“Spending time with Jesus: #48 Transformed To A New Life” John 21:1-25

RSS

“Spending time with Jesus: #48 Transformed To A New Life” John 21:1-25

24 Jul

Gone fishing.

How many times have you wanted to hang that sign on your door? Maybe when there’s a lull in business. Maybe when job pressures hem you in and you feel trapped.

Maybe those were some of the disciples’ thoughts after Jesus died. Perhaps that’s why they took the day off and went fishing. The ministry, fbr all practical purposes, had shut down.

For three years these fishermen learned from Jesus, observing how He calmed storms, how He walked on water, how He cast His saving net into humanity’s sea.

But now, in the wake of death, all was calm, and the disciples returned to their old vocation — back to Galilee and their nets.

The purpose of this epilogue is to show how the belief which the disciples had achieved should be applied. The witness of the risen Lord to His followers had been completed, and they were ready to undertake the responsibilities of discipleship.

Consequently, the last chapter of the gospel opens the door to the future and shows how belief should be translated into terms of daily activity.

It seems also apparent that John did not want to end his gospel without telling his readers that Peter was restored to his apostleship. He also wanted to refute the foolish rumor that had spread among the people that Peter would live until the return of the Lord (21:23).

The average reader would conclude that John completed his book with the dramatic testimony of Thomas (John 20:28-31), and the reader would wonder why John added another chapter.

The main reason is the Apostle Peter, John’s close associate in ministry (Acts 3:1). Apart from the information in this chapter, we would wonder why Peter was so prominent in the first twelve chapters of the Book of Acts.

I think John may have had another purpose in mind: he wanted to teach us how to relate to the risen Christ. During the forty days between His resurrection and ascension, our Lord appeared and disappeared at will, visiting with the disciples and preparing them for the coming of the Spirit and their future ministries (Acts 1:1-9).

They never knew when He would appear, so they had to stay alert! The fact that He may return for His people today ought to keep us on our toes! It was an important time for the disciples because they were about to take His place in the world and begin to carry the message to others.

Besides, Jesus had trained these men for something besides fishing. The manifestation of Jesus was, then, a call to a new reality.

* We are fishers of men—obey Him (20:1-8)

“Afterward Jesus appeared again to his disciples, by the Sea of Tiberias[1]. It happened this way: {2} Simon Peter, Thomas (called Didymus), Nathanael from Cana in Galilee, the sons of Zebedee, and two other disciples were together. {3} “I’m going out to fish,” Simon Peter told them, and they said, “We’ll go with you.” So they went out and got into the boat, but that night they caught nothing. {4} Early in the morning, Jesus stood on the shore, but the disciples did not realize that it was Jesus. {5} He called out to them, “Friends, haven’t you any fish?” “No,” they answered. {6} He said, “Throw your net on the right side of the boat and you will find some.” When they did, they were unable to haul the net in because of the large number of fish. {7} Then the disciple whom Jesus loved said to Peter, “It is the Lord!” As soon as Simon Peter heard him say, “It is the Lord,” he wrapped his outer garment around him (for he had taken it off) and jumped into the water. {8} The other disciples followed in the boat, towing the net full of fish, for they were not far from shore, about a hundred yards[2].”

It was certainly someone who knew the fishermen of the Sea of Galilee who wrote this story. Night-time was the best for fishing. W. M. Thomson in The Land and the Book describes night fishing: “There are certain kinds of fishing always carried on at night. It is a beautiful sight. With blazing torch, the boat glides over the flashing sea, and the men stand gazing keenly into it until their prey is sighted, when, quick as lightning, they fling their net or fly their spear; and often you see the tired fishermen come sullenly into harbour in the morning, having toiled all night in vain.”

The catch here is not described as a miracle, and it is not meant to be taken as one. The description is of something which still frequently happens on the lake. Remember that the boat was only about a hundred yards from land. H. V. Morton describes how he saw two men fishing on the shores of the lake. One had waded out from the shore and was casting a bell net into the water. “But time after time the net came up empty. It was a beautiful sight to see him casting. Each time the neatly folded net belled out in the air and fell so precisely on the water that the small lead weights hit the lake at the same moment making a thin circular splash. While he was waiting for another cast, Abdul shouted to him from the bank to fling to the left, which he instantly did. This time he was successful…. The he drew up the net and we could see the fish struggling in it….It happens very often that the man with the hand-net must rely on the advice of someone on shore, who tells him to cast either to the left or the right, because in the clear water he can often see a shoal of fish invisible to the man in the water.” Jesus was acting as guide to his fishermen friends, just as people still do today.

It may be that it was because it was the grey dark that they did not recognize Jesus. But the eyes of the disciple whom Jesus loved were sharp. He knew it was the Lord; and when Peter realized who it was he leaped into the water. He was not actually naked. He was girt with a loin cloth as the fisher always was when he plied his trade. Not it was the Jewish law that to offer greeting was a religious act, and to carry out a religious act a man must be clothed; so Peter, before he set out to come to Jesus, put on his fisherman’s tunic, for he wished to be the first to greet his Lord.

Now we come to the first great reason why this strange chapter was added to the already finished gospel. It was to demonstrate once and for all the reality of the Resurrection. There were many who said that the appearances of the Risen Christ were nothing more than visions which the disciples had. Many would admit the reality of the visions but insist that they were still only visions. Some would go further and say that they were not visions but hallucinations. The gospels go far out of their way to insist that the Risen Christ was not a vision, not an hallucination, not even a spirit, but a real person. They insist that the tomb was empty and that the Risen Christ had a real body which still bore the marks of the nails and the spear thrust in his side.

But this story goes a step further. A vision or a spirit would not be likely to point out a shoal of fish to a party of fishermen. A vision or a spirit would not be likely to kindle a charcoal fire on the seashore. A vision or a spirit would not be likely to cook a meal and to share it out. And yet, as this story has it, the Risen Christ did all these things. When John tells how Jesus came back to his disciples when the doors were shut, he says: “He showed them his hands and his side” (John 20:20).

Ignatius, when writing to the Church at Smyrna, relates an even more definite tradition about that. He says: “I know and believe that he was in the flesh even after the resurrection, and when he came to Peter and his company, he said to them: ‘Take, handle me, and see that I am not a bodiless demon.’ And straightway they touched him, and they believed, for they were firmly convinced of his flesh and blood. . . . And after his resurrection he ate and drank with them as one in the flesh.”

The first and simplest aim of this story is to make quite clear the reality of the resurrection. The Risen Lord was not a vision, nor the figment of someone’s excited imagination, nor the appearance of a spirit or a ghost; it was Jesus who had conquered death and come back.

There is a second great truth symbolized here. In the Fourth Gospel everything is meaningful, and it is therefore hardly possible that John gives the definite number one hundred and fifty-three for the fishes without meaning something by it. It has indeed been suggested that the fishes were counted simply because the catch had to be shared out between the various partners and the crew of the boat, and that the number was recorded simply because it was so exceptionally large. But when we remember John’s way of putting hidden meanings in his gospel for those who have eyes to see, we must think that there is more to it than that.

Many ingenious suggestions have been made.

(i) Cyril of Alexandria said that the number 153 is made up of three things. First, there is 100; and that represents “the fullness of the Gentiles.” 100, he says, is the fullest number. The shepherd’s full flock is 100 (Matthew 18:12). The seed’s full fertility is 100-fold. So the 100 stands for the fullness of the Gentiles who will be gathered in to Christ. Second, there is the 50; and the 50 stands for the remnant of Israel who will be gathered in. Third, there is the 3; and the 3 stands for the Trinity to whose glory all things are done.

(ii) Augustine has another ingenious explanation. he says that 10 is the number of the Law, for there are ten commandments; 7 is the number of grace, for the gifts of the Spirit are sevenfold.

“Thou the anointing Spirit art, Who dost thy sevenfold gifts impart.”

Now 7+10 makes 17; and 153 is the sum of all the figures, 1+2+3+4 . . ., up to 17. Thus 153 stands for all those who either by Law or by grace have been moved to come to Jesus Christ.

(iii) The simplest of the explanations is that given by Jerome. He said that in the sea there are 153 different kinds of fishes; and that the catch is one which includes every kind of fish; and that therefore the number symbolizes the fact that some day all men of all nations will be gathered together to Jesus Christ.

We may note a further point. This great catch of fishes was gathered into the net, and the net held them all and was not broken. The net stands for the Church; and there is room in the Church for all men of all nations. Even if they all come in, she is big enough to hold them all.

Here John is telling us in his own vivid yet subtle way of the universality of the Church. There is no kind of exclusiveness in her, no kind of colour bar or selectiveness. The embrace of the Church is as universal as the love of God in Jesus Christ. It will lead us on the next great reason why this chapter was added to the gospel if we note that it was Peter who drew the net to land (John 21:11).

It is interesting that at least seven of the 12 disciples were probably fishermen. Why did Jesus call so many fishermen to follow Him? For one thing, fishermen are courageous, and Jesus needs brave people to follow Him. They are also dedicated to one thing and cannot easily be distracted. Fishermen do not quit! (We are thinking, of course, of professional fishermen, not idle people on vacation!) They know how to take orders, and they know how to work together.

The Lord had instructed His disciples to meet Him in Galilee, which helps to explain why they were at the Sea of Galilee, or Sea of Tiberias (Matt. 26:32 and 28:7-10; Mark 16:7).

After His resurrection, our Lord was sometimes not recognized (John 20:14; Luke 24:16); so it was that His disciples did not recognize Him when, at dawning, He appeared on the shore.

They toiled all night and caught nothing, and certainly Peter must have remembered a similar occasion two years earlier when Jesus had called him into full-time discipleship (Luke 5:1-11).

It was time for Jesus to take over the situation, just as He did when He called Peter into discipleship. He told them where to cast the net; they obeyed, and they caught 153 fish! The diference between success and failure was the width of the ship! We are never that from success when we permit Jesus to give the orders, and we are usually closer to success than we realize.

In spite of his faults and failures, Peter did indeed love the Lord, and he was not ashamed to admit it.

While Peter must have rejoiced in his restoration and apostleship, realize how shocking it must have been for this open discussion of his coming death to have come out!

The day would come when another would take charge of Peter — and kill him. Tradition tells us that Peter was indeed crucified, but that he asked to be crucified upside-down, because he was not worthy to die exactly as his Master had died.

Jesus “showed himself alive aflcer his passion by many proofs, appearing unto them by the space of forty days, and speaking the things conceming the kingdom of God” according to Acts 1.3.

Here in Galilee is one of those occasions. He had commanded the disciples through the women (Matt. 28:7, ]0; Mk. 16:7), to go into Galilee. They did not go immediately and Jesus appears to them in company twice in Jerusalem over a seven day period (cf. Jn. 20). Now they have arrived in Galilee and have resumed their former occupations as they wait for the Lord’s promised appearance here.

John’s use of the name “sea of Tiberias” is another indication that he intended his gospel account to be read by readers all over the Roman world. “Tiberias” is the Roman name for the sea of Galilee.

Why did Peter and these other six disciples go fishing! Some say they had lost faith and interest in continuing as disciples of jesus and simply had returned to their former occupations. Those who make this interpretation generally base it on a questionable exegesis of the question Jesus asked Peter, “Lovest thou me more than these. “‘ (Jn. 21:15).

I prefer the view that the disciples were merely occupying the time while they waited for the Lord in plying their trade as fishermen. Some of them (Peter at least) would need to provide some sort of financial support for their families. Men of the sea, active, hardworking, industrious men could not remain inactive while they waited for Jesus to come.

R. C. Foster said: “Jesus did not condemn them for going fishing, but directed them to a miraculous catch. Peter is no more to be condemned for seeking food by this accustomed trade than Paul for supporting himself by tentmaking while he preached as opportunity offered. Peter and the rest were here in Galilee in obedience to the express, repeated command of Jesus. Having come to Galiiee, they could do nathing for their Master except wait His coming and further commands. To supply themselves with food by a means that was honorable and available was simple common-sense.”

Fishermen had an honorable place in society. They supplied one of the most important items in the ordinary diet. They also had the teputation of being unusually pious. There were those who used hooks I to fish in the days of Jesus for archeologists have B found copper, brass and iron hooks df that period. But mast of the commercial fishing was done with nets. The first type of net was the “throwing” type, a round one of perhaps twelve feet in diameter, with leads all around the edge, and it was designed to catch fish by dropping over them.

The second type was the “seine” type which was bringing in their catch. The disciples probably used both types of nets. But it would seem they were using the seine type net this night.

The fishing trade required large investments to commence. The nets were expensive and needed a great deal of maintenance. The boats would be even 1 more expensive and need even more maintenance.

When the fish were caught they had to be separated. Some fish were worth more than others on the market. Also for the Jewish fishermen there would be the unclean fish they were not allowed to sell-those without scales and fins.

“The fisherman’s life strengthens his character: it is work that insists upon courage and firmness, as well as patience; and it is clear that those freshwater sailors, the fishermen of the Sea of Galilee stodd out from all the other workers who are mentioned in the Gospel. They seem to have been men of strong and ardent minds, open, hearty, enthusiastic in spirits–‘Sons of thunder, as Christ called two of them … Even today one may see the Galilean fishermen skipping for joy at a good catch; and under the fierce sun they may be heard chanting at the top of their voices.

“It is understandable that for the work He meant to undertake, Christ should have called upon these strong, brave, spirited men and their loyalty. He said to them, ‘Come and follow me; I will make you into fishers of men.’ And Simon and Andrew and then James and John, left their nets on the ground.”

They fished all flight and caught nothing. It was a big sea. They had probably put their net into the sea over and over again in many different places. They were tired and they had spent a frustrating day and night. in the darkness of the early dawn they looked toward the shore and saw a man standing there. The darkness, the distance and a probable mist arising from the surface of the sea kept them from recognizing Jesus.

Jesus then called out from the shore, “Lads, you don’t have anything to eat do you!” The Greek word paidia may be translated “lads, boys, children.” Jesus stated the question as if He expected a “No” answer. He wanted to focus their attention on the fruitlessness of their night’s labor in order to emphasize the more the rmraculous nature of what was about to happen. This He did to build their faith in Him and to demonstrate the divine assistance they would have during their labors in His name.

So Jesus instructed them, “Cast your net on the right side of the boat and you will catch fish.” Still not recognizing Him as their Master, thinking perhaps He was one of the local fishermen with a knowledge of where the fishing was currently the best, they followed His instruaions. To their wonderment the net became so full of fish they were unable to haul it into the boat and eventually the net, which seemed ready to burst at any moment, was towed to shore behind the boat.

What examples for us to follow as we seek to “catch fish” for Jesus Christ!

We are indeed “fishers of men,” and there are “fish” all around us. If we obey His directions, we will catch the fish.

John, the beloved disciple (cf. 13:23), then recognized Jesus and told Peter, “It is the Lord!” Perhaps John began to recognize Him when He called out from the shore and then at the miraculous draught of fishes could restrain himself no longer and forgot the fish and pointed toward shore and cried out to Peter.

It was John who first realized that the stranger on the shore was their own Lord and Master. It was John who leaned on the Lord’s breast at the table (John 13:23) and who stood by the cross when his Lord suffered and died (John 19:26). It is love that recognizes the Lord and shares that good news with others: “it is the Lord!”

Impetuous Peter was not about to wait until the boat reached the shore. He grabbed his outer tunic (he had probably taken off all his clothing but his undergarments), wrapped it around himself and jumped into the sea and started making for the shore.

Whether he swam or whether it was shallow enough for him to wade ashore we do not know. The disciples were only about 100 yards off shore m the boat.

R. C. Foster notes that the Greek language here indicates Peter fastened the girdle” and tucked the tunic up into his girdle before leaping into the water.

This may indicate he was intending to wade ashore without getting all his clothing wet. Peter may have been impetuous but his impetuosity at this particular instance is an example we all might well follow. Would that all His disciples were so eager to be near Him and to come to Him.

Practically all the commentators show the interesting parallels between this experience on the sea of Galilee and the one some three years before as recorded in Matt. 4:18-22; Mk. 1:16-20; Lk. 5:1-11.

In both instances they toiled all night and caught nothing; in each case they had gone fishing of their own volition; in both they were commanded by Jesus to make another effort; in the first the nets broke; in this one the net seemed ready to break momentarily; in both Peter exexhibited his impetuosity; m both Jesus gives them a solemn commission to evangelite.

Why did Peter act so impulsively! Who knows! It was just his nature, it seems, to act this way. What would you have done considering all his recent experiences if you had been Peter!

Perhaps you too would have leaped into the water and hurried to meet the resurrected Lord. These disciples were real men–not robots or the idealistic characters of fiction. Some of them were as different in personality and temperament as some of us today!

Now in verse eight we find an example of the Greek idiom which is not altogether familiar to the English language. We find John shifting from the regular noun to the diminutive form using both forms to describe the same thing. In 21.6 he speaks of the ploion (boat) and in 21.8 he speaks of the same boat only this time it is ploiarion (little boat). John does the same thing in 6: 17-20 and 6:22.

Peter went wading on ahead. The other disciples came slowly in the boat hauling the catch of fish which were still very precariously enclosed within the overtaxed net.

To their amazement, when they stepped out on shore they found the Master had a fire going, was broiling fish and preparing bread for a morning meal.

* We are Shepherds—Love Him (John 21:9-18)

“When they landed, they saw a fire of burning coals there with fish on it, and some bread. {10} Jesus said to them, “Bring some of the fish you have just caught.” {11} Simon Peter climbed aboard and dragged the net ashore. It was full of large fish, 153, but even with so many the net was not torn. {12} Jesus said to them, “Come and have breakfast.” None of the disciples dared ask him, “Who are you?” They knew it was the Lord. {13} Jesus came, took the bread and gave it to them, and did the same with the fish. {14} This was now the third time Jesus appeared to his disciples after he was raised from the dead. {15} When they had finished eating, Jesus said to Simon Peter, “Simon son of John, do you truly love me more than these?” “Yes, Lord,” he said, “you know that I love you.” Jesus said, “Feed my lambs.” {16} Again Jesus said, “Simon son of John, do you truly love me?” He answered, “Yes, Lord, you know that I love you.” Jesus said, “Take care of my sheep.” {17} The third time he said to him, “Simon son of John, do you love me?” Peter was hurt because Jesus asked him the third time, “Do you love me?” He said, “Lord, you know all things; you know that I love you.” Jesus said, “Feed my sheep. {18} I tell you the truth, when you were younger you dressed yourself and went where you wanted; but when you are old you will stretch out your hands, and someone else will dress you and lead you where you do not want to go.””

Jesus met His disciples on the beach where He had already prepared breakfast for them. This entire scene must have stirred Peter’s memory and touched his conscience.

Surely he was recalling that first catch of fish (Luke 5:1-11)and perhaps even the feeding of the 5,000 with bread and fish (John 6). It was at the close of the latter event that Peter had given his clear-cut witness of faith in Jesus Christ (John 6:66-71). The “fire of coals” would certainly remind him of the fire at which he denied the Lord (John 18:18). It is good for us to remember the past; we may have something to confess.

Three “invitations” stand out in John’s Gospel: (‘Come and see ” (John 1:39); ‘Come and drink” (John 7:37); and “Come and dine ” (John 21:12). How loving of Jesus to feed Peter before He dealt with his spiritual needs. He gave Peter opportunity to dry off, get warm, satisfy his hunger, and enjoy personal fellowship.

This is a good example for us to follow as we care for God’s people. Certainly the spiritual is more important than the physical, but caring for the physical can prepare the way for spiritual ministry. Our Lord does not so emphasize “the soul” that He neglects the body.

Some suggest that Peter and his Lord had already met privately and taken care of Peter’s sins (Luke 24:34; 1 Cor. 15:5), but since Peter had denied the Lord publicly, it was important that there be a public restoration.

We do not know that for certain, but sin should be dealt with only to the extent that it is known. Private sins should be confessed in private, public sins in public. Since Peter had denied his Lord three times, Jesus asked him three personal questions. He also encouraged him by giving a threefold commission that restored Peter to his ministry.

The key issue is Peter’s love for the Lord Jesus, and that should be a key matter with us today. But what did the Lord mean by “more than these”? Was He asking, “Do you love Me more than you love these other men?” Not likely, because this had never been a problem among the disciples .

They all loved the Lord Jesus supremely, even though they did not always obey Him completely. Perhaps Jesus meant, “Do you love Me more than you love these boats and nets and fish?” Again, this is not likely, for there is no evidence that Peter ever desired to go back permanently into the fishing business. Fishing did not seem to compete with the Saviour’s love.

The question probably meant, “Do you love Me–as you claimed–more than these other disciples love Me?” Peter had boasted of his love for Christ and had even contrasted it with that of the other men. “I will lay down my life for Thy sake! ” (John 13:37) “Though all men shall be offended because of` Thee, yet will I never be offended!” (Matt. 26:33).

There is more than a hint in these boastful statements that Peter believed that he loved the Lord more than did the other disciples.

Foster lists three reasons why he believes Jesus means “do you love Me mote than these other disciples,” instead of “things–i.e., things representing your worldly vocation such as nets and boats and fish.” (a) There was nothing wrong with fishing per se, that is, Jesus did not condemn Peter for fishing and accuse him of loving Him less’ for fishing; (b) The three-fold question parallels the three-fold denial; (c) If Peter had understood Jesus to mean he was questioning whether he planned to desert his Master and go back to his old fishing trade, it seems incredible that Peter would not have answered immediately and precisely, “You know that I love you more than these things.

It is more in keeping with the humility Peter must have felt when asked that he did not even so much as say,”You know that I love you more than these other men.” He had fallen into that prideful trap before.

Two Greek verbs are used in an interesting interplay upon the word love in this section. Jesus uses the verb agapao in His first two inquiries and the verb phileo in the third question. Peter replies with phileo in all three answers.

There are some commentators who are dogmatic in their assertions that agapao always means the “higher, spiritual devotion, not an impulse from the feelings, but more intellectually oriented love” while phileo always refers to the lower type of love “intimate, personal affection among human beings, brotherly love.

This is not borne out by the New Testament usage of the two words, a. Both words are used of God’s love for man (agapao: Jn. 3:16; 14:23; 17:23; I Jn. 14:10-19) (phileo: Jn. 16:27; Rev. 3:19) b. Both words are used of God’s love for the Son (agapao: Jn. 3:35; 10:17; 15:3; 17:23-26) (phileo: Jn. 5:20). c.

Both verbs are used of the love of men for Jesus (agapao: Jn. 8:42; 14:15, 21, 23, 24, 28; 21:15-16) (phileo: Jn. 16:27; 21:15-16; Matt. 10:37; ICor. 16:22). d. Both verbs are used of the love of men for other men (dgapao: Jn. 13:34-35; 15:12, 17; I Jn. 2:10; 3:10; 4:7, 20) phileo: John 15:19).

The text now under consideration seems to indicate that the words were, as the Arndt and Gingrich Lexicon says, “used interchangeably.”

R. C. Trench, in his Synonyms of the New Testament puts it this way: “…there is often a difference between them, well worthy to have noted and reproduced, if this had lain within the compass of our language, being very nearly equivalent to that between ‘diligo’ and amo’ in the Latin … In that threefold ‘Lovest thou Me!’ which the risen Lord addresses to Peter, He asks him first, agapas me; at this moment, when all the pulses in the heart of the now penitent Apostle are beating with a passionate affection toward his Lord, this word on that Lord’s lips sounds far too cold…He therefore in his answer substitutes for the agapas of Christ the word of a more personal love, philo se.

Foster says “it is clear there is some difference and the use of both words in John 21 would indicate there is some different shade of meaning indicated. The fact that when we are commanded to love our enemies agapao is used, suggests the shade of meaning that we are not commanded to make a confidants or an intimate personal friend of an enemy–this might not be possible. But we are to treat all, even our enemies, with kindness and generous regard.”

We will make Peter say something he certainly did not intend to say if we insist on a decisive and immutable distinction between the two words. We would have Peter replying to the Lord, “You know I love you Lord, but I do not love you with the highest devotion which man should have toward God (agapao); I only love you as a close personal friend (phileo), with a lower type of love.

For Peter this was the right word. It expressed the deep, warm, heartfelt affection of this impetuous man. There does seem to be a decisive difference in the two words, but not as pronounced a difference as some commentators insist upon.”

Why did Jesus use agapao when asking the first two questions, “Lovest thou me!” and then use phileo when He asked the third time? Most commentators believe Jesus was mildly rebuking Peter by questioning whether Peter even had the lowest type of love for Him. But Peter, by using phileo in each of his answers was using a word by which he meant to affirm both his lofty devotion toward God whom he revered but had never seen, and his personal love for Jesus whom he has seen and recognizes as God’s Son, just as Thomas had (Jn. 20:28).

As we quoted Dr. Trench above, for Peter the word agapaojust did not fully describe his feelings so he used phileo and the Master simply used Peter’s own word of feeling as the basis for His final challenge.

We believe there is some relationship between the charge Jesus made to Peter (“Feed my sheep”) and the question He asked (“Lovest thou me!”).

If Peter loves the Master, Peter will feed the Master’s lambs. Whatever is done for the lambs is done for the Master (cf Matt. 25:31-46; Acts 9:1-6). Is this not why Jesus used the word agapaoas if to say, “Peter, do you love me!” “You say you love me, then love my lambs and feed them.”

Peter’s personal, warm and affectionate love for Jesus is well and good, but this love for Jesus must be directed toward His flock “at large” as well or it isn’t even phileo love for Jesus (and this is why Jesus changed to Peter’s terminology in the last challenge.

Jesus did not doubt Peter’s love for Him–He was challenging, preparing and commissioning Peter to go and love the Master’s lambs. This was not simply a reconciliation between Master and disciple for this had already occurred in the first appearance of Jesus to Peter in Luke 24:34.

It was not to restore Peter to his apostleship among the select eleven for as Foster says, “the angel made it plain in the first message after the resurrection that Jesus did not consider that Peter had forfeited his apostleship (Mark 16:7).

It was to challenge Peter, to strengthen him (to make him firmer in his love by reminding him of the humiliation of denial three times), to instruct him that lovmg Christ means to feed His sheep, and to confirm his place of leadership among the eleven. Jesus also elicited these confessions of love from Peter to prepare him for the prophecy of his death about to be made.

There certainly are great principles for all followers of Christ to learn from this private intercourse between Jesus and Peter. Those who have dedicated themselves to “feed the flock” (whether evangelists or elders) must love Christ above all else and before all others. Love for Christ, deep, personal affection is the only force that will motivate and fortify His servants against the many disappointments and dangers in “feeding the flock.”

We may also learn that love is expressed by obedient service (cf. II Cor. 8:5-8; 8:24; 9:13). Love is notjust desire; love is the desire to give–to spend and be spent for another.

There is an interesting play of synonyms for “feed” in this context. In verses 15 and 17 Jesus used the word base which means “feed; do the part of a herdsman and provide the flock food.” In verse 16 He used the word pojmaine which means “shepherd the flock, protect, care for, lead the flock. “

This is the commission of the Chief Shepherd to the under-shepherds to give themselves to the ministry of feeding, Protecting, guiding and leading the flock of God (6: Jn. to; Ads 20:18-38; I Pet. 5:1-11, etc.). The important food for the nock is the spiritual food. Peter was called and charged to carry out this great task and he eventually laid down his life for the sheep.

It is also interesting to note the way Jesus used synonyms for sheep and lambs. In verse 16 and 17 the word plobatia (sheep) is used. In verse 15 He used the word arnia which is a diminutive meaning “little lambs.” The “little lambs” are mentioned first. The unsophisticated ones, the weak ones, the young ones must be tenderly nurtured.

The older ones, even the experienced ones, must also be cared for and fed. We must all grow up together in stature into the full measure of godliness in Christ (cf Eph. 4:11-17).

In verse 18 Jesus culminates his charge to Peter to “feed the lambs” with the revelation that Peter shall lay down his life for the flock. The figure of speech used by Jesus was vivid. The Jews, in walking or running, gathered up (girded) the long folds of their outer garments and fashioned them about their waists like belts, that their progress might not be impeded. The figure then expresses the freedom to go as one pleases unimpeded and unfettered.

In fact Peter had just so “girded” himself and made his way to Jesus on the shore unfettered and unrestramed. But m his later years it shall not be so. Solemnly Jesus told him that he would stretch forth his hands to be fettered and bound and he would be led according to the will of another.

Most commentators believe this “stretchmg forth of the hands” indicates Peter was told he would die by crucifixion. This is highly probable since Peter’s Master was put to death in this way and it was a common form of Roman execution administered upon non-citizen “malefactors.

Works by Eusebius and Tertullian relate the traditional manner of Peter’s death to be crucifixion head downward. Whatever the manner of death it was to glorify God. Peter was to be among the first martyrs (from the Greek maturos). Marturia means to “testify or bear witness.”

Peter’s life and death in faith bore witness to the glory of God. Just as the death of the first recorded Christian martyr, Stephen (Acts 7.54n), glorified God and was instrumental to some degree in the conversion of the great apostle Paul, the death of Peter for the sake of Christ and the church was undoubtedly a great testimony to the power of the word of God and instrumental in the conversion of many other people. “Precious in the sight of the Lord is the death of his saints” (Rev. 14:13).

Now after speaking this Jesus admonished again, “Follow me.” One commentator thinks Jesus began after this admonition to draw apart from the discipies to vanish from their company until His next appearance, and that Peter may have taken Jesus literally and began to withdraw from the group and walk after Jesus. This seems the most explanation for Peter turning to see another disciple “following.

There can be no doubt that this other disciple who followed was John the beloved (cf our notes on John 13:23). Both Peter and John (and James) were of the mner circle” three, and Peter was involved in the incident at the supper where the “other” disciple is described in the same way.

Foster says, “Follow me in the light of the preceding context seems to mean ‘follow me in my example of dying on a cross.’ But the succeeding context seems to indicate that Jesus was leading Peter off to a little distance from the group and that John followed–or perhaps He was leading all of the disciples hence.

It may be that both the spintual and the literal are meant to be understood by the apostles.

The main point is Peter’s question about the “other” disciple and the Lord’s answer to Peter. Peter, having been challenged, commissioned and having had his destiny revealed to him, said, “Lord what about him! ” Peter had missed the mark again!

He had allowed his natural mind to take over again. He was out of focus. He was not focused on what Jesus had sought to emphasize. He was worrying about “times and seasons.

Jesus replied, as He had before to His own mother, and as He would to the disciples later, “It is none of your business to know this …. if it is My will that John remain alive even until I come again in contrast to your death before I come, it is My affair and nor yours. The destiny of this other disciple is minor; the major raskfor you is to follow me. “ (cf, our notes on Jn. 2:1-5; also cf. Acts 1:6-8).

If a man is going to be a soldier, he must have a soldier’s training. Sighing after happiness; brooding over the life we’ve missed–these are all out of place with the the Christian soldier.

Men are not coddled and indulged when they are trained as soliders. Orders are given and no questions are solicited. Immediate and implicit obedience is called for.

The Lord will tell us all we have need to lo know. We are His friends. What would be detrimental to us He will withhold (cf. our notes on Jn. 15:1216). We are not to know times or seasons, but to go to the ends of the earth witnessing.

Some disciples misunderstood the point of Jesus’ reply to Peter. The word was spread among the brethren that Jesus had said John would not die.

Barnes points out that first, the words of Jesus might easily be misunderstood and second, the false ‘rumor might gain credence when it was seen that John survived all the other apostles. So John, writing this gospel record in the twilight of life, deemed it this rumor and so said simply, “Jesus did not say that the other disciple would not die-Jesus said,’If it is my will that the other disciple remain until I come, it is none of your affair, Peter.

We believe it is significant that John repeated precisely what Jesus said and offered no interpretation. John learned the lesson Jesus intended. His disciples need not know all-but all they need to know is revealed.

The primary thing the disciples of Jesus need to do is to love and live the revealed teachings of their Master, leaving times and seasons to the wisdom and will ofa loving Father.

There are many Christians who need to be, as Hendriksen says, turned from curiosity to their calling. It seems there were many brethren in John’s day in the same curious frame of mind. They are majoring in miners.

We like the condusion given by Mr. Barclay: “Some would say that John was the great one, for his flights of thought went higher than those of any either man. Some would say that Paul was the great one for he fared to the ends of the earth for Christ. But this chapter says that Peter, too, had his place…to each Jesus had given his function. It was Peter’s function to shepherd the sheep of Christ, and in the end to die for Christ It was John’s fUnction to witness to the story of Christ, and to live to a great old age and to come to the end in peace.

That did not make them rivals and competitors in honor and prestige; that did not make the one greater or less than the other; it made them both servants of Christ. Let a man serve Christ where Christ has set him. As Jesus said to Peter, “Never mind the task that is given to someone else. Your job is to follow me.

And that is what He still says to each of us. Our glory is never in comparison with men; our glory is the service of Christ in whatever capacity has been allotted to us.

In spite of his faults and failures, Peter did indeed love the Lord, and he was not ashamed to admit it. The other men were certainly listening “over Peter’s shoulder” and benefiting from the conversation, for they too had failed the Lord after boasting of their devotion. Peter had already confessed his sin and been forgiven. Now he was being restored to apostleship and leadership.

The image, however, changes from that of the fisherman to that of the shepherd. Peter was to minister both as an evangelist (catching the fish) and a minister (shepherding the flock). It is unfortunate when we divorce these two because they should go together. Ministers ought to evangelize (2 Tim. 4:5) and then shepherd the people they have won so that they mature in the Lord.

Jesus gave three admonitions to Peter: “Feed My lambs,” “Shepherd My sheep,” and “Feed My sheep.” Both the lambs and the more mature sheep need feeding and leading, and that is the task of the spiritual shepherd.

It is an awesome responsibility to be a shepherd of God’s flock! (I Peter 5:2) There are enemies that want to destroy the flock, and the shepherd must be alert and courageous (Acts 20:28-35). By nature, sheep are ignorant and defenseless, and they need the protection and guidance ofthe shepherd.

While it is true that the Holy Spirit equips people to serve as shepherds, and gives these people to churches (Eph. 4: 1 Iff), it is also true that each individual Christian must help to care for the flock. Each of us has a gift or gifts from the Lord, and we should use what He has given us to help protect and perfect the flock. Sheep are prone to wander, and we must look after each other and encourage each other.

Jesus Christ is the Good Shepherd (John 10:11), the Great Shepherd (Heb. 13:20-21), and the Chief Shepherd (I Peter 5:4). Ministers are ”under-shepherds” who must obey Him as they minister to the flock. The most important thing we can do is to love Jesus Christ. If he truly loves Jesus Christ, the minister will also love His sheep and tenderly care for them.

The Greek word for “sheep” at the end of John 21:17 means “dear sheep.” Our Lord’s sheep are dear to Him and He wants His ministers to love them and care for them personally and lovingly. (See Ezek. 34 for God’s indictment of unfaithful shepherds, the leaders of Judah.)

A person who loves the flock will serve it faithfully, no matter what the cost.

How the fish were obtained by Jesus we are not told. We are neither told that He obtained them in a supernatural way or a natural way. Most commentators believe He supplied them supernaturally. The recent events and the excitement of the present hour would lead one to think this also must have come about in some supernatural way.

In their excitement and haste to meet the Lord they had forgotten their net full of fish strainmg on the tow rope still tied to the side of the boat and being lashed about by the waves of the surf. Jesus directed them, Bring of the fish which you have now taken. Perhaps Jesus had another reason for such directions than His concern that the miraculous catch might be lost by neglect.

Perhaps He wanted to re-emphasize the magnitude of the miracle. This we believe is all the significance there is to the number–153 of fish caught. The number is given simply to signify the marvelousness of it all.

They had fished all night and caught nothing. Jesus merely said, Cast your net on the right side of the boat, and in one cast they caught one hundred fifty-three large fish. So many the net was about to break.

Many commentators, both ancient and modem, are, we believe, too taken up with allegorizing, symbolizing and spiritualizing numbers.

For example Cyril of Alexandria said the 100 represents the “fulness of the Gentiles”; the 50 stands for the remnant of Israel which will be saved: 3 stands for the Trinity to whose glory all things are done.

Augustine, according to Barclay, explains it this way: 10 is the number for the Law (10 commandments); 7 is the number of grace (7 gifts of the Spirit); 7 plus 10 equals 17, 153 is the sum of all the figures, I plus 2 plus 3 plus 3 … and up to 17. Thus 153 stands for all those who either by Law or by grace have been moved to come to Jesus Christ.”

Whether the number has a mystical meaing or not, it most certainly points out that the one who wrote the Fourth Gospel was an eyewitness for he knew every detail even to the number and size of the fish that morning.

The amazing thing to the fishermen was that such an enonnous catch could be contained in the net without the net breaking.

Jesus bids them, “Come, have breakfast.” So overwhelmed with His majesty and awed with His omnipotence now not one of them dared interrogate Him. They all knew! There were no doubts, no questionings in their minds and hearts now. Perhaps the events of the night had so awed them that they stood off in reverential fear. None dared to say, Is it really you, Lord!

In fact, the indication is that they did not even dare to come close to the fire and feed themselves at His invitation. It seems that Jesus had to take the bread and the fish and “come” toward them and give it to them.

The main point to get from this section is exactly the point the disciples got and the one Jesus intended: a dramatic and awe-inspiring demonstration of the omnipotence and omniscience of Jesus Christ, the resurrected Lord of heaven and earth.

Verse 14 must, of course, be understood as denominating the third appearance to the disciples (apostles) being gathered together in a body. He appeared at least a third time to other disciples (both women and men) before this but this is His third appearance to His specially called disciples-apostles.

We Are Disciples–Follow Him (John 21:19-25)

“Jesus said this to indicate the kind of death by which Peter would glorify God. Then he said to him, “Follow me!” {20} Peter turned and saw that the disciple whom Jesus loved was following them. (This was the one who had leaned back against Jesus at the supper and had said, “Lord, who is going to betray you?”) {21} When Peter saw him, he asked, “Lord, what about him?” {22} Jesus answered, “If I want him to remain alive until I return, what is that to you? You must follow me.” {23} Because of this, the rumor spread among the brothers that this disciple would not die. But Jesus did not say that he would not die; he only said, “If I want him to remain alive until I return, what is that to you?” {24} This is the disciple who testifies to these things and who wrote them down. We know that his testimony is true. {25} Jesus did many other things as well. If every one of them were written down, I suppose that even the whole world would not have room for the books that would be written.”

Jesus had just spoken about Peter’s life and ministry, and now He talks about Peter’s death. This must have been a shock to Peter, to have the Lord discuss his death in such an open manner.

No doubt Peter was rejoicing that he had been restored to fellowship and apostleship. Why bring up martyrdom?

The first time Jesus spoke about His own death, Peter had opposed it (Matt. 16:2 Iff). Peter had even used his sword in the Garden in a futile attempt to protect his Lord. Yet Peter had boasted he would die for the Lord Jesus! But when the pressure was on, Peter failed miserably. (You and I probably would have done worse!) Anyone who yields himself to serve the Lord must honestly confront this matter of death.

When a person has settled the matter of death, then he is ready to live and to serve! Our Lord’s own death is a repeated theme in John’s Gospel: He knew that His “hour” would come, and He was prepared to obey the Father’s will. We as His followers must yield ourselves–just as He yielded Himself for us–and be “livmg sacrifices” (Rom. 12:1-2) who are “ready to be offered” (2 Tim. 4:6-8) if it is the will of God.

Earlier that morning, Peter had “girded himself’ and hurried to shore to meet Jesus (John 21:7). The day would come when another would take charge of Peter–and kill him (see 2 Peter 1:13-14).

Tradition tells us that Peter was indeed crucified, but that he asked to be crucified upside down, because he was not worthy to die exactly as his Master had died.

But Peter’s death would not be a tragedy, it would glorifl God! The death of Lazants glorified God (John 11:4, 40) and so did the death of Jesus (John 12:23ff). Paul’s great concern was that he glorify God, whether by life or by death (Phil 1:20-21). This should be our desire as well.

Our Lord’s words, “Follow Me!” must have brought new joy and love to Peter’s heart. Literally, Jesus said, “Keep on following Me.” Immediately, Peter began to follow Jesus, just as he had done before his great denial.

However, for a moment Peter took his eyes off the Lord Jesus, a mistake he had made at least two other times. After that first great catch of fish, Peter took his eyes off his Lord and looked at himself: “Depart from me; for I am a sinful man, O Lord!” (Luke 5:8)

When he was walking an the stormy sea with Jesus, Peter looked away from the Lord and began to look at the wind and waves; and immediately he began to sink (Matt. 14:30). It is dangerous to look at the circumstances instead of looking to the Lord.

Why did Peter look away from his Lord and start to look back? He heard somebody walking behind him. It was the Apostle John who was also following Jesus Christ.

Peter did a foolish thing and asked Jesus, “What shall this man do?” In other words, “Lord, you just told me what will happen to me; now, what will happen to John? “

The Lord rebuked Peter and reminded him that his job was to follow, not to meddle into the lives of other believers. Beware when you get your eyes off the Lord and start to look at other Christians! “Looking unto Jesus” should be the aim and practice of every believer (Heb. 12:1-2). To be distracted by ourselves, our circumstances, or by other Christians, is to disobey the Lord and possibly get detoured out of the will of God. Keep your eyes of faith on Him and on Him alone.

This does not mean that we ignore others, because we do have the responsibility of caring for one another (Phil. 2:1-4).

Rather, it means that we must not permit our curiosity about others to distract us from following the Lord. God has His plan for us; He also has plans for our Christian friends and associates. How He works in their lives is His business. Our business is to follow Him as He leads us (see Rom. 14:1-13).

Jesus did not say that John would live until His return, but that is the way some of the misguided believers understood it. More problems are caused by confused saints than by lost sinners! Misinterpreting the Word of God only creates misunderstanding about God’s people and God’s plans for His people.

However, there is a somewhat enigmatic quality to what the Lord said about John. Jesus did not say that John would live until He retwned, nor did He say that John would die before He returned. As it was, John lived the longest of all the disciples and did witness the Lord’s retum when he saw the visions that he recorded in the Book of Revelation.

As John came to the close of his book, he affirmed again the credibility of his witness. (Remember, witness is a key theme in the Gospel of John. The word is used forty-seven times.) John witnessed these events himself and wrote them for us as he was led by the Holy Spirit. He could have included so much more, but he wrote only what the Spirit told him to write.

The book ends with Peter and John together following Jesus, and He led them right into the Book of Acts!

What an exciting thing it was to receive the power of the Spirit and to bear witness of Jesus Christ! Had they not trusted Him, been transformed by Him, and followed Him, they would have remained successful fishermen on the Sea of Galilee; and the world would never have heard ofthem.

Jesus Christ is transforming lives today. Wherever He finds a believer who is willing to yield to His will, listen to His Word, and follow His way, He begins to transform that believer and accomplish remarkable things in that life. He also begins to do wonderful things through that life.

Peter and John have been off the scene (except for their books) for centuries, but you and I are still here. We are taking His place and taking their place. What a responsibility! What a privilege!

We can succeed only as we permit Him to transform us.

This passage makes it quite clear that John must have lived to a very old age; he must have lived on until the report went round that he was going to go on living until Jesus came again. Now, just as the previous passage assigned to Peter his place in the scheme of things, this one assigns to John his place. It was his function to be pre-eminently the witness to Christ. Again, people in the early Church must have made their comparisons. They must have pointed out how Paul went away to the ends of the earth. They must have pointed out how Peter went here and there shepherding his people. And then they may have wondered what was the function of John who had lived on in Ephesus until he was so old that he was past all activity. Here is the answer: Paul might be the pioneer of Christ, Peter might be the shepherd of Christ, but John was the witness of Christ. He was the man who was able to say: “I saw these things, and I know that they are true.”

To this day the final argument for Christianity is Christian experience. To this day the Christian is the man who can say: “I know Jesus Christ, and I know that these things are true.”

So, at the end, this gospel takes two of the great figures of the Church, Peter and John. To each Jesus had given his function. It was Peter’s to shepherd the sheep of Christ, and in the end to die for him. It was John’s to witness to the story of Christ, and to live to a great old age and to come to the end in peace. That did not make them rivals in honour and prestige, nor make the one greater or less than the other; it made them both servants of Christ.

Let a man serve Christ where Christ has set him. As Jesus said to Peter: “Never mind the task that is given to someone else. Your job is to follow me.” That is what he still says to each one of us. Our glory is never in comparison with other men; our glory is the service of Christ in whatever capacity he has allotted to us.

In this last chapter the writer of the Fourth Gospel has set before the Church for whom he wrote certain great truths. He has reminded them of the reality of the Resurrection; he has reminded them of the universality of the Church; he has reminded them that Peter and John are not competitors in honour, but that Peter is the great shepherd and John the great witness. Now he comes to the end; and he comes there thinking once again of the splendour of Jesus Christ. Whatever we know of Christ, we have only grasped a fragment of him. Whatever the wonders we have experienced, they are as nothing to the wonders which we may yet experience. Human categories are powerless to describe Christ, and human books are inadequate to hold him. And so John ends with the innumerable triumphs the inexhaustible power, and the limitless grace of Jesus Christ.

———————————————————

We hesitate to comment on these last two verses inasmuch as there is good manuscript evidence to show that it was not a part of the onginal.

The Sinaiticus manuscript (350 A.D.-othenwise known as Aleph), gives evidence that verses 24 and 25 were added and the original Aleph manuscript was subjected to inspection by ultra-violet process and it was found that these verses were not included in the Sinaiticus coder when it was first written but were added later.

The Bodmer II Papyrus (P66) omits these two verses (Bodmer II dates about 250 A.D.). It is reported that one of the best manuscripts of John found just recently, designated (P75), also omits these two verses (this manuscript also dates sometime between 200-300 A.D.)

The latest revision of the Greek text by Nestle in its critical apparatus notes that Aleph omits verse 25. Perhaps more manuscript evidence will be forthcoming soon to establish either the omission or the inclusion of these verses. Until then, we will make comments, with the reservatons stated above, on these two verses.

Foster thinks that the elders of the church at Ephesus, where John probably resided when he wrote the Fourth Gospel, added verses 24 and 25.

Hendricksen is of the same opinion and so is Westcott. Their argument is based upon the change of person which they say indicates a change of authorship.

Macknight, however, in his “Harmony of The Gospels, ” says it is agreeable to John’s manner (cf Jn. 19:-5) to speak of himself in the third person (cf also I Jn. 5:18 and III Jn. 12). Macknight then believes John himself to be the author of these two concluding verses.

Whoever authored them they are a strong affirmation of the reliability of his record. If it is by the Ephesian elders they probably were endowed with the supernatural gift of the Holy Spirit to “discern the spirits” and were adding their verification to the record for the benefit of the churches in which the record would be read.

Verse 25 is hyperbolic. It is a common figure of speech of the people of that area. One has only to read the Prophets to see this. This exaggeration serves to express the great magnitude and importance of the words and deeds of Jesus which were recorded.

Scripture itself testifies that there were things said and done by Jesus not recorded in the books about His life (the Gospels). In Acts 1:1-4 we are told that Jesus appeared to the disciples and spoke concerning the kingdom of God over a period of 40 days. Some of these things are recorded, some are not.

In Acts 20:35 we have recorded a statement of Jesus not to be found in any of the Gospel accounts.

There are many spurious apocryphal gospels and other accounts which purport to be records of deeds and sayings of Jesus. They are so utterly out of harmony with the tenor of the inspired accounts and the historical evidence is so definitely against their canonicity that they are completely unreliable.

The main point is that John has recorded enough that men might come to believe and love Jesus Christ and become heirs of salvation in His name (Jn. 20:30-31).

If men will not believe on the basis of what has been written, they will not believe even if someone would rise from the dead (ci. Lk. 16:31).

John has written enough. The omnipotence, omniscience, compassion, love and glory of Jesus Christ has been recounted with factuality, emotion and a moral penetration that is able to capture the volition of man.

Anything less would be insufficient-anything more would be redundant. Let us remember the admonition of this same apostle when he wrote the Revelation he received on Patmos (Rev. 22:18-20).

We say, “Amen” to Lenski when he closes his commentary with, “Soli Deo Gloria”–Glory to God alone” is our prayer for this commentary.

Turn right now, without letting another moment go by, and reread the Prologue, John 1:1-18. After these hours of soul-gripping study of John’s Gospel can you not say with all that is in you, “The Word became flesh, and dwelt among us” (and we beheld his glory, glory as of the only begotten from the Father), full of grace and truth!”

NOTE ON THE DATE OF THE CRUCIFIXION

There is one great problem in the fourth gospel which we did not take note of at all when we were studying it. Here we can note it only very briefly, for it is really an unsolved problem on which the literature is immense.

It is quite certain that the fourth gospel and the other three give different dates for the Crucifixion, and take different views of what the last meal together was.

In the Synoptic gospels it is clear that the Last Supper was the Passover and that Jesus was crucified on Passover Day. It must be remembered that the Jewish day began at 6 p.m. on what to us is the day before. The Passover fell on 15th Nisan; but 15th Nisan began on what to us is 14th Nisan at 6 p.m. Mark seems to be quite clear; he says: “And on the first day of unleavened bread, when they sacrificed the passover, his disciples said unto him, Where will you have us go and prepare for you to eat the passover?” Jesus gives them instructions. Then Mark goes on: “And they prepared the passover, and when it was evening he came with the twelve.” (Mark 14:12-17.) Undoubtedly Mark wished to show the Last Supper as a Passover meal and that Jesus was crucified on Passover day; and Matthew and Luke follow Mark.

On the other hand John is quite clear that Jesus was crucified on the day before the passover. He begins his story of the last meal: “Now before the feast of the Passover . . .” (John 13:1). When Judas left the upper room, they thought he had gone to prepare for the Passover (John 13:29). The Jews would not enter the judgment hall lest they should become unclean and be prevented from eating the Passover (John 18:28). The judgment is during the preparation for the Passover (John 19:14).

There is here a contradiction for which there is no compromise solution. Either the Synoptic gospels are correct or John is. Scholars are much divided. But it seems most likely that the Synoptics are correct. John was always looking for hidden meanings. In his story Jesus is crucified as somewhere near the sixth hour (John 19:14). It was just then that in the Temple the Passover lambs were being killed. By far the likeliest thing is that John dated things in order that Jesus would be crucified at exactly the same time as the Passover lambs were being killed, so that he might be seen as the great Passover Lamb who saved his people and took away the sins of the world. It seems that the Synoptic gospels are right in fact, while John is right in truth; and John was always more interested in eternal truth than in mere historic fact. There is no full explanation of this obvious discrepancy; but this seems to us the best.

“Transformed To A New Life” John 21:1-25