Chapter XXI

Certain critics have treated this last chapter of John with suspicion. Grotius among the more modern commentators stated what Tertullian many centuries before had advocated, that the Gospel of John ends with the twentieth chapter, and that the concluding chapter was written by another hand. The notion that chapter xxi is at best a kind of an appendix is held by many among them Alford, Stier, Neander, Tholuk, Westcott, and a score of others. The contents of the chapter prove conclusively that it was written by John and forms an important part of the Gospel, therefore it is not an appendix at all.

“From all these theories I-entirely dissent, and repudiate them altogether. I see no proof whatever that the two last verses of the twentieth chapter were intended to be a winding up of the whole Gospel. To me they appear to be a characteristic comment of the Evangelist, such as he often makes, on the account he has given in the chapter of our Lord’s appearances to the disciples after his resurrection, and nothing more. To me it appears perfectly natural that he should go on writing, and give a further account of our Lord’s most instructive appearance at the sea of Galilee; and I see in the narrative no abruptness or awkward fitting whatever. On the contrary, I see a peculiar beauty in the selection of the matter which the twenty-first chapter contains. It seems to me a most fitting conclusion to the whole narrative of the Gospel, to tell us our Lord’s last sayings about two such Apostles as Peter and John. — Concerning Peter, it should be remembered that none of the Apostles had professed so much, and yet fallen so sadly as he had. John takes care to tell us how graciously and emphatically Jesus restores him to his commission, and specially bids him feed His Church, and foretells his end. — Concerning John, it should

PES

FFI ON EE

be remembered that he had been peculiarly mentioned, as the disciple whom Jesus loved. He meekly tells us that the only prediction about himself, if it can be called one, was that his future end was left in obscurity by his Lord. And thus he concludes his Gospel. If any one thinks that such a chapter comes in awkwardly, and is not a fitting conclusion to John’s narrative after the twentieth chapter, I cannot agree with him” — J. C. Ryle.

Verses 1-3. The chapter is at once defined as containing another manifestation of the risen Christ. It is clearly marked as the third time that He showed Himself to His disciples (verse 14). There are then two previous manifestations. The first one when Thomas was absent, taking place on the resurrection day; the second one a week later, recorded at the close of the preceding chapter. The prophetic-dispensational meaning of these two manifestations has been pointed out before. But there must be a third time, as in the beginning of the Gospel there is marked off a third day. That third day brought the marriage in Cana of Galilee, a blessed picture ‘of the Kingdom which follows Israel’s conversion, typified by Nathanael’s conversion.

The three days in the beginning of this Gospel (chapter 1:35, 43 and ii:1), with their sweet and instractive dispensational lessons, are repeated at the close of the Gospel in the three manifestations of the risen One. The third time He showed Himself to his disciples is, as we shall see, a striking prophetic picture of what will happen after Israel has confessed Him, as Thomas did. The lesson is the coming ingathering of the Gentile nations into the millennial kingdom. This is a strong evidence that this Gospel could not end with the twentieth chapter.

The scene is at the sea of Tiberias, or as it is also called, the lake of Gennesaret, the sea of Galilee. What holy and blessed memories gather around this historic lake! It is the sea across which the disciples toiled hard in rowing, with the wind contrary; the sea across which He came walking, when Peter left the little ship and walked to meet Him. The lake is often stormy; but He stilled the waves and the wind with His commanding word of power. At another occasion there was a miraculous draught of fishes, when the net broke. In this lake Peter caught the fish, at His direction, which supplied the coin to pay the tribute money. Sitting in a boat at the lake shore, He delivered some of His parables (Matt. xiii). On its shore He fed the multitudes, and in this lake the 2,000 swine had rushed to destruction, when the demons had entered into them. In one word this lake was the frequent scene of the display of His divine power and glory. Once more it is to witness His gracious power, His loving kindness, His mercy as well as His Lordship.

We see seven disciples gathered together, among these the two disciples which figure so prominently in the beginning and in the end of this Gospel, Nathanael of Cana in Galilee and Thomas. Were they in Galilee following the instruction of the angel and as commanded later by Himself? (Matt. xxvili:7,10). Simon Peter is evidently the leader of the little group. He proposed to go a fishing and the others followed him as leader. There was nothing wrong with these disciples when they took up their trade as fishermen. The time for witness bearing had not yet come, for the promised Spirit had not yet been given. The fear of the Jews still controlled them all. Perhaps it was also the matter of necessity, for they were poor men, who had to toil to support themselves. But their labors were in vain. Though they were excellent fishermen, and fished all night, they caught nothing. Well may we see the lesson here that all toil without the Lord goes for nothing; unless He directs there is no success.

Verses 4-14. When the morning was come the risen One appeared suddenly on the shore. It was as sudden an appearance as at the two previous occasions, when they met behind closed doors. Where our Lord was between these different visible manifestations we do not know. The disciples saw a figure standing on the shore, but they did not know that it was Jesus, their Lord and Master. They did not recognize Him, just as the two going to Emmaus did not know Him, because their eyes were holden. And as He called to them across the water, they did not know Him either by His voice. He spoke like one of their comrades, “Boys (not children) have ye anything to eat?” And they answered Him, “No.” Then He spoke a word of command, ‘“‘Cast the net on the right side of the ship, and ye shall find.” This instruction must have given to the disciples the first hint that the speaker might be the Lord. Would they have followed the command of a total stranger? Were not John and Peter reminded of the time when many months before, on the same lake, they had toiled all night and caught nothing, but at His Word they let down the nets once more and a miraculous draught of fishes resulted! The net was cast at once, following the direction given, and when the multitude of fishes were caught, the identity of the stranger at the shore was no longer guess work with them.

John, with a heart filled with love, which made him keen-sighted, recognized the Lord at once, just as he outran Peter and was the first to believe that Christ is risen. As elsewhere in this Gospel, which his inspired pen wrote, he speaks of himself as “that disciple whom Jesus loved.” He said to Peter, “It is the Lord.” But Peter is again close behind the beloved disciple. Impetuous, impulsive, yet affectionate, he rushed at once into action, he cast himself into the sea to reach the shore as quickly as possible. He is not going to be left behind now, as it was when John beat him in running to the tomb in the garden. And probably he succeeded this time. The other disciples came in a little ship, dragging along the net with fishes, which unlike the other net, when there was a miraculous draught of fishes, was not broken (Luke v:1-10). What took place, if Peter reached the Lord first, is not recorded. Here then is another spiritual lesson. Service without Him and without His guidance is barren. Alas! how much of such service there is today. Service in self-will, or under the leadership of a man, as it was with the six disciples who followed Peter that memorable night. But if we take our directions from Him who is our Lord, especially as “fishers of men,” that is soul winners, and are obedient to His words, and follow His directions, His own gracious power will accompany our toil.

Another miracle is seen by them when they gather at the shore. ‘‘As soon as they were come to land, they saw a fire of coals there, and fish laid thereon, and bread.” How did this coal fire, the broiling fish and the bread get there? A little while before they had acknowledged that they had nothing to eat. And here is a breakfast prepared for His beloved, toiling servants. There is but one solution of this mystery. The pierced hands of the Christ had prepared this meal. He started the coal fire. He produced by His own omnipotent power, the fish and the bread. He showed once more, as He did in the days of His humiliation on the same scene, by feeding the multitudes with bread, that He is a compassionate, tender, loving Lord, who cares for the bodies and temporal needs of His own, as He cares for their souls. Such a Lord He is still, He is touched with the feeling of our infirmities; He is interested even in a breakfast for His children. As we look upon this beautiful scene, His deep compassion, remembering that He is still the same, the Lord that changeth not, we take new courage to come with boldness to the throne of grace, and tell Him all our needs. He loves to be trusted and loves to show forth His loving kindness and tender mercies, as He did when He prepared that morning meal.

What is the dispensational meaning of this third manifestation of the risen Christ and the miraculous draught of fishes? It is the picture of the coming kingdom, established after Israel’s conversion, when the nations of the earth will be gathered in. The miraculous draught of fishes in the Gospel of Luke is a picture of the Gospel net during this present age. It breaks and those which are caught can not be numbered. But it is different here; the net did not break and the actual number of the great fish caught is given, there were One Hundred and Fifty and Three. Much guess-work has been done as to the meaning of this number.We cannot be dogmatic about it. But the fact that the exact number is given shows that it has a meaning. It is of great significance that historians of the first century speak of the number of nations known to them as being 153. This is the only meaning which we know of. All the nations, when the Lord comes, will be gathered into His Kingdom.

Then the divine host asked them to partake of the spread meal He had so graciously and miraculously provided. Here again we see His tender compassion. He knew they were tired and hungry. He Himself in the days of humiliation had been tired and hungry, and therefore He is always touched with the feeling of our infirmities. But what will a ee

sat So ) y
THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 407

be the feast to which He brings His own in days to come, the marriage supper of the Lamb? But why did they not ask Him, who art Thou? They knew it was the Lord. It must have been a holy awe which kept them from asking. Here too is proof that His resurrection-body, though the same incarnation body, must have been altered.

Verses 15-17. The meal was over and the Lord turned next to Peter. His denial had led Peter to the depths of repentance and self-judgment. We must rehearse briefly some of these things. Let us remember before Peter ever denied the Lord, He knew what was coming. Satan saw that Peter was a marked man. He had heard what the Lord had said about him (Matt. xvi). He tried to snatch him away from the Lord, and so Satan had asked permission to sift him, just as long before he had asked for Job. And the Lord assured Peter of His intercession in his behalf. Peter’s faith for this reason could not fail.

When the denial had taken place, the Lord “looked upon Peter, and Peter remembered the word of the Lord.” What a look that must have been! Then Peter went out and wept bitterly. A blessed weeping it was.

In the third place the risen One sent a special message to Peter through the women: ‘“Tell His disciples and Peter that He goeth before you into Galilee.” But more than that He appeared to Peter. “The Lord is risen indeed, and hath appeared to Simon” (Luke xxiv:33). “He was seen of Cephas” (1 Cor. xv:5). What occurred at this mysterious interview is a secret. No doubt the Lord had then direct dealings with Peter, which he was not permitted to reveal.

And now we come to his restoration to that which he had lost by his denial. He addressed Peter. The meal which they had enjoyed together was an expression of fellowship. Not a word of rebuke had come from the lips of the Lord. He - might have pointed to the coal-fire and might have asked - Peter if he remembered another coal-fire, before which he had’ warmed himself a number of days ago in the palace of the high priest. He might have asked him of the words of denial he had then spoken, But He addressed him in these words, “Simon Peter, son of Jonas, lovest thou Me more than these?” The reason for this question is very plain. What the Lord asked him was exactly what he had professed. He was loud-mouthed in his profession of devotion to Him, saying, “Lord, I am ready to go with Thee, both into prison and to death.” Confidently he had spoken thus of his strength. Then he denied Him thrice. When the Lord asked him the same question three times He touched most graciously the sore spot, reminding him of his past profession of devotion, and of his three denials. It had to be done not in secret, but before the six witnesses. Forgiveness was not involved in this. The Lord had forgiven him already; it was the answer to his penitential tears. The Lord had to restore him to service. In the presence of these witnesses He commissioned Peter once more, as He had done at Cesarea Philippi, after Peter had confessed Him as the Son of God. If such a restoration and renewed commission had not taken place others might have pointed to Peter and charged him with having forfeited his apostleship by his denial, while Peter would have been in serious doubt and uncertainty.

Roman Catholic theologians claim that the Lord established him here as the head of the Church. Dean Burgon answered this claim in the following statements: ““The profane and ridiculous pretensions of the Church of Rome are based in great part on the words our Lord addressed to St. Peter in this passage. The Papists assume (1) that He hereby appointed Peter to be His vicar upon earth; (2) that Peter was the first Bishop of Rome and (3) that Peter transmitted to the Bishops of the same See, in endless succession his own supposed authority over the rest of Christendom. Each one of these assumptions is simply unfounded and untrue; opposed alike to Scripture and reason; to the records of the early Church and the opinions of the primitive fathers.”

“Lovest thou Me more than these?” Then Peter answered “Yea, Lord; Thou knowest that I love Thee.” Our version does not distinguish at all between the two words used in the Greek, translated by “love”. The two words are the verbs “Agapao”; this expresses fully our English “love”; then there is the word “Phileo”’, which corresponds to our English “like”, or as it has been translated “to have a friendly feeling.” When the Lord put His question to Peter, the first word is used, “Simon, son of Jonas, lovest (4gapas) thou

Me more than these?” Now if Peter had not judged himself, if he had still adhered to the same self-confidence he exhibited before, he would have answered enthusiastically by using the same word the Lord had used. Instead he answered ‘““Thou knowest that I love (Philo) Thee.” He did not dare to use the word which expresses the highest affection. It is the evidence that he had learned the lesson and judged himself. The second time the Lord asked Peter He uses the same word, and Peter answers Him in the same way, employing also the same word, expressing a friendly affection. But when the Lord asked Peter the third time He uses the same word Peter had used, “Peter, lovest (Phileis) thou Me?” And Peter was grieved because He had asked him the third time, and answers appealing to His divine omniscience, “Lord, Thou knowest all things, Thou knowest that I love (Philo) Thee.”” The wound had been probed to the very bottom, though not a word of blame or reproach had come from the lips of the Lord. Peter had revealed in his three answers that his old self had been judged and broken.

And He, who knows indeed all things, knew the condition and state of his soul. He knew that Peter loved Him, and so with the first question He commissioned afresh and said “Feed My lambs.” He did not mean, as it is so often taught, little children; He means by this term believers, who are young in the faith and lack in deep spiritual experience. They are the little children in the epistle of John, and that which is weak has always His first and tenderest care. Even so Isaiah had spoken of Him as the shepherd. “He shall feed His flock like a shepherd; He shall gather the lambs with His arms, and carry them in His bosom, and shall gently lead those that are with young” (Is. xl:11). This blessed work, to feed that which is weak with the bread of life, he committed to Peter. It is a higher work than the exercise of the keys of the kingdom of Heaven. Those keys were used by Peter when he preached to the Jews on the day of Pentecost, and used again in the house of Cornelius, preaching to the Gentiles. With this the use of the keys was exhausted. Feeding His lambs is the more permanent work,

The second time the Lord commissions him, if we translate literally, to shepherd His sheep. The sheep are those which the Spirit of God in John’s epistle designates as “young men and fathers,” the more mature believers. He is commissioned to tend these sheep, to exercise a loving charge over them, doing a true shepherd’s work. Augustinus called attention to the fact that the Lord calls the lambs and the sheep “My” and not “Thy.” The flock is not the flock of a man, but the flock of God. Often preachers speak of “my flock” or “my people.” This is an evil habit and many servants of Christ speak thus unthoughtfully. “He, who treats Christians as his congregation, is guilty of the same forgetfulness of Divine grace and authority as the congregation in regarding the minister as their minister, instead of Christ’s. If any think these to be slight distinctions, it is clear that they have no right apprehension of a difference which is as deep in truth as it is fraught with the most momentous consequences for good and ill in practice. Only this gives moral elevation, as it alone springs from faith; this alone delivers from self, and gives the true relation and character, even Christ, whether to those that minister, or to those ministered to.” (Wm. Kelly.)

When Peter later wrote his letter he exhorts the elders, as an elder, to do the same which the Lord commissioned him to do. ‘Feed the flock of God which is among you, taking the oversight, not by constraint, but willingly; not for filthy lucre, but of a ready mind; neither as being lords over God’s heritage, but being examples to the flock” (liivets v.2=3)¢

And once more the Lord said “Feed my she:p,” or as some manuscripts record it, “little sheep,” *-uich is a term of endearment. And what the Lord told Peter He tells all those who are called by Him to minister to His flock. It is the expression of His own love for His sheep, which the servant of Christ is to manifest and which must constrain him. Well has it been said, “Love is the great endowment of a true pastor of Christ’s flock. He says not to Peter, ‘Art thou wise? or learned? or eloquent?’ but ‘Lovest thou me?’ Then, ‘feed.’ Love to Christ begets love to His own people’s souls, which are so precious to Him, and care of feeding them.”

Verses 18-25. But He spoke other words to Peter, which are also linked to his former conduct. ‘Verily, verily, I say unto thee, When thou wast young thou girdest thyself, and walkedst whither thou wouldest, but when thou shalt be old, thou shalt stretch forth thy hands, and another shall gird thee, and carry thee whither thou wouldest not. Thus spake He, signifying by what death he should glorify God. And when He had spoken this, He saith unto him, Follow Me.” It is the last “Verily” of this Gospel, in which this word so frequently appears. In self-confidence Peter had boasted that he would go to prison with the Lord, and die with Him. He failed miserably. But what he offered to do and could not do, the risen Christ would make possible for him. He announced the manner of his death and the time of his death, and thereby proving that as Lord He controls the departure of His servants out of this life. Peter was not yet an old man. He was still in his prime of natural - vigor. When younger still he ventured to go whither he - would, that is in self-will and self-confidence, as he did when he walked into the palace of the high priest after boasting. that he would die with Christ. The Lord told him when he would be older, an aged man, what he as a young man in fullest vigor failed to do, the Lord through Grace and Power, would enable him to do. He announced that the mode of his death would be like Christ’s death, by crucifixion. When he wrote his second epistle, he was an old man. He referred then to these words spoken to him by the Lord, “Knowing that shortly I must put off this my tabernacle, even as our Lord Jesus Christ has showed me” (2 Pet. 1:14).

There is a legend that Peter was in Rome when he was condemned to be crucified. It is said he tried to escape, and outside of Rome he met the Lord, whom he addressed by saying in Latin “Quo Vadis Domine,” Whither goest thou Lord? And the Lord answered, “To be crucified afresh”; then Peter turned back. But it is only a legend. We can rest assured when the time came Peter, as the Lord had said, stretched out his hands, ready to be crucified. It was the Grace and the Power of the risen, enthroned Christ, which made it possible. And so it was with the martyred millions in the beginning of the Church, as well as the host of martyrs before, during and after the reformation.

Then He said to Peter “Follow Me.” Here too we are reminded of Peter’s former words, “Lord, why cannot I follow Thee now?” ‘This was in answer to the statement of the Lord “Whither I go, thou canst not follow Me now; but thou shalt follow Me afterwards” (John xiii:36,37). The time for this had come and came still more fully when Peter died on the cross. It also may be looked upon as a renewed call to follow Him, not afar off, as he had done, but in closest fellowship. And into this He has called us all.

Then Peter’s eye rested upon John and he said “Lord, and what shall this man do?” By this question he evidenced a loving interest in the beloved disciple with whom he had been more closely associated than with his brother Andrew. This interest in John made him curious to know his future destiny. ‘The Lord answered him with a gracious rebuke. “If I will that he tarry till I come, what is this to thee? Follow thou Me.” He rebuked the curious anxiety of Peter and gave him to understand that He as the Lord and Master of John would order everything in John’s life as He had in the life of the questioner. What is this to thee? What good will it do you? The words “If I will that he tarry till I come” have been differently interpreted. The Lord probably meant that John should be the last of His Apostles to pass from this earth, and that he was the chosen one who should behold in a great vision, as he did in Patmos, the end of the age, and the Lord’s return in judgment and in the establishment of His kingdom. Others have taken it as an hypothetical expression, that the Lord was just supposing to have him tarry till He comes.

At once a tradition was started among the brethren that John should not die. Just a little word had been omitted, the little word “if.” The Lord did not say “I will that he tarry till I come’’; or that John should not die. How much harm there has been done, and is being done today, by wrong quotation of Scripture and building upon a perverted text, a misquoted saying, some unscriptural doctrine. And this saying did not die with the apostolic age. So late as the sixteenth century an enthusiast was burned at Toulouse who claimed to be the Apostle John.

The closing verses have been denied a Johanine authorship by many scholars and critics. There is no valid reason for such a supposition. It was not an amanuensis, or a friend of the Apostle, who concluded this Gospel with the statements of the last two verses, but John himself. He bears a solemn declaration that he is the author of all this document contains. The beloved disciple wrote these things. This is sufficient evidence. When he wrote “we know that his testomony is true” he writes as he did in his epistles — we have heard — we have seen and we know. The last verse is a description of the quantity and value of Christ’s works and words. For the adoring John they seemed so wonderful, so vast in their meaning and so deep, that the world could not contain the books that might be written.

We have reached the end of this blessed Gospel and we quote the late Bishop Ryle’s words with which he concluded his excellent exposition of John, from which we have frequently quoted.

“Reader, I have now set before thee thy Saviour the Lord Jesus Christ, that very Son of God, who was begotten by the Father by an eternal and ineffable generation, consubstantial and coequal with the Father in all things; — but in these last times, according to prophetical oracles, was incarnate for us, suffered, died, rose again from the dead, and was made King and Lord of all things. This is He who is appointed and given to us by God the Father, as the fullness of all grace and truth, as the Lamb of God who taketh away the sin of the world, as the ladder and door of heaven, as the serpent lifted up to render the poison of sin harmless, as the water which refreshes the thirsty, as the bread of life, as the light of the world, as the redeemer of God’s children, as the shepherd and door of the sheep, as the resurrection and the life, as the corn of wheat which springs up into:much fruit, as the conqueror of the prince of this world, as the way, the truth, and the life, as the true vine, and finally, as the redemption, salvation, satisfaction, and righteousness of all the faithful in all the world, throughout all ages. Let us therefore pray God the Father, that, being taught by His Gospel, we may know Him that is true, and believe in Him in whom alone is salvation; and that, believing, we may feel God living in us in this world, and in the world to come may enjoy His eternal and most blessed fellowship.” Amen and Amen.