Verses one through fourteen tell the story of the third appearance of Jesus. While other gospels expand somewhat on the activities of Jesus after his resurrection, John recounts three final appearances and leaves it at that. There are no forty days or ascension into Heaven. John's account ends with a central emphasis on the disciple whom Jesus loved. The story is as follows.
By the third encounter, Jesus had already appeared to his disciples first on the day of his rising and second one week later. That was in or around the area including Jerusalem and Bethany. By the time that Jesus met them on the final occasion, seven of the disciples had made their way all the way back to the sea of Galilee – and, I am going to assume the location was Capernaum where Peter lived and worked. The distance between Jerusalem and Capernaum is nearly seventy-nine miles and is about a four or five-day walk.
Peter is one of seven disciples listed: Peter, Thomas, Nathaniel, the two sons of Zebedee, James and John, and two other unnamed disciples. They were all hanging out together and life was returning to a sense of normalcy. Peter tells the others he wants to fish. Business as usual. Right? Are the unnamed disciples Andrew and Philip? I assume that Andrew had to be there because he was a fisherman like his brother, lived in the same town, and worked with his brother in the family business. Who was the final disciple and was he a fisherman? I went to https://www.theclassroom.com/what-were-the-professions-of-the-twelve-apostles-12083577.html for information on the professions of the disciples, finding what follows:
The Other Apostles
The Bible provides no information on the professions of Philip, Bartholomew, Thomas, Thaddaeus or James, the son of Alphaeus. It does provide information about Paul, who became an apostle after the death and resurrection of Jesus. He was a Pharisee and may have taught religion or worked in political office. During his missionary journeys, Paul supported himself as a tent maker according to Acts 18:1-3.
Four of the seven disciples present were bona fide fishermen. Three of them were not. Yet, all three of them hailed from the same general area and may, at the very least, have had some exposure to the fishing profession. We see in the account that there is no mentioned difficulty in those three joining in an all-nighter with Peter. Imagine being on the open waters all night, casting nets and pulling them in hour after hour. Sounds like hard work. The three just jumped in the ship with Peter with no preamble. Just your average fisherman's night out. Well, with the ministry and shared funding at an end, I guess there was nothing better for them to occupy their time with than earning a living for their families. It is recorded that Peter had a family. It is no particular stretch to imagine that the others had families. It is seen as a pattern in the gospels that Jesus allowed downtime in which the apostles returned home.
The timeline. Jesus was crucified and buried on the day of preparation – a Friday. The evening and the morning were the day of preparation. The next evening through the morning were the Sabbath, running from the evening of Saturday into the morning of Sunday. Finally, the evening and the morning were the first day of the week, running from the evening of Sunday to the morning of Monday. Jesus appeared to the disciples that evening and again one week from that day. If Peter and his fellow apostles made a four or five-day trek from Jerusalem to Capernaum in the Tuesday through Friday period after the final Sabbath of the Passover, for which they were required to be physically present, they would have arrived on or around the following weekend and rested through the Sabbath and returned to earning a living on or around pretty much three weeks to the day they first saw the risen Jesus.
Verse three follows the decision to fish by the seven men immediately entering “a ship” rather than 'the ship' or 'Peter's ship.' If Peter's family and Zebedee's family ran a joint business, a ship makes sense. They just went out and grabbed one of the ships normally available to the two families. We've seen more than seven men on one of those ships. In general terms, such ships were a minimum of 27 feet long, 7.5 feet wide, and with a maximum preserved height of 4.3 feet. They included a mast, oars, anchors, rigging, and ropes. Of a necessity, they would need room for the men and the nets with all the required space for the catch to be dumped. Whether or not there were seats, I could not say but Jesus once fell asleep in such a ship – so, perhaps.
The seven men had labored hard through the night. It was dawn as they returned. The light was just coming up. Figures on the shore would have seemed like dark silhouettes. Having seen Jesus a week prior and having received signs, they may have considered that the Lord had gone to be with the Father. There was no recorded instance of Jesus telling them he would be back in a week. It is possible the men considered Jesus gone. Therefore, a dark figure on the shore on an early morning would have raised no flags in their thinking. They had to plan out their ministries, decide just how to proceed, and do a little fishing along the way. A man calls to them from the shore, “Children, have ye any meat?” To hear a stranger they could not make out address them as children, their first assumption may have been that it was an older man. To hear him ask if they had something to eat, they may have thought he was either a beggar or a customer. They answered simply, “no.” We must think not in terms of our own times and attitudes but in the way of the past. How would they react to each of the possibilities – to a neighbor and fellow fisherman, to a beggar, to a customer, to an elder?
Why would they have so easily been convinced that the person on the shore knew better than they or had sound advice? Well, they were still on the waters, there was little to lose. There was always a chance. Still, it depends on who they assumed they were responding to. Perhaps the town had many elderly fishermen who no longer went out but had experience the younger men felt obliged to respect. They cast their net in the advised direction and not only caught fish, which would have been enough of a surprise at that point, but they caught so many fish they could barely hold on to the net. They could not, for the weight of it, pull it into the ship. What to do? They were both excited and perplexed. They had to do some quick thinking to keep the catch. I'm sure there was a cacophony of excited chatter but in the midst of that, the disciple whom Jesus loved came to the conclusion that such a miraculous catch could only be the work of Jesus. He said as much to Peter.
When Peter heard that it was Jesus, he also became excited. Before that, he may have only wanted to get off the ship and go get some sleep. He may have been exhausted but when he heard mention of the Master, he put on his work coat and threw himself into the sea. At two hundred cubits ( 300 feet ) from land, I wonder how deep the sea was? The water ranged from wading depth nearest the shore to approximately 32 feet deep. Peter swam for shore. It is mentioned that the other disciples followed in “a little ship.” Perhaps they had a larger ship at their disposal but simply chose the smaller among the available vessels. I considered the possibility that another of the disciples had swum to shore and went back out with a smaller vessel. I considered them pulling the net to shore between them but the wording plainly places the remaining six disciples together.
Verse nine redirected my thinking. I assumed that Peter swam to shore but there is no mention of him being there when the others arrive on the ship. Now I must consider that bringing the catch to shore was the reason Peter jumped overboard. Perhaps a few others did as well. I can picture some of the men rowing. I can picture some of them in the water pulling. Perhaps, where they were, the waters were shallow enough for Peter to jump in and wade, pulling in his catch with brute force. It was a group experience to come close to shore, see a fire of coals waiting, and tie off the little ship. On the fire, they spotted fish and bread that Jesus had provided. In the process of all of that, Jesus said to all of them, “Bring of the fish which ye have caught.” They were to add some of theirs to some of his.
“Peter went up.” That is a directional statement. To my mind, it suggests Peter coming ashore from the water and standing there on his feet. Peter is seen, in the John narrative, to 'muscle in' the fish with his own hands. To me, that suggests something of the strength and stature of the man. They later counted the fish and arrived at the number one hundred and fifty-three. It is stated that the net contained “great fishes.” That reference suggests a great weight of mature fish. Further, they thought it worthy of note that the net did not break under the full weight of the catch. I take it they were surprised by the size and amount of the catch. As to the exact number of 153, many writers through the ages have considered that there might be some deep or hidden significance to the number. Many have put forth theories, assumptions, and references. I found this in Wikipedia: The code for "mental processes & intelligence" in the Dewey Decimal Classification.
For myself, I have considered, through the years, that the number nine is the number that signifies change. When you add the three numbers, 1+5+3, the outcome is 9. It should also be noted that Jesus died in the ninth hour. Nine is, therefore, a number associated with finality, and completion of one's purpose. If you take the 53 and add it to the 1, you get 54. Adding the numbers in 54 brings one back to the number 9. I mention this because I was born in 1954. I feel like these numbers are special to me as I was raised in a home with a house number of 954. The significance of numbers is an aside. I have no idea why the author thought it necessary to mention the number of fish caught.
So they pull the net in, count the fish, and add some to the fire. By this time, they are all aware that it is Jesus. The meal is ready and Jesus invites them to dine. They gather around the fire and Jesus takes bread and breaks it in a typical fashion. In short, Jesus serves them breakfast. The author states in verse fourteen that this was the third occasion where Jesus met them after his resurrection.
Verses fifteen through nineteen show us the familiar exchange between Peter and Jesus. I get the sense that they are no longer sitting. Jesus asks a question three times. 'Peter, do you love me?' Peter answers three times in the affirmative although somewhat grieved over the repetition. It is almost like Jesus asking, 'Are you sure you love me?' 'Yes, Lord. I'm sure.' 'Are you sure that you are sure?' 'I said so. I would know if I wasn't.' But – the thing about this repetition is that it has scriptural roots in the old testament law. Deuteronomy 19:15 states, “at the mouth of two witnesses, or at the mouth of three witnesses, shall the matter be established.” Also in Corinthians 13:1, we find, “This is the third time I am coming to you. In the mouth of two or three witnesses shall every word be established.” The repetitious exchange between Peter and Jesus established both the fact that Peter loved Jesus (as in a pledge) and the charge to feed the lambs/sheep that Jesus placed in Peter's care. All of the exchange seemed to be summed up in Jesus' final command to Peter. “Follow me.”
The author gives an explanation in verses eighteen and nineteen. He explained what Jesus meant when he said to Peter, “Verily, verily, I say unto thee, When thou wast young, thou girdedst 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.” The author explained that those words signified the kind of death by which Peter would glorify God. I have always gotten the sense of an older, feeble person who is unable to dress himself, rather than a prisoner being bound and led away. However, this was supposedly how Peter would follow Jesus. Peter was perhaps one of the older disciples and after leading the Jerusalem church for years, he would have been approaching his doddering years. It is possible that those around him in service helped him dress and made sure he got to where he was supposed to be.
There is another point about these verses that I wish to bring up. If the author was John, how does he come by such a sage explanation? Was he the disciple whom Jesus loved because he had a gift for discernment? Early Church tradition states that Peter probably died by crucifixion in the year 64 around the time of the Great Fire of Rome. Bible scholars say that the Gospel of John was probably composed between 90 and 100 CE. Word of Peter's demise may have reached the author of John long before the gospel was written. Even so, the beloved disciple may still have had qualities that brought him closer to Jesus when he was a young man. Discernment is one possibility. Another is a thirst for truth. Another is a child-like faith.
So Jesus was walking with Peter after the meal which they ate in Capernaum after they had fished all night. Peter looks over his shoulder and sees the beloved disciple following Jesus like a puppy. That the beloved disciple was following speaks of his character and personality. Peter asks what Jesus was going to have that disciple do. Let us stop ahead of Jesus' response, to ask why. Why? Why was Peter concerned with the other person? After the meal, Peter and Jesus are up walking around and engaged in conversation. Why were not the other disciples following? Perhaps they had gone home to sleep. Perhaps they still sat around the fire in conversation. Perhaps they were processing the catch. Perhaps they were showing deference to their master thinking he wanted to speak with Peter alone. Only one disciple walked behind them. It was the beloved disciple. He followed as if he did not want the Lord to get too far away. Perhaps he feared he would not be present when Jesus left for heaven. Perhaps he desired to know if there was a command for him. It is possible that some or all of the other disciples followed at a distance behind the beloved disciple. Peter's question is never fully explained. It is presented as possible jealousy, as possible truculence or obtuseness. What I get is that Peter thought he was going to his commanded duties in an immediate fashion, as if Jesus was taking him to the lambs and sheep right there and then. I see Peter as mostly curious.
Peter asks Jesus, “What shall this man do?” More or less, Jesus told Peter, 'Don't you worry about him. Focus on the path I have set for you.' The details of Jesus' response to Peter, in verse twenty-two, is 'if I decide that he wait until I come, that is not your concern.' Let us ask ourselves, just what did Jesus mean when he used the word “come?” Obviously, word got around that Jesus meant, 'until I return,' which presumes that they thought Jesus was walking, at that time, to a place where he would leave them for heaven. That presumption signifies the possibility that all the disciples followed as Jesus and Peter walked ahead and that the beloved disciple was just the closest after them. The rumor that the loved disciple would live until the return of Jesus could have had its origin in any of the disciples. However, I want to suggest the possibility that Jesus meant, in the sense of handing out commands, 'until I come to him.'
The fact that the author felt compelled to rectify the rumor, in verse twenty-three, suggests that the author and the beloved disciple were actually one and the same. The rumor was not an immediate thing. The author used the expression, “Then went this saying abroad among the brethren.” The ''brethren" speaks, in a broader sense, of the followers of Jesus. There were the seventy or seventy-two apostles, mentioned in Luke, that Jesus sent out two by two. Jesus also had a large following among the common people as well as followers among the priests and Sanhedrin.
So, maybe the beloved disciple was actually the disciple John. Maybe he had a skill in discernment and understanding which was accepted beyond his own opinion. Verse twenty-four is suggestive. The author claims that the beloved disciple (student) is the very one who is testifying about the events of the written account. He also claims that “we” know that his testimony is true. That is a shared assessment more than an opinion. By the time of the writing, there was much commonly shared experience. There was a consensus among the brethren. It is not a stretch to think that there was something special about John. It is not a stretch to think that John's special quality was the reason Jesus loved him. It is not a stretch to think that said detail was well known by many.
The gospel of John includes no forty days, ascension, or the five hundred people mentioned in Corinthians fifteen. Other gospels have Jesus ascending from the Mount of Olives near Bethany. Alternately, Jesus leads the disciples to Bethany and ascends, commanding them to stay in Jerusalem for a time. The Gospel of John has a closing statement. They had their breakfast of fish and bread. Then they were up and walking. Perhaps they were heading back to Bethany. Some facts are absent as if the author is writing to the people who knew, the people who were there. To the general audience, he leaves a closing statement. It is a statement which suggests an active period in which many things occurred. The author intimates that so many things took place in that time that many volumes could not contain the information. Someone should have written about those forty days.
There you have it. That is the end of the gospel. To be honest, this work could be fleshed out a bit. This work is little more than the personal notes I have written down in my studies. As to whether or not they could be of use to others in their studies, I may only hope. I have not tried to understand the common things. One may understand only so much from going to Bible School or church. Those are the things which the spirit defines through the Apostle Paul as the rudiments. I will close with a reference obtained from an article written by Joseph A. Cannon including a definition from the Oxford English Dictionary.
"Rudiments" appears only twice in the Bible. Paul uses it, however, with surgical precision to describe the nature of the choice that all of us must make between the natural, carnal, or materialistic world view, or the spiritual, "in the beginning God …" perspective. Rudiment means the "first principles or elements of a subject; those points which are first taught to, or acquired by, one commencing the study or practice of a branch of knowledge." It is a "first principle; an initial step or stage." Rudiment is "the imperfect beginnings of some (material or immaterial) thing; those parts which are the foundation of later growth or development"
In my studies, in these notes, as in my mental development, I have striven to move beyond the rudiments. I have considered the rudiments to be like a glove that only shows the basic form of what exists beneath. I have striven to dig deeper and reach for the details. I have wanted a more perfect or fully realized understanding of the Bible's truth. So, I took the time, I dug deeper into the Bible praying for the help of the Holy Ghost in my quest. These are just my thoughts but if anyone reads the things I have written, I ask that you compare my thoughts to your own thoughts. We just might be on the same road.
End.
No comments:
Post a Comment