1. See Hooker, “Beginnings and Endings,” 201–02.
2. Brown writes, “The clear termination . . . seems to preclude any further narrative” (John, 2:1078).
3. Cf. Paul S. Minear, “The Original Functions of John 21,” JBL 102 (1983): 85–98 (86).
4. Bultmann, John, 700.
5. D. Moody Smith, The Composition and Order of the Fourth Gospel (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1965), 227.
6. According to an extensive linguistic comparison, B. de Solages, Jean et les Synoptiques (Leiden: Brill, 1979), 191–235 (234) even suggests that chapter 21 is actually in a closer linguistic relationship than chapter 20 to chapters 1–19.
7. See Alan Shaw, “Image and Symbol in John 21,” ExpTim 86 (1975): 311.
8. See Edmund Little, “Peter and the Beloved Disciple: Unfinished Business in John 21,” Stim 18 (2010): 36–43.
9. Richard Bauckham, “The 153 Fish and the Unity of the Fourth Gospel,” in Testimony of the Beloved Disciple, 271–84 (274).
10. Howard M. Jackson, “Ancient Self-referential Conventions and their Implications for the Authorship and Integrity of the Gospel of John,” JTS 50 (1999): 1–34 (4).
11. For a fascinating argument regarding the interconnection between the prologue and epilogue based upon intentional numerical compositon (496 syllables and words—a triangular number), see Bauckham, Jesus and the Eyewitnesses, 364. A similarly intentional numerical correspondence exists between the two-stage conclusion (20:30–31 and 21:24–25), both of which consist of exactly forty-three words.
12. Baum, “The Original Epilogue,” 231.
13. See Markl, “Spielen Joh 1,1; 20,30f; 21,24f auf den Rahmen des Pentateuch an?,” 107–19.
14. Baum, “The Original Epilogue,” 233.
15. See John Breck, “John 21: Appendix, Epilogue, or Conclusion,” SVTQ 36 (1992), 27–49.
16. On the nature of symbolism, see Sandra M. Schneiders, “John 21:1–14,” Int 43 (1989): 70–75, who explains how symbols “mediate transcendent reality” (71).
17. The following is adapted from Segovia, “The Final Farewell of Jesus,” 184–85.
18. Cf. Schlatter, Der Evangelist Johannes, 363.
19. Lars Hartman, “An Attempt at a Text-Centered Exegesis of John 21,” ST 38 (1984): 29–45 (30).
20. Schnackenburg, John, 3:352.
21. Bruner, John, 1204.
22. See Aquinas, John, 3:283.
23. However, this would not be the first place where the reader is benefited by counting (see comments on 1:17).
24. Hoskyns, Fourth Gospel, 552.
25. Brown, John, 2:1096.
26. Cf. Morris, John, 760.
27. Both testaments use the catching of fish to symbolize the catching and ingathering of people (for the OT, see Jer 16:14–16; Hab 1:14–15). Cf. Heil, Blood and Water, 153–54.
28. See Keener, John, 2:1226–27.
29. BDAG 892.
30. But the narrative is even more intentional. For the theological significance of the verbal root of “becoming” (γενομένης), see comments on 1:17.
31. BDAG 630.
32. Contra Bultmann, John, 707; Brown, John, 2:1070.
33. The NIV’s translation “friends” obscures the likely intentional connection to “children” in 1:12. In the historical context of the Gospel, however, the term could function as an affectionate colloquialism. Cf. Michaels, John, 1031.
34. BDAG 886. The term only occurs here in the NT and does not occur in the LXX; it is even rare in Greek literature. It is the first of three different terms for “fish” in this pericope. Cf. Moloney, John, 552.
35. Cf. Barrett, John, 580.
36. Morris, John, 761.
37. See Barrett, John, 580.
38. Keener, John, 2:1228.
39. Heil, Blood and Water, 155.
40. Ridderbos, John, 660.
41. See Stephen S. Smalley, “The Signs in John XXI,” NTS 20 (1964): 275–88.
42. Cf. Aquinas, John, 3:286; Augustine, John, 122.7.442.
43. With the modifying demonstrative, “that” (ἐκεῖνος) Beloved Disciple, the character is given a more technical introduction (cf. 13:25; 19:35).
44. Keener, John, 2:1183.
45. Similar to the second comparison, the Beloved Disciple is the first to see (20:5), but Peter is the first to take action (20:6). The connection between this pericope and 20:1–10 gives further credence to the originality of the epilogue. Cf. Beasley-Murray, John, 400.
46. Especially since swimming with a wrapped tunic would be cumbersome. Cf. Keener, John, 2:1229–30.
47. BDAG 812.
48. Angus Paddison, “Exegetical Notes: John 21:1–19,” ExpTim 118 (2007): 292–93 (293).
49. Newbigin, The Light Has Come, 277.
50. See Aquinas, John, 3:289–90.
51. Ridderbos, John, 662.
52. Regarding allusions to this meal as an allusion to the Lord’s Supper or Eucharist, see comments before 6:22.
53. Keener, John, 2:1231.
54. Barrett, John, 582.
55. See Heil, Blood and Water, 157.
56. For a more comprehensive survey and bibliography, see R. Alan Culpepper, “Designs for the Church in the Imagery of John 21:1–14,” in Imagery in the Gospel of John: Terms, Forms, Themes, and Theology of Johannine Figurative Language, ed. Jörg Frey, Jan G. Van der Watt, and Ruben Zimmermann, WUNT 200 (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2006), 369–402 (383–94).
57. Bernard, John, 2:699–700.
58. Timothy J. Wiarda, “John 21.1–23: Narrative Unity and Its Implications,” JSNT 46 (1992): 53–71 (60, 67).
59. See Brown, John, 2:1076.
60. See J.-P. Migne, ed., Patrologia Latina, 25:474c.
61. See Robert M. Grant, “ ‘One Hundred Fifty-Three Large Fish’ (John 21:11),” HTR 42 (1949): 273–75.
62. Aileen Guilding, The Fourth Gospel and Jewish Worship (Oxford: Clarendon, 1960), 226–27.
63. George J. Brooke, “4Q252 and the 153 Fish of John 21:11,” in Antikes Judentum und Frühes Christentum: Festschrift für Hartmut Stegemann zum 65. Geburtstag, ed. Bernd Kollmann, Wolfgand Reinbold, and Annette Steudel, BZNW 97 (Berlin: de Gruyter, 1999), 253–65.
64. J. M. Ross, “One Hundred and Fifty-Three Fishes,” ExpTim 100 (1989): 375.
65. Augustine, John, 122.6–9.441–43.
66. Ibid., 122.8.443.
67. M. J. J. Menken, Numerical Literary Techniques in John: The Fourth Evangelist’s Use of Numbers of Words and Syllables, NovTSup 55 (Leiden: Brill, 1985).
68. Richard Bauckham, “The 153 Fish and the Unity of the Fourth Gospel,” 283–84.
69. Ibid., 280–81.
70. Ibid., 283–84.
71. Culpepper, “Designs for the Church in the Imagery of John 21:1–14,” 401.
72. Brown, John, 2:1075.
73. According to Aquinas, part of the number’s meaning is its mystery (John, 3:291).
74. Cf. Raymond E. Brown, “The Resurrection in John 21—Missionary and Pastoral Directives for the Church,” Wor 64 (1990): 433–45.
75. Ridderbos, John, 664.
76. BDAG 349.
77. Hartman, “Text-Centered Exegesis of John 21,” 41.
78. Ibid.
79. Bruner, John, 1215.
80. Bultmann, John, 710. This pericope works with the motif of “hospitality” that has already been established in the Gospel (see comments before 4:1).
81. G. Delling, “τρεῖς, τρίς, τρίτος,” TDNT 8:222.
82. Calvin, John 11–21, 217.
83. Bruner, John, 1215.