SIGNS OF DIVINITY: The Sign of his Glory

When you see a sign do you tend to believe it or to ignore it?  For example, "slippery when wet" or "caution wet floor" sign. The result of ignoring signs often results in adverse consequences. This eight session study titled Signs of Divinity looks at the signs of Divinity to which the Gospel of John points.

Let’s start by looking at two things.  The word divine is derived from an ancient word root dyeu meaning to shine.  And the word glory is from a Hebrew word meaning brightness, splendor, magnificence, and majesty of outward appearance. 

The glory that WE bring to our own lives is a flawed glory.  When we "shine the spotlight" on ourselves it fades quickly.  But when we bring glory to Divinity we are pointing out eternal glory to those around us.  “Hey, look at ME!” Is much different than “Wow!  Look at those stars!”

 

The first recorded miracle of Jesus brought, or reinforced,  a first hand awareness of the divine to Jesus' mother, some of his disciples, some servants and perhaps some party goers at a wedding in Cana.  While unnoticed by a majority of the public this miracle serves to point out the divine nature of miracles, which are extraordinary events attributed to the direct intervention or power of a divine being.  It surpasses ordinary capabilities of nature, human effort, or scientific explanation, inspiring awe, wonder, or faith serving as a sign point to the presence, power, authority or revelation of a Divine Being.

This first miracle took place at Cana, a word meaning "place of reeds" or "nest".  The exact location is unclear to us at this time, but the modern town of Khirbet Qana is the likely site.  It is eight miles north of Nazareth and overlooks a marshy plain. Archaeology demonstrates a population of about 1,200 people, other regional villages were only about 400 in population. 

Cana had a strong Jewish population as evidenced by the Jewish Synagogue excavated and where stone storage jars called pithos that held 20-30 gallons of liquid and weighing, when full, at some 200 to 300 or even 500 pounds were found.  A modern 30 gallon water tank is 20 inches in diameter and 30 inches tall, roughly 2 feet by three feet. 

John 2:1-4

1 And the third day there was a 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.

Here John notes that this was Cana of Galilee.  This is common, for example we meet in Brenham, Texas and NOT in Brenham, Kansas, the only two cities in the world named Brenham (according to the internet which is, of course, always correct 😉).  

John notes that this wedding occurred on "the third day."  Likely, John was describing that the wedding was taking place on the third day of the week, a Tuesday.  This had become a Jewish tradition because in Genesis 1:10 and 12, on the third day of the creation God TWICE declared the work to be "good". 

God called the dry ground “land,” and the gathered waters he called “seas.” And God saw that it was good. ... The land produced vegetation: plants bearing seed ... and trees bearing fruit with seed in it.... And God saw that it was good.  

In a wedding a new family was created and Jewish tradition wanted the union to be doubly blessed as it was on the third day of creation.  Jewish weddings in the first century were a week-long celebration or even longer. The groom’s father paid for the wedding and chose the date. Invitations to Jewish weddings in the first century came in two parts. The first indicated the date; recipients were expected to RSVP.  “Y’all come in several weeks on Tuesday to a wedding.  Let me know if you can make it.”

The second invitation arrived when the food was ready and the festivities were about to begin. “Remember the wedding feast will begin this Tuesday.” A trumpet (shofar) blast marked the beginning of the wedding. If you missed the trumpet call you might miss the wedding feast. The groom then brought his bride from her father’s home to his father’s home. This procession was marked by joyous singing and music.  This is similar to the “wedding banquet” described in the end times of Revelation.

John refers to “the mother of Jesus” but not by name.  He referred to her by a title that associated her with Jesus, John expected his readers to know that the mother of Jesus was named Mary.

Mary came to Jesus and said “They have no wine.”  Mary’s saying they may indicate she was not directly involved in the wedding situation, but her simply being a guest at the wedding seems unlikely.  It seems that Mary may have had a more official role at the wedding.  She may have been a family friend who was assisting with the food. Or, she may have been responsible for catering some of the week-long festivities.

Some speculate that this might even have been Jesus’ marriage to Mary Magdalene. I asked Grok AI to report on this speculative proof and it returned: 

The speculative theory that the wedding at Cana was Jesus’ own wedding to Mary Magdalene is a fringe interpretation with no support in mainstream biblical scholarship, early Christian writings, or historical records. Scholars across Christian traditions and historians classify it as pseudohistory.

The core speculative arguments claim the text contains “hidden” clues that Jesus himself is the unnamed bridegroom. These arguments date back at least to the 19th century and have been revived in modern popular works. Here are the main speculative points:

Jesus’ mother behaves like the groom’s mother.  Mary is already present when the wine runs out and she directs the servants. Some argue this matches 1st-century Jewish wedding customs, in which the groom’s family (especially his mother) would oversee hospitality and provisions. Jesus arrives later “with his disciples” and is treated as central to the miracle—implying he is not an ordinary guest but the host/groom whose wedding his mother is helping manage. 

The steward addresses the “bridegroom” in a way that points to Jesus.  After tasting the miraculous wine, the steward praises the bridegroom for saving the best wine until last. Proponents say the steward is (unknowingly or cryptically) addressing Jesus, who just provided the wine.

Connection to Mary Magdalene.  The Cana story itself never names Mary Magdalene, so proponents import details from Gnostic texts such as the Gospel of Philip (which calls her Jesus’ “companion” and says he “loved her more than the other disciples” and kissed her often) and the disputed Gospel of Jesus’ Wife fragment (“my wife…”).

Why this remains purely speculative:  The canonical Gospels present Jesus and his mother as invited guests (“Jesus also was invited”), not hosts.  No early Christian writer of the 1st through 4th centuries ever claims Jesus was married at Cana or to Mary Magdalene.  The Gospel of Philip and similar texts are 2nd–4th century Gnostic works that do not mention Cana at all; they are not eyewitness accounts. In short, the “proof” consists of interpretive leaps, structural patterns, and later non-canonical traditions layered onto a text that says nothing explicit about Jesus’ marital status. It has appealed to some novelists (The Da Vinci Code popularized the broader marriage idea), alternative historians, and a few 19th-century religious figures, it has no traction in academic biblical studies. The wedding at Cana functions in the Gospel as the first public sign of Jesus’ glory, not a veiled wedding announcement.  

But here’s why the wine miracle is important. In a culture based on displaying honor and avoiding shame, running out of wine was a huge social blunder. Such a faux pas could ruin the family’s reputation and standing in the community. Further, the blunder could result in legal action. The bride’s family could bring charges against the groom’s family for not fulfilling their obligations and for shaming their daughter. 

When wine was lacking, for whatever reason, Mary told Jesus "they have no wine." Jesus' response seems confusing, "what have I to do with thee?"  It almost seems like he is saying that "Gee, Mom, whadda want ME to do about it?!" But of course this was not the case.  Jesus’s use of this phrase may indicate Mary had a more official role at the wedding.  If so, then running out of wine would also have been a concern for Mary. The term Woman was not a title Jews commonly used when addressing their mothers, yet it was not a term of disrespect or contempt; it would be comparable to our saying, “Madam,” or “Ma’am.” Jesus' statement was "mine hour is not yet come." 

Jesus’s hour is a theme woven throughout John’s Gospel. This statement is taken to mean that this was not the time for Jesus to reveal His access to the full nature of divine glory; that would come later. Yet, as we see, this miracle did reveal God’s glory. It served to show those closely following Jesus at the time that Jesus was something more than a simple teacher.  Jesus was demonstrating to His mother and His disciples that the purpose of miracles is not to use them as something performed on-demand. Miracles are intended to meet a need and to point to a greater truth about God and for His glory.

Mary’s response to Jesus wasn’t one of entitlement (e.g. listen here young man, when your mother says....) but one of trust. She took her hands off the problem and put the focus on Jesus’s power and compassion.  She made Jesus "aware" of the problem and of a potential need.  She made known her desire, her “it would be nice if…” statement that Jesus “do something” and then she left the matter in Jesus’ hands instructing the servants who will be dealing with the jars weighing hundreds of pounds.  Let's see what she tells them.

John 2:5-8

5 His mother saith unto the servants, Whatsoever he saith unto you, do it. 6 And there were set there six waterpots of stone, after the manner of the purifying of the Jews, containing two or three firkins apiece. 7 Jesus saith unto them, Fill the waterpots 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.

Mary's words put the responsibility for the problem in the hands of Jesus and then she told the servants "do whatever he tells you."  Somewhat confusingly this statement to the servants also contributes to the indication that Mary was more than an observant guest. Do is an imperative, a command. The only way Mary would have had authority to give this directive would have been if she had an official role at the wedding. Otherwise, these servants would have had no compulsion to obey an order from a woman. If Mary had no official role, they would have been answerable only to a member of the groom’s family.  

If Mary did have an official function at the wedding she just delegated the problem to, and gave authority to, Jesus to deal with it.  Was Mary expecting a miracle?  Was she just expecting Jesus to send the boys out to get more wine?  We can't know, but we can see that Mary’s statement is a precursor to something Jesus taught His disciples, “You are my friends, if you do whatsoever I instruct you.” 

The Jewish purification concept was a big deal during this time period.  Purity had to do with “not mixing things, e.g. keep your water separate from your dirt.  Stone vessels were common, but expensive. Where most would utilize clay or ceramic pots, it was popular for stone vessels to predominate during this time and they became a status symbol. Carving a vessel out of stone was an expensive and time consuming job, even for limestone vessels.  This indicates that this wedding involved a wealthy family.

Having six of the LARGE stone vessels was a display of abundant wealth. This was a large wedding. A small gathering would not need this much water for purification.  The wedding involved a religiously observant Jewish family. The family was obedient to Old Testament law, which stated clay jars were susceptible to contamination. Jews thus used stone jars to avoid impurities. The Jewish purification called for persons to wash their hands before and after eating and also the “cups, and pots, brazen vessels, and of tables” used at a feast or religious observance would have been washed . 

These large storage vessels were nearby the entrance to the dining hall. Water was dipped out of the jars and poured over hands and utensils for cleansing. You could say that this verse highlights the original "employees must wash hands before returning to work" sign.  Jews in the first century took purification regulations seriously. The Talmud has thirty chapters on purifying various vessels and four on cleansing one’s hands. 

So there were six stone vessels each holding about twenty or thirty gallons totaling 120 to 180 gallons for these six vessels. The task of filling the jars would not have been a simple one. It would have taken numerous trips to the spring or cistern that supplied the city’s water, possibly taking hours rather than a few minutes.

After filling the vessels to the brim with water, Jesus told the servants to take some of it to the Governor of the feast.  In the New Testament, this word appears only in this verse and the next. The Greek translates literally as “ruler of the table.” This may have been a volunteer or someone the groom’s family hired to cater the wedding, or he may have worked for the wedding venue. His role was something of a combination of master of ceremonies, chief steward, and head waiter.  He was responsible for overseeing the servants and making sure everyone had plenty of food and drink. Part of his job was evidently to be the taste-tester for anything served at the wedding. What he found when they brought in Jesus' wine shocked him.

John 2:9-11

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 official’s words indicate he was surprised at how good this new wine was. Underscoring the theme of these verses, the quality of this wine exceeded his expectations. The common practice was for the best wine to be served first, to make the biggest impact and impression early in the week-long celebration. The steward thought the groom had done the opposite and saved the better wine until later. Dude, most people serve the good stuff first and the cheap stuff last. He had no idea where this wine had come from. 

So, who then did know the source of this wine? Jesus, his disciples, and Mary knew. The servants knew; they had drawn water and poured it into the stone jars. Who didn’t know the source of the wine? The headwaiter did not know. The groom and his family did not know. None of the guests knew. The wedding festivities continued uninterrupted thanks to the miracle Jesus performed. But why keep the miracle in the shadows and shrouded from public view? 

Jesus himself tells us:  Jesus’s hour had not yet come. The terminology lets us know this was not the only miracle Jesus would perform and more specifically, not the only one in Cana. This first miracle was like a roadside sign.  It indicates that a restaurant is at the next exit, but the sign is not the restaurant. It points beyond itself to something unseen, something greater, more important, and more satisfying than the roadside sign. Jesus’s miracles conveyed an unseen truth; they pointed to the fact that there was something more powerful beyond the miracles that he did, or would do.  This miracle showed the God nature and his disciples believed that such Christ-awareness could be realized. Jesus revealed and demonstrated divine glory and shows us how we can do the same.

Near the end of his Gospel, John stated that Jesus did many more signs besides the ones included in his book. These first disciples who were with Him at the wedding in Cana believed. They put their faith in Him.  Two of those with Jesus at the wedding were Andrew and an unnamed disciple; these two had been disciples of John the Baptist. Andrew’s brother Peter was at the wedding; so were Philip and Nathaniel. They were no longer disciples of someone else; they were now Jesus' disciples. They had seen the remarkable sign of the glory of God through Jesus at Cana; yet even greater signs were ahead.

We can learn of Jesus' miracles through the Bible and, if we look with awareness, we can even see miracles around us even today. These miracles are the signs of the shining glory of the Divine working in our lives. If you look for the signs provided by Divinity you can find them.  It is best if we heed the signs.