In other words the sign-miracles (σημεῖα) demonstrate the Evangelist’s thesis that Jesus is the promised Messiah of the Old Testament Scriptures and the divine Son of God.[2] Riga correctly describes the significance of this word. “Perhaps no single word can give such a profound insight into the whole theology of the Fourth Gospel as the word σημεῖον.”[3] Rainey says σημεῖα is the key to interpreting the whole book.[4]

The study of this significant word indicates that the sign-miracles in the Fourth Gospel all point to a deeper meaning beyond the miracle itself.[5] The word σημεῖον has three meanings: (a) a sign or distinguishing mark by which something is known; (b) a sign consisting of a wonder or miracle, an event that is contrary to the usual course of nature, either of divine or demonic nature; (c) a sign or portent of the last days.[6] The word σημεῖον seems to be used in the Fourth Gospel to convey the idea of demonstrating significant truths through a miracle, as a sample of what is to take place in the future,[7] and many studies have given attention to this significant word.[8]

A major clue to the interpretation of the Fourth Gospel, or any other book for that matter, is its structure.[9] Fortunately in the Gospel of John the book’s structure can be viewed in light of the Evangelist’s purpose statement in 20:30-31. According to these verses, although Jesus performed many other miracles during His earthly ministry among His disciples, these particular miracles are recorded by the Evangelist for a definite purpose, namely, to present Jesus as the promised Messiah of the Old Testament Scriptures and the divine Son of God. John’s aim is that his readers might believe, thereby partaking in the divine life, that is, eternal life. And these sign-miracles of Jesus are all recorded in the “Book of Signs” (chaps. 2-12),[10] which describes Jesus’ public ministry.[11]

The first two sign-miracles are included in the first chapters of the Gospel, which are often called the “Cana Cycle” (chaps. 2-4),[12] while the remaining sign-miracles are recorded in the following section commonly known as the “Festival Cycle.” The first two sign-miracles are generally distinguished from the others because they were both performed in Cana of Galilee, and thus they form a geographical inclusio in the early chapters of the Gospel.[13] These chapters form a literary unit because they are also bounded thematically. These chapters present Jesus as the divine Messiah who offers newness of life to those who believe. As Carson explains, “These three chapters are organized to convey what Paul says in 2 Corinthians 5:17: ‘the old has gone, the new has come!’ “[14] Beasley-Murray calls this section “the revelation of the new order in Jesus.”[15] And as Borchert summarizes, “The geographical settings here are clearly important to the evangelist’s theological intention. Cana becomes the center for both the first and second signs.”[16]

Although the Cana Cycle includes the two sign-miracles (σημεῖα) Jesus performed in Cana of Galilee, namely, changing of water into wine at a wedding (2:1-11) and healing the official’s son (4:43-54), this article focuses only on the first miracle.

Although the Cana Cycle forms a separate literary unit from the opening chapter of the Fourth Gospel, these chapters are linked closely with the themes introduced in the Prologue (1:1-18) and the Testimonium (1:19-51). For instance the theme of Christ’s glory (δόξα), central to Jesus’ miracle of turning water into wine, was first introduced in the Prologue (2:11; cf. 1:14). The Testimonium’s linkage to the following chapter is even more obvious as the second chapter begins with the words “On the third day” (2:1). It seems apparent that Jesus’ promise to the disciples in 1:51 is given its first fulfillment in His miracle of turning water into wine.[17] Furthermore, as the Evangelist’s purpose statement in 20:30-31 explicitly states, the sign-miracles were all designed to reveal the person of Jesus; and the reason behind this revelation is so that people would believe (or keep on believing) in Him.[18] And the concluding verse of the first miracle states that through it Jesus revealed His glory and that His first disciples believed in Him (2:11). Thus Brown is correct in saying that “the first sign had the same purpose that all subsequent signs will have, namely, revelation about the person of Jesus.”[19]

The Setting Of The Miracle

The setting of the story is described in the beginning verses of the passage: “On the third day a wedding took place at Cana of Galilee. Jesus’ mother was there, and Jesus and his disciples had also been invited to the wedding” (vv. 1-2).[20] The miracle narrative begins with a temporal indicator, “On the third day,”[21] which significantly links this miracle with the Johannine “Testimonium” (1:19-51), both chronologically and theologically. Chronologically this miracle occurred on the third day after the four days of testimonies by John the Baptist and the disciples (1:19-28, 29-34, 35-42, 43-51). More specifically the miracle took place on the third day following the exchange between Jesus and Nathanael in the closing verses of chapter 1.[22] Theologically this miracle is the initial fulfillment of the promise made by Jesus to Nathanael and the disciples, namely, that they would see greater revelation of the Son of Man than even the patriarch Jacob’s apocalyptic vision (v. 51). Furthermore this miracle and the subsequent ones are demonstrations of Christ’s messianic identity heralded by John the Baptist and Jesus’ disciples in the Testimonium.

In Cana of Galilee[23] a Jewish wedding and its attendant feast were the occasion for the miracle.[24] A Jewish wedding was a time of great joy and festivity, and it was the culmination of a long process toward marriage. Brown explains the atmosphere of this joyous occasion. “The usual festivities consisted of a procession in which the bridegroom’s friends brought the bride to the groom’s house, and then a wedding supper; seemingly the festivities lasted seven days (Judg 14:12; cf. Tob 8:19; 11:18-19).”[25] Laney adds, “The festivities could last one day or continue on for a week, depending on the resources of the husband.”[26] Presents were given, and the hosts were expected to supply plenty of food and wine for the guests.[27] To run out of wine would have been a major embarrassment to the host family, and Morris notes that this social faux pas could even result in a lawsuit.[28] Thus when the wine did run out, the hosting family became desperate, including Jesus’ mother who suggested that Jesus do something about it (v. 3).[29]

The Sign

The Evangelist set the scene for the miracle with an important description of the stone jars of water: “Nearby stood six stone water jars, the kind used by the Jews for ceremonial washing, each holding from twenty to thirty gallons” (v. 6). The total amount of wine involved in the miracle was between 120 and 180 gallons.[30] This was a miracle of no small measure! Jesus provided wine in “superabundance.”[31] Verse 7 indicates that Jesus instructed the servants to fill the stone jars with water, and the Evangelist noted that they were filled “to the brim.” Jones is correct in pointing out that John wanted to make certain there could be no mistake as to the original contents of these vessels, that there was only water.[32]

The closing verses describe the happenings after the miracle had taken place (vv. 8-10). The transformation of the water into wine is not narrated, but it is assumed. Jesus commanded the servants to take the new wine to the banquet master (v. 8).[33] Although the master of the banquet did not know where the wine had come from (v. 9), he confirmed the authenticity of Jesus’ miracle when he declared to the bridegroom, “Everyone brings out the choice wine first and then the cheaper wine after the guests have had too much to drink; but you have saved the best [καλόν] till now” (v. 10).[34]

The Significance

The point of this miracle is stated in the closing verse: “This, the first of his miraculous signs, Jesus performed in Cana of Galilee. He thus revealed his glory, and his disciples put their faith in him” (v. 11). This verse also discloses the purpose of this first miracle: through it Jesus revealed His glory (δόξα). Essentially the purpose of the first sign-miracle is the same for all the sign-miracles, namely, to reveal the person of Jesus. The Johannine Prologue (1:1-18) further reveals the purpose of Jesus’ words and works in this Gospel. First, Jesus’ glory was revealed so that people may know that He came from the Father (v. 14). Also Jesus came to reveal the Father by manifesting Himself through the flesh (v. 18). Therefore this dual purpose of revealing both His own person and the Father during His earthly ministry is manifested in all of Jesus’ sign-miracles. Schnackenburg is correct in highlighting the Christological emphasis of the first miracle: “The most important for the evangelist is the revelation of Jesus’ glory (v. 11) and any interpretation which departs from this Christological perspective loses sight of the central issue.”[35]

On its most obvious level the first miracle reveals Jesus as the Creator.[36] As the divine Son of God, Jesus shares with the Father one of the most significant works, namely, that of creation. Blum explains how Jesus was involved in the miracle of creation through this act. “The sign points to Jesus as the Word in the flesh, who is the mighty Creator. Each year He turns water into wine in the agricultural and fermentation process. Here He simply did the process immediately.”[37] In other words by the mere command of His word Jesus was able to turn the jars of water into the finest of wines. The Evangelist could have been referring to the opening chapter of Genesis, where God is said to have created the whole universe by the simple command of His word (Gen. 1:1, 3, 6, 9, 14, 20, 24). That Jesus was also involved in the work of creation in the beginning is emphasized first in the Prologue. “Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made” (John 1:3). In defending Jesus’ deity to the church in Colosse, Paul described Jesus as the Creator. “For by him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things were created by him and for him” (Col. 1:16; cf. Heb. 1:1-3). But perhaps a more specific aim of this miracle was to reveal Jesus as the Creator of life, the kind of life that exists only in Him (cf. John 1:4). In short through this miracle John revealed the person of Jesus as the divine Son of God who is also the Creator of life, just as the Father Himself is (5:21).

This miracle reveals yet a deeper Christological truth of Jesus’ person. By recording Jesus’ miracle of turning water into wine at a wedding, John reveals Jesus as the promised Messiah of the Old Testament Scriptures who is capable of ushering in the predicted kingdom. Three symbols in the narrative lead to this conclusion: the wedding, the water, and the wine. First, the setting of the miracle at a Jewish wedding points to the miracle’s messianic message. In the Old Testament, weddings symbolized the messianic kingdom (Isa. 54:1-8; 62:1-5).[38] Jesus used both the wedding and the banquet to portray His coming (Matt. 8:11; 22:1-4; Luke 13:29; 14:15-24). The apostle John also used the wedding as a symbol of messianic fulfillment at Christ’s second advent (Rev. 19:9). Thus Toussaint is correct when he observes, “The presence of the Lord at these marriage festivities at Cana graphically pictures the coming of the kingdom.”[39]

Second, the water Jesus used in this miracle obviously contrasts to the wine. Jesus could have supplied the wine by creating it out of nothing. But He chose to perform the miracle by using water from which to create the wine. Also water is a significant motif that runs throughout the entire Fourth Gospel. Lightfoot perceptively observes that “the theme of water runs like a silver thread through the early chapters of this Gospel.”[40] Culpepper also notes, “The image of water appears surprisingly frequently and with the most varied associations of any of John’s symbols.”[41] Koester adds, “Images of water, like those of light and darkness, create another rich and variegated motif in the Fourth Gospel.”[42]

Although the Evangelist used water as a symbol in various ways throughout his Gospel, it seems that in this miracle water stands in contrast to the wine Jesus provided. Dodd suggests that water, “standing for the lower life, is contrasted with wine, standing for the higher.”[43] In other words water in this miracle stands to represent physical human life without Christ devoid of any true hope and joy. In that case wine represents the newness of life, the kind of life that is found in Christ.

However, it would also be appropriate to consider the symbol of water in the context of the Jewish religious institutions. In describing the water jars Jesus used for the miracle, John added “the kind used by the Jews for ceremonial washing” (v. 6). “This scene fits the recurring theme of the fulfillment of Jewish expectations and the replacement of Jewish festivals and institutions.”[44] Beasley-Murray concurs with this. “There is an implicit contrast between water used for Jewish purificatory rites and wine given by Jesus; the former is characteristic of the old order, the latter of the new.”[45] While agreeing with this, Jones takes the symbolism a step further and suggests that water itself represents something new.

What Jesus brings to the wedding feast increases the joy of the celebration and offers far more than ritual purification. In addition to that, at Cana water has a more complete symbolic function. It not only bears witness to another reality but also embodies something about that reality. As water served to purify the celebrants under the Jewish dispensation and to enable them to partake in the wedding feast, so the water from the vessels used in purification rites, when turned to wine by Jesus, enables the disciples to grasp more fully his identity. The one who will baptize with the Holy Spirit (1:33) begins his ministry by using water to bring his disciples to faith.[46]

Besides water being linked with the issue of purification, it also demonstrates the change to which it points. As Jones clarifies, “Water both represents the new beginning Jesus brings and manifests that beginning in and of itself.”[47] This truth brings to mind the declaration in the Prologue, “For the law was given through Moses; grace and truth came through Jesus Christ” (1:17).

Third, the wine that Jesus provided at the wedding symbolizes the messianic kingdom. Throughout the Old Testament the messianic kingdom is described in terms of wine.[48] For instance in Isaiah 25:6 the prophet joins the figures of a banquet and wine together to illustrate the joys of the kingdom. “On this mountain the Lord Almighty will prepare a feast of rich food for all peoples, a banquet of aged wine—the best of meats and finest of wines.” In Isaiah 27:2-6 the prophet described Israel as God’s fruitful vineyard in the eschatological kingdom. An abundance of wine is often used in the Old Testament to symbolize the blessings in the promised kingdom (Gen. 49:11-12; Jer. 31:12; Hos. 2:22; 14:7; Joel 2:19, 24; 3:18; Amos 9:13-14; Zech. 9:15-17; 10:7).[49] Joel declared expectantly, “In that day the mountains will drip new wine, and the hills will flow with milk; all the ravines of Judah will run with water” (Joel 3:18). The “new wine” that flows from the Lord’s mountain symbolizes the abundance of blessings in the millennial kingdom. Amos’s description of the “new wine” in the kingdom anticipates the fulfillment of the Davidic Covenant (2 Sam. 7:8-16; cf. 1 Chron. 17:7-14; Ps. 89:19-29) and the restoration of God’s people in the promised land (Amos 9:13-14).

With the rich symbol of wine that represents the abundance of joy in the messianic kingdom, it is not difficult to see the significance of Mary’s statement to Jesus, “They have no more wine” (John 2:3). As Toussaint notes, “The lapse of wine was a picture of the obsolescence of Judaism. The old wine had run out and Christ the Messiah was here to bring the new. . . . The miracle shows the old order had run its course; now was the time for a new one.”[50] What Judaism could not provide Jesus supplied in exceeding abundance! He demonstrated this by creating between 120 and 180 gallons of wine, which was far more than necessary for a Jewish wedding in Galilee.

To summarize, Jesus’ first miracle, turning water into wine at the wedding in Cana, authenticated Him as the promised Messiah of the Old Testament Scriptures and the divine Son of God. By providing an abundance of wine at a Jewish wedding feast, Jesus was demonstrating that as the Messiah He is capable of ushering in the promised eschatological kingdom. The miracle gave the disciples a “preview” of the abundant blessings that would be theirs in the messianic kingdom. As Laney concludes, “The turning of water to wine was an indication that the Messiah was present and the kingdom was imminent. The miracle gave the wedding guests a brief foretaste of the abundance of joy that would be theirs in Messiah’s kingdom.”[51] This miracle is an initial fulfillment of Jesus’ promise to the disciples in the closing verses of chapter 1 (vv. 50-51), that they would witness great revelation concerning the messianic identity of Jesus. The messianic titles heralded by John the Baptist and the disciples in the Testimonium (1:19-51) were being demonstrated through the miracle in 2:1-11. All seven miracles in the Gospel of John demonstrated that Jesus is the promised Messiah and the divine Son of God. Thus this miracle of Jesus stands as the representative sign for the rest of them. “The account of the water-become-wine is the key to the Johannine signs just as much as it is the first of Jesus’ miracles.”[52]

It is important to keep in mind, however, that this miracle of Jesus turning water into wine has far broader significance than the future fulfillment of the Messiah in His kingdom. In fact the focus of Jesus’ sign-miracles in the Fourth Gospel is primarily the person of Jesus as the Christ, the divine Son of God. Although John presented Jesus as the promised Messiah of the Old Testament who will one day fulfill the messianic promises in the millennial kingdom, his practical aim in demonstrating Jesus’ person was that his readers would believe (or continue to believe) in Him, and thereby partake of eternal life here and now. “Eternal life is not merely future. It begins now in receiving in this life the life that is in Christ.”[53] Thus on a practical level the miracle of Jesus turning water into wine demonstrates that as the Messiah He offers a new life filled with abundant joy, that is, eternal life.

The passage immediately following the first sign-miracle—Jesus’ cleansing of the Jerusalem temple (2:11-22)—may serve the important literary and theological function of confirming the claims of the first miracle (2:1-11). The two events occurred in different geographical settings; the wine miracle was in Galilee and the temple cleansing in Jerusalem. Nevertheless they seem to be linked literarily through their common theme. Polhill explains, “At first glance, the cleansing of the Temple seems wholly unrelated to the miracle which precedes it. In actuality, there is a close relationship. The cleansing provides a context for understanding the miracle at Cana.”[54] “The account of Jesus’ actions in the Jerusalem temple forms the companion piece to the miracle at Cana.”[55] “The cleansing of the temple by Jesus fits in with motifs already seen at Cana—replacement of Jewish institutions, and an abundance of wine heralding the messianic times.”[56]

Cleansing the temple in Jerusalem at the beginning of His ministry was Jesus’ first public presentation to Israel. Whereas the wine miracle in Cana was a “semi-private” demonstration of Jesus’ messianic identity to His disciples, the cleansing of the temple was a public declaration to Israel and its religious leaders. In doing this Jesus presented Himself to the nation as the Messiah. At the coming of the Messiah in His eschatological kingdom He is expected to begin His ministry in the temple to purify the nation and its priesthood (Mal. 3:1-3).[57] On cleansing the temple Jesus’ expression “my Father’s house” was a self-claim to His messiahship (Ps. 69:9). When Jesus cleansed the temple and said to the merchants, “Get these out of here! How dare you turn my Father’s house into a market place!” (John 2:16), Jesus was possibly alluding to Zechariah’s vision in which he stated that there will be no merchants in the house of the Lord (Zech. 14:20-21).[58] In cleansing the temple Jesus was demonstrating His messianic authority over His Father’s house. Thus these two pericopes of the wine miracle and the temple cleansing both confirm the messianic identity of Jesus that was heralded by John the Baptist and the disciples in the Testimonium in 1:19-51.

In recording this significant cleansing of the temple, coupled with the first sign-miracle of turning water into wine, the Evangelist may have also had in mind the universal emphasis of Jesus’ messiahship. Besides being Israel’s promised Messiah, Jesus will also reign over the Gentiles who will embrace and worship Him.[59] Zechariah wrote concerning the future messianic kingdom, “Then survivors from all the nations that have attacked Jerusalem will go up year after year to worship the King, the Lord Almighty, and to celebrate the Feast of Tabernacles” (14:16). Isaiah also predicted such a glorious day when the Gentiles will join Israel in worshipping the Lord. “And foreigners who bind themselves to the Lord to serve him, and to love the name of the Lord, and to worship him, all who keep the Sabbath without desecrating it and who hold fast to my covenant—these I will bring to my holy mountain and give them joy in my house of prayer. Their burnt offerings and sacrifices will be accepted on my altar; for my house will be called a house of prayer for all nations. The Sovereign Lord declares—he who gathers the exiles of Israel: ‘I will gather still others to them besides those already gathered’ “(Isa. 56:6-8). The original dwelling places that were filled with the glory of God, the tabernacle and the Solomonic temple, were testimonies to the nations regarding the glory of the one true God and were invitations to the foreigners to come join Israel in worshipping Yahweh (Exod. 40; 1 Kings 8).

Conclusion

John’s purpose statement in John 20:30-31 explicitly states that his selected sign-miracles (σημεῖα) were intended to reveal Jesus as the promised Messiah and the unique Son of God, and to affirm that those who believe in Him are promised eternal life. Thus all seven sign-miracles in the Gospel of John reveal Jesus as the divine Messiah who grants life to those who believe. But this theme of Jesus as the life-giving Messiah is particularly central in the first four chapters of the Gospel, particularly in the two sign-miracles recorded in the section commonly referred to as the Cana Cycle (chaps. 2-4). The first sign-miracle (2:1-11), as the “beginning of signs” (ἀρχὴ τῶν σημείων), stands as the representative sign for the other miracles that follow. Jesus’ turning water into wine at the wedding in Cana authenticated Him as the promised Messiah and the divine Son of God. And the Evangelist stated that Jesus revealed His glory (δόξα) through this miracle, a fact that would be true of all His miracles.

Notes

1. Unless indicated otherwise, all Scripture references in this article are from the New International Version.
2. Merrill C. Tenney, “Topics from the Gospel of John, Part II: The Meaning of the Signs,” Bibliotheca Sacra 132 (April–June 1975): 145.
3. Peter Riga, “Signs of Glory: The Use of Σημεῖον in St. John’s Gospel,” Interpretation 17 (1963): 402. For a detailed discussion of the etymological and theological meaning of the word σημεῖα, especially in the Fourth Gospel, see chapter 2 of Stephen S. Kim, “The Relationship of the Seven Sign-Miracles of Jesus in the Fourth Gospel to the Old Testament” (Ph.D. diss., Dallas Theological Seminary, 2001), 28-84.
4. Frankie Earl Rainey Jr., “Σημεῖον in the Fourth Gospel: A Clue to the Interpretation of the Gospel” (Th.D. diss., Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary, 1968).
5. Victor R. Gordon, “Sign,” in International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, rev. ed., ed. Geoffrey W. Bromiley, vol. 4 (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1988): 505-6.
6. Walter Bauer, William F. Arndt, and F. Wilbur Gingrich, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, 3rd ed., rev. and ed. Frederick W. Danker (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000), 920-21.
7. C. K. Barrett emphasizes the eschatological aspect of the sign-miracles. “The σημείον thus becomes a special part of the prophetic activity; no mere illustration, but a symbolic anticipation or showing forth of a greater reality of which σημείον is nevertheless a part” (The Gospel according to St. John: An Introduction with Commentary and Notes on the Greek Text, 2nd ed. [Philadelphia: Westminster, 1978], 63).
8. Some of the most extensive studies on the Johannine σημεία are in the following: Barrett, The Gospel according to St. John, 75-78; Jürgen Becker, “Wunder und Christologie: Zum literarkritischen und Christologischen Problem der Wunder im Johannesevangelium,” New Testament Studies 16 (January 1970): 130-48; Raymond E. Brown, The Gospel according to John (I–XII), Anchor Bible (Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1966): 525-32; Robert T. Fortna, The Gospel of Signs (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1970); Reginald H. Fuller, Interpreting the Miracles (London: SCM, 1963): 88-109; Donald Guthrie, “The Importance of Signs in the Fourth Gospel,” Vox Evangelica 5 (1967): 72-83; Eduard Lohse, “Miracles in the Fourth Gospel,” in What about the New Testament? Essays in Honour of Christopher Evans, ed. Morna Hooker and Colin Hickling (London: SCM, 1975): 64-75; Leon Morris, The Gospel according to John, New International Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1971), 684-91; W. Nicol, The Semeia in the Fourth Gospel, Supplements to Novum Testamentum (Leiden: Brill, 1970); Alan Richardson, The Miracle-Stories of the Gospels (London: SCM, 1941), 114-22; Riga, “Signs of Glory: The Use of ‘Semeion’ in St. John’s Gospel” 402-24; Rudolf Schnackenburg, The Gospel according to St. John: Introduction and Commentary on Chapters 1-4, trans. Kevin Smyth (New York: Crossroad, 1982), 515-28.
9. Merrill C. Tenney, John: The Gospel of Belief (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1976), 27.
10. C. H. Dodd refers to the first part of the Fourth Gospel as the “Book of Signs” (chaps. 2-12) and the second part of the Gospel as the “Book of Passion” (chaps. 13-20) (The Interpretation of the Fourth Gospel [Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1953], x). Brown, on the other hand, entitles the second part of the Gospel as the “Book of Glory,” while also referring to the first part as the “Book of Signs” (The Gospel according to John(I–XII), cxxxviii).
11. The first twelve chapters of the Fourth Gospel record the public ministry of Jesus, while the second section, particularly chapters 13-17, records the private Farewell Discourse with His disciples. Chapters 18-20 record the passion and resurrection of Jesus Christ, while chapter 21 serves as an “epilogue” to the Gospel. For a helpful structural layout of John see Gary M. Burge, Interpreting the Gospel of John (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1992), 75-82.
12. Francis J. Moloney, The Gospel of John, Sacra Pagina (Collegeville, MN: Liturgical, 1998), 63-65.
13. F. J. Moloney, “From Cana to Cana (John 2:1-4:54) and the Fourth Evangelist’s Concept of Correct (and Incorrect) Faith,” in Studia Biblica 1978 II: Papers on the Gospels: Sixth International Congress on Biblical Studies, Oxford 3-7 April 1978, ed. E. A. Livingstone, Journal for the Study of the New Testament Supplement Series (Sheffield: JSOT, 1980), 185-213. Gerald L. Borchert explains the geographical bounding of this section this way: “The five segments of the Gospel and two transitional statements (2:12, 23-25) that compose the Cana Cycle move the reader’s attention from Cana (2:1-11) and Capernaum (2:12) through Jerusalem (2:13-24) to an unclear Jewish/Judean (?) context (3:1-36), then to Samaria (4:1-42) and back to Cana in Galilee (4:43-54)” (John 1-11, New American Commentary [Nashville: Broadman & Holman, 1996], 151).
14. D. A. Carson, The Gospel according to John (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1991), 166.
15. George R. Beasley-Murray, John, Word Biblical Commentary (Waco, TX: Word, 1987), 5.
16. Borchert, John 1-11, 151.
17. Beasley-Murray, John, 31. He further explains, “But it is equally plain that the sign described in vv. 1-11 is the first of the series of signs incorporated in chaps. 2-12 as examples of the deeds of the Redeemer-Revealer, hence that a new start is being made at 2:1. It commences the account in this Gospel of the public ministry of Jesus” (ibid.).
18. In using John 20:30-31 to determine the author’s purpose, one is left with two options of interpretation because of the textual variant of the verb πιστεύω with the ἵνα clause. The verb can be read as either an aorist subjunctive (πιστεύσητε), or as a present subjunctive (πιστεύητε). The aorist subjunctive would indicate an evangelistic message that is directed to unbelievers, in order to convince them to believe. The present subjunctive, on the other hand, would indicate an edificatory or didactic message that addresses believers, in order to strengthen and confirm their faith. Most modern commentators seem to prefer the present subjunctive and thus translate the verse this way: “that you may continue to believe.” Textually the evidence seems evenly balanced between the two. Also the outcome of the text-critical decision cannot help determine the Gospel’s purpose, since both the present subjunctive and the aorist subjunctive occur in the context of coming to faith and also in the context of continuing in faith (Carson, “The Purpose of the Fourth Gospel,” 640-41). Thus the determining factor concerning the author’s purpose statement in 20:31 is not textual evidence but the context of the book as a whole. Although the purpose statement in 20:30-31 may seem primarily evangelistic in its focus, matters discussed in the Gospel itself seem instructive for those who are already believers (see Borchert, John 1-11, 35-36). The Farewell Discourse in chapters 14-17 especially seems to be addressing those who are already believers rather than attempting to evangelize unbelievers. If the Fourth Gospel is addressed primarily for believers, what intention, then, did the Evangelist have in mind when he penned his Gospel? His purpose statement seems to suggest that he intended to present Jesus to second and subsequent generations of believers, those who did not “see signs” but have the written account of them (Marianne M. Thompson, “John, Gospel of,” in Dictionary of Jesus and the Gospels, ed. Joel B. Green, Scot McKnight, and I. Howard Marshall [Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 1992], 372). Jesus’ remarks after Thomas’s confession, “My Lord and my God” (20:28), may be a clue to John’s primary audience. Jesus said, “Because you have seen me, you have believed; blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed” (20:29). Thus much of the Gospel seems designed to encourage believers to persevere in the faith they already possess, even in the midst of the hostile world in which they live (15:18-25). In conclusion, then, although the gospel story certainly can be used to bring unbelievers to a saving knowledge of Jesus Christ, the book as a whole seems to be written primarily with the aim of strengthening and instructing those who already possess eternal life.
19. Brown, The Gospel according to John(I–XII), 103-4.
20. For a good discussion of the structure of this pericope see Moloney, Belief in the Word: Reading John 1-4, 78-79. He outlines it as follows: (1) Verses 1-2: the setting of the account; (2) verses 3-5: a verbal exchange; (3) verses 6-10: the main action of the miracle story; (4) verse 11: the narrator’s comment; and (5) verse 12: a final comment by the narrator. It is preferable to see the final verse as more of a transitional verse to the next pericope rather than a part of the record of this miracle. Timothy L. Owings’s structure of the pericope is simpler: (1) the setting of the marriage; (2) the draught of the wine; (3) the request of Mary; (4) the response of Jesus; and (5) the belief of the disciples (“John 2:1-11” Review and Expositor 85 [summer 1988]: 533-37).
21. A number of suggestions have been made as to the meaning of the Evangelist’s enigmatic temporal indicator, “On the third day.” Many have attempted to read a symbolic meaning into it from the outset, often leading to unrestrained allegorisms. It seems fitting instead to see the “days” in the Testimonium (1:19-51) as literal time indicators. However, it is also possible to see a symbolic meaning along with the literal days. For instance C. H. Dodd has proposed that “the third day” is an allusion to Easter, with the miracle anticipating the manifestation of Christ’s glory in the Resurrection (The Interpretation of the Fourth Gospel, 300). F. J. Moloney, on the other hand, sees “the third day” as reflecting back to God’s revelation to Israel at Mount Sinai when Moses went up to meet with God and receive the Law (see Exod. 19:16). He explains, “The four days of 1:19-51 look forward to ‘the third day’ “(John, 66). Moloney’s proposition is more plausible contextually based on Jesus’ promise of greater revelation to His disciples in 1:50-51. Thus the Fourth Evangelist was introducing Jesus as the “New Moses” who will reveal the new age. This is probably one of many instances in which the Evangelist was using double meanings to indicate both the literal and the symbolic (cf. 3:2; 13:30).
22. Andreas J. Köstenberger, John, Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2004), 91.
23. Cana was apparently a little-known village because every reference to it in John describes it as being “of Galilee” (2:1, 11; 4:46; 21:2). No other New Testament writer alludes to it. Brown, citing Josephus (The Life of Flavius Josephus, 16), suggests that Cana is to be identified today with Khirbet Kana, located nine miles north of Nazareth (The Gospel according to John(I–XII), 98). See also J. Carl Laney for a detailed explanation of the same view (John, Moody Gospel Commentary [Chicago: Moody, 1992], 58). The town is perhaps mentioned by the Evangelist to mark the Cana Cycle as a literary unit.
24. John B. Polhill, “John 1-4: The Revelation of True Life,” Review and Expositor 85 (summer 1988): 450.
25. Brown, The Gospel according to John (I–XII), 97-98.
26. Laney, John, 62.
27. For a discussion on the historical and cultural context of Jewish wedding feasts behind this story see J. D. M. Derrett, “Water into Wine,” Biblische Zeitschrift 7 (January 1963): 80-97. He explains the strong expectations of reciprocity in ancient Near Eastern weddings. Failure to provide adequate wine for the guests would have been a major social blunder for the hosts.
28. Morris, The Gospel according to John, 179.
29. The context reveals that Mary expected Jesus to do some kind of a miracle, although He had not yet performed any miracles (cf. 2:11). However, it is also true that she had many evidences of His supernatural and messianic identity—His supernatural conception and the announcement by the angel Gabriel, the events preceding His birth such as Zechariah’s song, the events surrounding His birth such as the angels’ announcement, Jesus’ presentation in the temple, and Simeon’s exultation (Luke 1-2). In short she had good reasons to believe in Jesus’ messianic identity.
30. The amount of water consisted of two to three measures (μετρητάß), with each measure being between eight and nine gallons. Each stone jar therefore contained somewhere between sixteen and twenty-seven gallons. Thus the NIV’s translation of “twenty to thirty gallons” is close (v. 6). See John Villescas, “John 2:6: The Capacity of the Six Jars,” Bible Translator 28 (October 1977): 447. See also R. B. Y. Scott, “Weights and Measures of the Bible,” Biblical Archaelogist 22 (May 1959): 22-40, esp. 29-32.
31. Moloney, The Gospel of John, 68.
32. Larry Paul Jones, The Symbol of Water in the Gospel of John, Journal for the Study of the New Testament Supplement Series (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic, 1997), 60.
33. On the nature and content of wine in biblical times see Craig S. Keener, The Gospel of John: A Commentary (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 2003), 1:500-501. See also D. F. Watson, “Wine,” in Dictionary of Jesus and the Gospels, ed. Joel B. Green and Scot McKnight (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 1992), 870-73.
34. See Bauer, Arndt, Gingrich, and Danker, eds., A Greek English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, 504-5.
35. Schnackenburg, The Gospel according to St. John: Introduction and Commentary on Chapters 1-4, 337.
36. Surprisingly most of the major commentators such as Brown, Schnackenburg, Beasley-Murray, Carson, Morris, and others hardly mention this aspect of the miracle. Granted this is not the Evangelist’s major emphasis of the miracle. But it is still surprising that such an important aspect of Jesus’ work is not highlighted more.
37. Edwin A. Blum, “John,” in The Bible Knowledge Commentary, New Testament, ed. John F. Walvoord and Roy B. Zuck (Wheaton, IL: Victor, 1983; reprint, Colorado Springs: Cook, 1996), 278.
38. Brown, The Gospel according to John (I–XII), 104-5.
39. Stanley D. Toussaint, “The Significance of the First Sign in John’s Gospel,” Bibliotheca Sacra 134 (January–March 1977): 45-51.
40. R. H. Lightfoot, St. John’s Gospel (Oxford: Clarendon, 1956), 121.
41. R. Alan Culpepper, Anatomy of the Fourth Gospel: A Study in Literary Design (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1983), 192-95. Culpepper lists the varied uses of the water motif throughout John’s Gospel: water, water pots, rivers, wells, springs, the sea, pools, basin, thirst, and drink.
42. Craig R. Koester, Symbolisms in the Fourth Gospel: Meaning, Mystery, Community (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1995), 155. For a detailed examination of the different uses of water as a symbol in the Fourth Gospel, see the chapter entitled “Water” in ibid., 155-84.
43. Dodd, Interpretation of the Fourth Gospel, 138.
44. Culpepper, Anatomy of the Fourth Gospel, 193.
45. Beasley-Murray, John, 36.
46. Jones, The Symbol of Water in the Gospel of John, 62-65.
47. Ibid., 220.
48. Toussaint, “The Significance of the First Sign in John’s Gospel,” 50.
49. Schnackenburg, The Gospel according to St. John: Introduction and Commentary on Chapters 1-4, 1:338.
50. Toussaint, “The Significance of the First Sign of John’s Gospel,” 50.
51. Laney, John, 68.
52. Raymond F. Collins, “Cana (Jn. 2:1-12)–The First of His Signs or the Key to His Signs?” Irish Theological Journal 47 (summer 1980): 79-95. If John intended to denote only the order of the first miracle, he probably would have used the word πρώτον. By using the word ἀρχή, however, John probably intended to emphasize its significance as a representative sign.
53. Polhill, “John 1-4: The Revelation of the True Life,” 453.
54. Ibid., 451.
55. Koester, Symbolisms in the Fourth Gospel, 82.
56. Brown, The Gospel according to John (I–XII), 121.
57. Koester, Symbolisms in the Fourth Gospel, 82. For a more detailed discussion of the import of this scene see ibid., 121-23.
58. Beasley-Murray, John, 39.
59. Andreas J. Köstenberger, Encountering John: The Gospel in Historical, Literary, and Theological Perspective (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1999), 75-76.