AFTERWARD JESUS APPEARED again to his disciples, by the Sea of Tiberias. It happened this way: 2Simon 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.
4Early in the morning, Jesus stood on the shore, but the disciples did not realize that it was Jesus.
5He called out to them, “Friends, haven’t you any fish?”
“No,” they answered.
6He 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.
7Then 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. 8The other disciples followed in the boat, towing the net full of fish, for they were not far from shore, about a hundred yards. 9When they landed, they saw a fire of burning coals there with fish on it, and some bread.
10Jesus said to them, “Bring some of the fish you have just caught.”
11Simon 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. 12Jesus said to them, “Come and have breakfast.” None of the disciples dared ask him, “Who are you?” They knew it was the Lord. 13Jesus came, took the bread and gave it to them, and did the same with the fish. 14This was now the third time Jesus appeared to his disciples after he was raised from the dead.
15When 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.”
16Again 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.”
17The 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. 18I 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.” 19Jesus said this to indicate the kind of death by which Peter would glorify God. Then he said to him, “Follow me!”
20Peter 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?”) 21When Peter saw him, he asked, “Lord, what about him?”
22Jesus answered, “If I want him to remain alive until I return, what is that to you? You must follow me.” 23Because 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?”
24This is the disciple who testifies to these things and who wrote them down. We know that his testimony is true.
25Jesus 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.
Original Meaning
SCHOLARS ARE DIVIDED over the literary history and role of John 21.1 Some view it as a vital and necessary conclusion to the Gospel, intimately linked to the previous twenty chapters. Others conclude that this final chapter is a supplement to the Gospel, an addition penned either by the same author who wrote chapters 1–20 or by his disciples (who identify themselves in 21:24). The chief problem is that within the narrative of the Gospel, chapter 21 appears extraneous. Note how 20:29 ends the Easter story with a final benediction and 20:30–31 provides an excellent closing to the book as a whole. Moreover, to some scholars it seems odd that these seven disciples would depart for Galilee, resume their previous occupation, and not recognize Jesus immediately, given the stupendous experiences recorded in chapter 20.
At the same time, however, there is no evidence in the manuscript tradition that this Gospel ever circulated without this final chapter.2 And even if this Gospel seems to end with chapter 20, it is improper to impose a standard of consistency on John’s Gospel that was never intended.3 Some scholars may be overly confident about their prediction of what John should have done.4 Vocabulary studies of the chapter likewise point to its integrity. There are twenty-eight words in chapter 21 that do not appear in chapters 1–20, yet in chapter 21 we have a new subject (fishing), which alone demands new vocabulary.5 Today most scholars see the present chapter as fully integrated (by someone) into the earliest stage of the Gospel.
The list of links between these verses and the balance of John is extensive. Note the following: Sea of Tiberias; the names Simon Peter, Thomas the Twin, Nathanael of Cana; the Greek word for “fish” (opsarion, 21:6, 9, 11); the contrast of Peter and the Beloved Disciple; Jesus’ “charcoal fire”; the distribution of bread and fish (cf. 6:11); the numbering of Jesus’ appearances (21:14); Simon’s father’s named “John”; the sheep metaphor; the double use of amen; an emphasis on “true witness” (21:24; cf. 19:35); the triple restoration of Peter (following his triple denial); the parenthesis of 21:19 (cf. 12:33); and the reference to the Beloved Disciple as “the one who had leaned back against Jesus” (cf. 13:25).6 Each of these words or themes appears elsewhere in the Gospel.
For instance, 18:18 describes a charcoal fire precisely like the one mentioned in 21:9 (Gk. anthrakia), and this Greek word appears nowhere else in the entire New Testament. These links are so compelling that either we have a chapter that is intimately a part of John’s narrative, or we have a later writer who has consciously imitated John’s style and incorporated many of his ideas.
Our dilemma is that while the style and form of the chapter appears Johannine, it seems to interrupt the main force of the Gospel’s story. The best explanation is to see these stories as secondary but authentically Johannine. With the exception of 21:24–25 (and also perhaps vv. 20–23), the bulk of John 20 has come from the same pen as John 1–20. Thus, it is not unreasonable to point to the Beloved Disciple (who is likely John, son of Zebedee) as the author.7
But now a crisis may have swept John’s church. John may have died or been near death (see 21:23), and faithful disciples who identify themselves in 21:24 (“we know that his testimony is true”) have collated John’s final stories and added them to his Gospel. John 20:31 says that there were many other signs worked by Jesus; these followers have saved one of them, the miraculous catch of fish. These were likely accounts written up by John that are now patched into his Gospel lest they be lost. These editors were skilful and wove the chapter artfully so that its link to the foregoing narrative is unmistakable (cf. 21:14, “this is now the third time Jesus appeared . . .”). They perhaps added the glorious prologue as well (1:1–18), enabling the Gospel to confront those issues the apostle fought toward the end of his life, particularly in his first letter.8
If an appendix is defined as an addition that bears no connection to previous material, we should then view chapter 21 as an epilogue, which picks up previous themes and develops them, bringing these subjects to a firm conclusion.9 John is not interested in giving us yet one more proof of Jesus’ resurrection. If a reader has not been convinced by the account in chapter 20, these added stories will not help.
John 21 develops two entirely different subjects. (1) The apostolic mission of the church is symbolized not only by the great catch of fish but by Peter’s private conversation with Jesus. This is a theme echoed in the Synoptics, wherein no Gospel could be complete without some signal that the work of Jesus’ followers must now follow his resurrection and departure (see Matt. 28:16–20; Mark 16:14–20 [though this is an addition]; Luke 24:44–53). The fish hauled in from the sea and the sheep Peter is called to love suggest those in the world whom Jesus likewise loves, those who will believe in Christ later through the disciples’ words (17:20)—other sheep perhaps not yet in Jesus’ fold (10:16).
(2) John concentrates on the character of Peter, whose name threads through the entire chapter. Peter’s threefold denial of Christ (18:15–18, 25–27) is matched by his threefold announcement of love. In addition, while the Beloved Disciple is the one who recognizes Jesus from the boat (21:7), Peter rushes to the shore in his zeal to see the Lord and is later invited to haul in the great catch of fish. This is Peter’s restoration. Jesus sees in this fallen disciple genuine potential for good and now not only demonstrates marked personal interest in him but predicts that Peter will follow Jesus even in a death that will “glorify God” (21:19).
The Fishing Miracle (21:1–14)
WHILE THE RESURRECTED Jesus appeared to his followers in Jerusalem according to John and Luke (Luke 24; John 20), the other Gospels point to Galilee as the place where they will meet him. Mark 16:7 (cf. Matt. 28:7) records the words of an angel, “But go, tell his disciples and Peter, ‘He is going ahead of you into Galilee. There you will see him, just as he told you.’ ” This suggests no contradiction. The disciples have simply been instructed to return to what had been their “base” throughout Jesus’ ministry and there receive further instructions. In John’s narrative, Jesus appeared already on Easter Sunday and then eight days later; now he appears a third (and final) time on the shore of Galilee. John 21:14 helpfully numbers these appearances.
The Sea of Tiberias is the Sea of Galilee, about seventy-five miles north of Jerusalem and surrounded by the hills of Galilee and Golan (see comments on 6:1). The fishing villages of Bethsaida and Capernaum are here—both significant residences of leading disciples. Peter is from Bethsaida (Heb. “house of fish,” see 1:44), and he decides to return to his long-neglected work of fishing.10 Other disciples are there too, even though some are not from the region (Nathanael is from Cana); the seven listed in 21:2 decide to join Peter for a night’s fishing.
The best fishing can be found in the early hours before sunrise (NIV “night”), and families generally worked together in pairs (cf. Luke 5:2). Two boats generally used compound nets (trammel nets) that would encircle a school of fish by setting them up vertically with cork floaters on one edge and stone or metal sinkers on the other. Once the school was surrounded, the net was tightened by the boats and the men would throw “cast nets” (about ten feet across), bearing lead sinkers over the unwary fish. These filled nets would either be emptied by a swimmer or pulled into the boat while many of the other fish would get caught in the net wall surrounding them.11 Peter’s boat is using this method in the shallow water about a hundred yards from shore (21:8), and it is likely that he is diving into the sea checking the cast nets (21:7).12
The seven disciples have an unsuccessful morning on the sea and they are frustrated. At sunrise they are finishing up when an unknown voice from shore instructs them to try the opposite side of the boat. “Throw your net on the right side of the boat and you will find some,” Jesus called out (21:6). To toss a cast net at random into the sea was virtually futile. Only a school captured by a trammel net could be picked up in this manner. But the stranger may have seen a large school of fish from the shore, and Peter quickly spins the net over his head and lets it sail, like a parachute, dropping onto the sea as he watches the sinkers take it down.
In these shallow waters, the miraculous catch cannot be mistaken. Pinned to the net are over one hundred fish (later counted at 153), and its weight is more than the boat can take. Recently members of Kibbutz Ginosar in Galilee found such a first-century fishing boat (now on display at the Beit Yigal Allon Museum, Ginosar), and its size gives some insight.13 Its length is 26.5 feet and its width 7.5 feet. If this bears any resemblance to Peter’s boat, seven men would have filled it—which lends further support to the notion that these men use two vessels.14
Immediately the Beloved Disciple recognizes Jesus on the shore (21:7) and conveys the news to Peter. What Peter does next has invited unnecessary confusion (obscured by a paraphrase in the NIV). Some translations, reflecting the literal Greek, report that when Peter hears that it is the Lord, he “put on his clothes for he was naked.” The idea is that Peter is wearing a loin cloth for diving into he sea (full nudity would be unusual) and now he gets dressed to join Jesus. The problem is that he gets dressed in order to jump fully clothed into the sea.
A more plausible translation recognizes that the verb “to dress” (Gk. diazonymmi) actually refers to wrapping or tucking clothes around oneself (as one would with a robe or toga). In 13:4 Jesus thus “wraps” (diazonymmi) a towel around himself at the footwashing. Here Peter is wearing a worker’s smock (Gk. epedytes) on the boat, but he wants to swim to shore to meet the Lord. Because he is naked (Gk. gymnos) underneath the smock, when he hears that Jesus is on the shore, he tucks or wraps his smock into his belt to give him a tight fit and leaps into the water.15
None of the others respond with Peter’s impulsiveness. John tells us that the other men turn their boats toward shore and slowly drag the bursting cast net (21:8). Rather than anchoring at a coastal harbor, they likely drop their stone anchor when the water became shallow, as it does quickly on the northern coasts. Later Peter runs out to the net, frees it from the boat, and pulls it to shore.
In Judaism, an abundant catch was a sign of God’s favor and blessing (T. Zebulon 6:1–8); this is precisely what Jesus has done. He blesses them further by greeting them with a fire and roasting fish together with fresh bread (the mainstays of a first-century meal in Galilee). Peter is told to haul the 153 netted fish to shore not to supplement Jesus’ breakfast, but to preserve the catch as any responsible fisherman would do. Some of the minor harbors in Galilee (such as Kursi) had stone catch-basins where newly caught fish can be kept fresh for later cleaning.16 Peter either drops the fish into one of these or keeps them in the shallows.
While they are eating, John says that the men know it is Jesus but are also afraid to ask (21:12). This is unusual. In the garden Mary (who knew Jesus intimately) spoke with him and mistook him to be a gardener, only later recognizing him when he said her name (20:16). The disciples now do the same. Jesus’ resurrected appearance bears some traits that give everyone pause: He is the same Jesus, but the events of Easter have also made him unmistakably different. Jesus’ offer of “bread and fish” precisely parallels what he did at the miraculous feeding in 6:11, and this no doubt serves as a signal that removes any uncertainties (cf. Luke 24:30 for similar recognition at a meal).
Much speculation has surrounded the meaning of the 153 fish. For some, this is merely the count of fish here offered to establish the size of the miracle (although a parallel miracle in Luke 5 provides no such number). Others see a deeper symbolism. The most popular explanation began with Jerome, who argued that in antiquity mariners understood that there were 153 species of fish. Jesus’ miracle is then a symbol of the “many species,” the many nations, who now must be netted. Jerome gives his source for this comment (the naturalist writer Oppian), but a quick glance at Oppian’s words does not bear this result. Antiquity did not believe that there were 153 species of fish. An earlier writer, Pliny, even tells us that according to his research there were seventy-four species in the world (plus thirty crustaceans)!17
Since Greek and Hebrew letters had numerical values and this system became a code for symbolic meanings (called gematria), some have sought a numerical value in 153 (as many have done with the number 666 in Rev. 13:18). For instance, the Greek words “Simon” and “fish” total 153. The Hebrew phrase “church of love” does as well. One scholar recently argued for the Hebrew word Pisgah, the mountain in Moab from which Moses commissioned his followers after viewing the land of Israel before his death (Deut. 3:27; 34:1).18
In 1958 a better suggestion was given pointing to Ezekiel.19 Ezekiel 47 says that at the end of time, a stream will flow from Jerusalem filled with fish from “En-Gedi to En-Egalaim” (47:9–10). En-Gedi is 17 and En-Egalaim represents 153. The number 17 is significant because it is the “triangular number” of 153 (1+2+3+4 . . . +17 = 153), and ancient mathematicians and scholars studied these sequences.20 Once we see the relation between 153 and 17, speculation becomes endless. Augustine noted the number 17 and thought of 153 believers who were inspired by the “7” gifts of the Spirit to obey the “10” commandments. Origen thought that 153 should be divided to symbolize the trinity: 153 = (50 × 3) + 3.
Patristic interpreters give us some clue to how fantastic such interpretations may become, and no doubt they should warn us about doing the same. Cyril of Alexandria thought the number represented 100 pagans, fifty Jews, and the Trinity! If John had a symbolic meaning in mind, we can only guess what it was. As with the other miracles of quantity in the Gospel (the wine in Cana, the food in Galilee), this number may simply represent extreme abundance and blessing from the One who controls good gifts from heaven. I imagine that Greek mathematicians recognized 153 as numerically important and likely saw it as a symbol of a “perfect and unique catch of fish.”21
John ends this section (21:14) by reminding us that this appearance was the third time Jesus had revealed himself since his resurrection. No doubt he has in mind the events of Easter, where he appeared to Mary and to the Twelve (20:11–23), and the second revelation in the Upper Room the following week, when he appeared for the benefit of Thomas (20:26–29). This reference closely links 21:1–14 with the stories of chapter 20.
The Restoration of Peter (21:15–17)
FOLLOWING THEIR MEAL as they sit on the beach thinking about their handsome catch of fish, Jesus strikes up a conversation with Peter. The solemn character of the moment is underscored by Jesus’ form of address: “Simon son of John.” Simon was the apostle’s given name but Jesus had renamed him “Peter” (Gk. petros, rock, Matt. 16:18). Peter’s name occurs frequently in this Gospel22 but not like this. Each time Jesus questions Peter here, he uses this full and formal form of address.
We should keep in mind that these verses are closely linked with the fishing miracle of 21:1–14. Thus, when Jesus asks Peter, “Do you love me more than these,” we are forced to examine the context to unravel the meaning of “these.” Is Jesus asking, “Do you love me more than you love these boats and fish?” Or, “do you love me more than you love these men with whom you are working?” These two options are relevant since Peter has rejoined his fishing career and now with his friends around him, perhaps Jesus is calling him to make a choice. Does he love his career or is he willing to be Christ’s disciple with a thoroughgoing call to ministry?
We must keep in mind that it was Peter who spoke up when Jesus predicted his betrayal. In the Synoptics he said that he alone would continue to be faithful even if the others fell away (Matt. 26:33; Mark 14:29). John describes for us Peter’s zeal to follow Jesus despite warnings of death. “Lord, why can’t I follow you now? I will lay down my life for you” (13:37; cf. 15:12–13). And, of course, the deepest irony of this story is that once Peter utters this pledge, he denies Christ three times. But in the present setting, Jesus is the One who knows all things (1:42; 2:25; 16:30), and he understands that despite this terrible falling, Peter is still a man of faith and commitment. Jesus may then be asking, “Do you [indeed] love me more than these other men love me?” Jesus is asking Peter to examine the strength of his earlier pledges.
The first step in Peter’s restoration comes when Jesus asks Peter to bring “the fish” to shore (21:10). Even this mundane task sets him apart, affirming his position as a leader among these men. Jesus may even be remembering his call to make these men “fishers of men” (Matt. 4:19), so that now the “catch” is going to be Peter’s responsibility. But fishing will not be the primary metaphor for Peter’s future.
Jesus’ three queries in 21:15–17 are perhaps the most celebrated exchange of questions and answers in the entire Bible. Three times Jesus asks Peter if he loves him, and three times Peter affirms his love. In each case he is commissioned to tend Jesus’ flock. There are nuances of language here, however, that are often identified in the passage, and it may be helpful to outline the exchange in Greek.
[15] Jesus: Do you love [agapao] me? | Peter: I love [phileo] you. |
[16] Jesus: Do you love [agapao] me? | Peter: I love [phileo] you. |
[17] Jesus: Do you love [phileo] me? | Peter: I love [phileo] you. |
Interpreters have to make a decision. Do these two words for love convey some hidden difference of meaning? Some commentators have argued that phileo represents an inferior form of love and that Jesus is challenging Peter to elevate his level of commitment. In effect, Jesus asks Peter, “Do you possess a profound love for me?” and Peter responds, “Yes Lord, I am fond of you.” In the end (21:17) Jesus reduces his expectation to Peter’s humble and limited affections. This nuance is behind the NIV translation of “truly love” and “love” for the two verbs.
One of the problems with this view is that if the conversation took place in Aramaic, such variation in Greek would not have been present—although this explanation fails to recognize that John is using Greek to represent the nuances of the exchange and his choice of words remains important. Another difficulty is that Peter oddly says “yes” to Jesus two times when (according to the view that emphasizes the difference between agapao and phileo) he should have said “no.” The two times Peter is asked, “Do you love [agapao] me?” Peter should then say, “No, Lord, I do not love you that deeply.” But Peter seems to be acknowledging and accepting that he indeed bears the sort of love Jesus describes, even though he uses phileo.
This has led many exegetes to see the variation between agapao and phileo as insignificant and to understand these two words as synonyms. In the LXX, for instance, Jacob’s love for Joseph is expressed with both verbs (Gen. 37:3–4). In Proverbs 8:17 both words are used to represent one Hebrew verb. This is the view of major lexicons23 as well as grammarians. N. Turner refers to John’s regular use of “needless” synonyms in order to bring variety to his narratives.24 John has two words each for love, send, heal, ask, speak, do, feed, sheep, and know, and in most cases these variations seem to merely avoid monotony.
Leon Morris echoes this sentiment: “There is no difference on the grounds of Johannine usage, for seeing a difference in meaning between these two verbs.”25 The focus of Peter’s conversation with Jesus has to do with his commission to tend the flock of Christ, not the quality of his love for him. Peter is thus upset (21:17) not because Jesus has changed the verb for love, but because Jesus has asked him the same question for the third time.
The same sort of comment can be said for the charges given to Peter following each affirmation of love. Once again there is variation, but these word shifts bear no theological importance. Jesus commissions Peter three times to care for his “flock”:
(1) Feed (basko) my lambs (arnion)
(2) Tend (poimaino) my sheep (probaton)
(3) Feed (basko) my sheep (probaton)
Attempts to find deeper meaning in the connections among these words should be viewed with utmost caution.
The Death of Peter and the Beloved Disciple (21:18–23)
DEATH AND GLORIFICATION are united so thoroughly in the Fourth Gospel that John regularly refers to Jesus’ death simply as “his glorification” (e.g., 12:23). The same correlation now applies to Peter (21:19). Discipleship for Peter will include not simply a ministry tending the flock of Christ (21:15–17) but also martyrdom that glorifies God. “I tell you the truth” (NIV) reflects the double formula “truly, truly” (see comment on 1:51), an expression reserved for Jesus’ most important sayings. Peter’s youth was characterized by freedom. He dressed himself and was free to go where he desired. This may be a well-known proverb in Jesus’ day.26 Old age, by contrast, will be characterized by limitations. At this time Peter will have to be dressed and led about.
While some interpreters think that Jesus is simply referring to Peter’s dependence, a strong case can be made for typical Johannine double meaning. In another day, someone will “stretch out your hands,” Jesus says to Peter. This language points clearly to crucifixion; the Greek word used here was used by many early Christian writers to represent death on the cross.27 If this is true—and I am convinced it is—then we may also have one more allusion to crucifixion in 21:18. In old age, Peter will not be “dressed” (NIV), but “bound” (Gk. zonnyo), as many victims were “fastened” with ropes to the cross. Those who lead him will not be charitable, but will force him to go where he does not want to.
We should no doubt read these verses together with 13:36–38, where Peter makes his bold promise to “lay down his life” for Jesus. Indeed, Jesus promises, while Peter cannot go where Jesus is going now, Peter will “follow later.” Jesus is anticipating his own hour of glorification, and both in 13:37 and in 21:18 he is prophesying Peter’s fate. Peter will lay down his life for Jesus (13:38); he will be crucified too; he will likewise glorify God in the same manner as his Lord—but this must await a time in the future. “Follow me” in 21:19 now takes on a poignant and provocative new meaning. Peter will follow Jesus to the cross.
Interest now shifts to the Beloved Disciple in 21:20–23. This name appeared first in 13:23 (also 19:26; 20:2; 21:7, 20) and may also connect with an unnamed disciple at other key places (1:37; 19:36). Note that the “sons of Zebedee” accompanied Peter fishing (21:2), and this adds plausibility to the suggestion that this Beloved Disciple is John.28 Throughout the Gospel this disciple is an exemplar of faithfulness and commitment. We are reminded, for instance, that it was he who spoke to Jesus about betrayal at their last meal (21:20b). He was faithful, standing with Jesus at the cross (19:26), and later he was the first to express faith at the empty tomb (20:8). Here at the shore, Peter is charged to “follow” Jesus (21:19), but we learn that John, the disciple whom Jesus loved, is “following” already (21:20). Again he is a model who on one level may be following nearby as Jesus talks privately with Peter, but who (on another level) is found to be the ideal “follower” whom Peter should emulate.
Encouraged perhaps by his own commission and restoration (21:22), Peter asks Jesus pointedly about John’s fate, “Lord, what about him?” Will John have a similar commission? Will he share a similar glorious martyrdom? Do we dare sense in Peter’s tone a rivalry that echoes the two men’s race to the tomb (20:4)? Jesus’ answer is nothing if not abrupt: It is not Peter’s privilege to know how or when John will die—or if, for that matter, John will remain alive until Jesus comes back in his powerful return (cf. 14:3; 1 John 2:28). Again, Jesus tells the apostle to follow, and this time the form is emphatic (cf. 21:19).29 To paraphrase: “Peter, this matter is not your concern; it is mine. You have one duty: Follow me.”
John 21:23 corrects what must have been an unusual misinterpretation of Jesus’ words that had circulated for some time in the church. No doubt among John’s followers many believed that their beloved leader would not die but would remain until Christ returned. Disciples in the Johannine church could thus keep their hope in the Second Coming alive and then increase their anticipation as John grew in age.
The problem, of course, is that once John died and Christ had not returned, the enemies of the church would have ample opportunity to ridicule Christian believers (2 Peter 3:4; cf. Matt. 16:28; 1 Thess. 4:15). The Gospel repeats Jesus’ original words again (21:23b), suggesting that the same exhortation given to Peter perhaps should come to devout Christians. The Gospel uses an emphatic “but” in the second half of the verse (Gk. alla) as if to say, “But let’s be clear—Jesus did not say that John would not die.” As Peter should not speculate about John, so too should John’s followers abandon any eschatology linked to the apostle’s fate.
Has John already died? Exegetes are divided. Some believe that John is very old since one can hardly imagine his followers saying, “He will not die,” if John is already dead. But others argue convincingly that 21:23 may serve another purpose. Perhaps John’s followers once believed he would survive, but now he is dead, and the community has been thrown into disarray. They have built an eschatology hinged to his surviving and now all has collapsed. John’s followers venerated his apostleship to such a degree that they now respond to the confusion caused by his death with an editorial explanation. It may also be at this time that they put the finishing touches on his Gospel (adding perhaps John’s prologue and chapter 21?) and giving their leader his famous name, “the Beloved Disciple.”
Validating John’s Testimony (21:24–25)
JOHN’S DISCIPLES NOW explicitly affirm the veracity of their leader’s work. When they write, “We know that his testimony is true” (italics added), at once we are alerted to their presence in the narrative. Here we have a third party standing between John’s reliable testimony and ourselves as readers. With devotion and humility, they now pen the Gospel’s closing frame.
This “Beloved Disciple” described in 21:21–23, the man whose intimate relationship with Jesus was a hallmark of his life, is affirmed as the eyewitness source of the stories recorded in this Gospel. This disciple is no idealized figure of faith promoted in the narrative, but a genuine man whose life built a community of believers and whose death shook their confidence. He was a man who saw the events of Jesus’ life (see 19:35) and wrote them down (21:24) so that other generations might benefit. “These things” (21:24) refer not simply to the episodes of chapter 21 but to the great span of the Gospel’s larger narrative. Moreover, John is the final witness in a long line of witnesses (such as John the Baptist and a host of signs), who is supplying with his Gospel record the final testimony of evidence for Christ.
Are these writers and editors the elders of the church of Ephesus, as church tradition suggests? According to Clement of Alexandria, John wrote his Gospel only after his disciples and fellow bishops urged him to do so.30 We cannot be certain of this tradition, but we must take the “we” of 21:24 seriously. John’s ministry resulted in the birth of a community committed to the preservation of the apostolic witness. For them the things of Jesus were true because people like John had seen them in history and recorded them accurately. This Gospel is no fanciful speculation, no whimsical, inspired redrawing of Jesus’ portrait. It is a record of what happened, given by a man who had seen it.31
The Gospel’s closing verse may well stem from the hand of John himself (following the quick editorial insertion of 21:24).32 John reminds us that there is far more to Jesus’ life than what is recorded in his Gospel. This suggests again the possibility that John knew of other stories (Synoptic stories?) that he did not record (cf. 20:30). At best we can say that the Fourth Gospel is a partial rendering—but also a sufficient rendering—of a story whose scope surpasses any one effort.
With playful and delightful hyperbole, John says that even all the books of the world could not contain Jesus’ story. Such expressions were common in antiquity. Rabbi Johanan ben Zakkai, a first-century teacher, wrote, “If all heaven were a parchment, and all the trees produced pens, and all the waters were ink, they would not suffice to inscribe the wisdom I have received from my teachers: and yet from the wisdom of the wise I have enjoyed only so much as the water a fly which plunges into the sea can remove.”33 John ends his Gospel with similar humility. The story is larger than anything he can imagine. His effort, while glorious for us to read, pales in comparison to the glory of the Person whom his story describes.
Bridging Contexts
THE WORK OF THE CHURCH. In many respects this chapter-long epilogue serves the Gospel much like the final verses of Matthew, Mark, and Luke. Matthew ends his Gospel with the Great Commission, where Jesus takes his followers to a Galilee mountain and charges them to go into the world and make disciples (Matt. 28:16–20). This charge focuses on the church and its work, empowering and commissioning the disciples to nurture and tend the followers of Jesus. Luke’s ending is similar (24:44–53); he shifts the focus to Jerusalem, where Jesus calls them to be his witnesses in the world—men and women empowered by the Holy Spirit, who will testify concerning the events of Jesus’ life and bring new followers into discipleship. Again, the topic is the church and its work. Although Mark’s longer ending (Mark 16:9–20) is surely inauthentic, a later scribe sensed the need to supplement the dramatic ending of 16:8 by including similar themes. The disciples are commissioned to go to the world as preachers, recreating the powerful signs of Jesus and bringing new believers into the community of faith. Once again, the story of Jesus ends with an emphasis on the church and its work in the world.
This closing frame of the Gospel of John echoes these same interests but supplements them with concerns of its own. These are not stories that affirm the reality of the resurrection or the truth of Jesus’ message. The fishing miracle of chapter 21 is not a sign for unbelievers, compelling them to believe in the resurrected Christ. Chapter 21 is an epilogue addressed to the church and its responsibilities and work in the world. The principal story in the chapter—the great catch of fish and Jesus’ subsequent conversation around the morning fire—reinforces the apostolic commission to take responsibility for those who come into the kingdom of Christ. Peter is to be fisherman and shepherd; some followers even may be called to be martyrs, but each has a task to glorify God by obediently following Jesus.
We have seen secondary, symbolic meanings throughout this Gospel. John delights in using irony and wordplay, but we have also seen that due caution is in order when we look for these meanings. The catch of fish, for instance, likely has little numerical symbolism. This is simply a miracle of abundance not unlike the enormous volume of wine in Cana (ch. 2) or Jesus’ distribution of bread (ch. 6). Nevertheless the miraculous sign may symbolize the work of Peter that now Jesus wishes to direct. It is no accident that the Beloved Disciple points us to what is most important in the story. This is his literary role on many occasions. He is the one who recognizes Jesus’ identity (21:7) when others cannot; and when Peter races to the shore, he is the one who stays with the fish, bringing them laboriously to land. Peter’s zeal is outdone again by John’s perception and insight. The fish—as practical gift and symbol of divine work—must not be neglected.
Jesus wants to direct his followers to the tasks that will continue his work in the world. The Spirit, which they now possess (20:22), is not merely a private gift of reassurance and comfort. It is an equipping that should inspire their witness in the world (15:26–27) and strengthen them for the confrontations that will inevitably come (16:7–11). It will mean pastoral work that mediates to the world knowledge of Christ’s saving work (20:23), which gathers new believers into a new flock (10:16)—a flock that Christ had not yet gathered, but which he now desires to build. The work of Christ is now the work of the church, his disciples—focused narrowly in this chapter on Peter—who must feed and tend the sheep of Jesus (21:15–17).
Secondary themes. There are also a couple of secondary themes that anticipate this primary message of Jesus’ instructions for work in the church. (1) The story of Peter’s reconciliation to Jesus is a story of Peter’s healing. It is no accident that Peter, the man who denied Jesus three times following a bravado-filled promise of faithfulness, now affirms his love for Christ three times. Much can (and ought) to be said for ministers and laypersons who work for Christ but need to have their own confidence in their relationship with him healed.
(2) The gentle rivalry between Peter and the Beloved Disciple reaches its peak in this chapter. We do not have enough information to probe beneath the surface to learn what transpired between these two men. But in 21:21 Peter finally unmasks his feelings: “Lord, what about him? What about this other man on the margin of our conversation? Will his death rival mine in bringing you glory?” Jesus’ rebuke is a rebuke to each of us.
(3) In order to develop John 21 for an audience today, we should also probe the personal issues in Peter’s life and make them a paradigm for personal health in ministry today. The work of the church—the gathering of fish, the nurture of sheep—cannot go forward unless its ministers are healed of their histories and renewed by God’s Spirit.
Contemporary Significance
CHAPTER 21 IS about discipleship and leadership. As its story unfolds, Peter remains in the spotlight (along with the Beloved Disciple, John), modeling for us what it means to shepherd the flock of Christ. The disciples have now not only witnessed the resurrection of Jesus, but they have experienced the Spirit. They know the truth and have experienced the Spirit of truth. One question remains: What will they do with it? Will they simply privatize these spiritual moments with Jesus or will these moments lead them somewhere significant?
The miraculous catch of fish no doubt is symbol as well as surprise. Jesus is still the disciples’ champion, aiding them in the struggle of their labors. But more, he wants to direct their work, and with his help they will find catches beyond their wildest belief. This symbolism can be applied to the church and its work. As Jesus worked through the direction of the Father, so too the disciples must work at the word of Jesus. He is a coworker and with him success is assured.
But with a mix of metaphors, this “catch of fish” now must become a flock that these men learn to nurture and tend. They must look to the model of shepherding given by Jesus, both in his life and in his words (ch. 10). The charge given to Peter must become the charge heard by contemporary church leaders today. Christ’s church needs decisive leaders. This has been the case throughout the church’s two thousand-year history. But many who would claim to play that role bear the weaknesses and shortcomings shown to us in the life of Peter. In fact, we may well see Peter’s literary role in the chapter as a reflection of our own leadership, complete with its personal struggles and wounds. Through Peter’s healing we may gain insight into our own.
Peter and Jesus. One of the first pilgrims to visit the Holy Land and record her experiences was a woman named Egeria. Little is known of her except that she traveled from the Atlantic coast of Europe and spent three years in the Holy Land (A.D. 381–384). Fourth-century travel was dangerous and arduous and her courage must have astounded the many bishops who met her. Egeria was eager to visit monasteries as well as holy sites; she also desired to participate in Jerusalem’s ceremonies from Lent to Easter, and it is from her pen that we have a record of Jerusalem’s most ancient liturgies.34
On her visit to Galilee she made a point of locating a site with “Seven Springs” called in Greek “Heptapagon.”35 Her interest here centered on the feeding miracles of Jesus. On Galilee’s north shore she was taken to a small Byzantine church. She was escorted to a stone altar and told that this is where Jesus offered his disciples bread and fish in John 21. By the ninth century the site gained the name “The Place of Coals,” because Jesus had built a “charcoal fire” there (21:9) and cooked fish on it. This was an important destination for this remarkable woman because it recalled a moment in time that transformed one man’s life.
Today Protestants rarely take the time to visit this beautiful Franciscan site with its cultivated grounds and gardens.36 The church steps seen by Egeria (possibly cut in the second or third century) are still visible as well as the shoreline used by Jesus to call his disciples to breakfast. The Franciscans also commissioned what is arguably the finest statue in Galilee adjacent to the shoreline chapel. It offers a life-size portrayal of Peter, who has now met his Lord on the beach. We also see Jesus, renewing his love for Peter and commissioning him. Jesus towers over Peter, both forgiving and commissioning this great man of God. Christians who visit the site sense what Egeria knew. Something momentous transpired here, and it speaks not just of Peter but of us.
Peter made a terrible mistake. His triple denial at Jesus’ interrogation is one of the few stories shared by the four Gospels. Knowledge of it was widespread among the evangelists, and it was deemed to be such an important episode that none chose to omit it. Luke notes not only that Peter denied Jesus, but at the crowing of the cock, Jesus (who must have been in the high priest’s courtyard) looked directly at him. Peter immediately remembered his promises of faithfulness as well as Jesus’ prediction. He then went out and wept bitterly (Luke 22:62).
True ministry now was impossible for Peter. On the one hand, he could have spent the balance of his life working for the kingdom and promoting faith in Jesus. He could have become one of the most zealous apostles, intolerant of those who might compromise, inflexible with any who didn’t take discipleship with utmost seriousness. All of this energy would look excellent on the surface, but it would have been mere compensation—perhaps even overcompensation—for the failings of his earlier life. This sort of Christianity (so familiar to ardent conservatives) is destructive. It produces a spiritual regimen that is merely a Protestant penance. “Because I failed God, because I have failed myself, I have a lot to make up for.” Such a ministry knows nothing of the “rejoicing heart” Jesus promised to his followers in John 16:22.
On the other hand, Peter could have become a man filled with despair. Seeing his own weakness so directly, knowing that Jesus had seen it and now even his fellow apostles knew about it, how could he still enjoy anyone’s respect? Yes, Peter could have continued in ministry, having packed away the burden of his sin in some of the deepest recesses of his heart. But it would have eroded his soul. Self-criticism, depression, and a spiritual pessimism (disguised as a “theology of the cross”) would have characterized his work. This burden would have sapped his energy; but because of his fear of disappointing himself and God once more, he could not quit. Without realizing it, the Christianity he promoted would become destructive to himself and to others. Any ministry like this also knows nothing of the “rejoicing heart” Jesus promised in the Upper Room in John 16.
Jesus wanted none of this. His first plan was a gift of such good humor I can just imagine him smiling as he contemplated his friends hauling in a net full of fish. He had done this once before at the lakeshore (see Luke 5:1–11). Early in his ministry he got their attention with a dramatic catch of fish, and this launched their ministries together in Galilee. “I will teach you to catch people,” he said. And (Luke notes) they left their boats and followed him. Now Jesus must get their attention again by evoking an old memory. When Peter saw his net filled to capacity, the apostolic squeals from this apostolic boat could likely be heard for miles.
When Peter learned that it was Jesus who had done this—the fishing-miracle-worker Jesus—it is no accident that he ran to the shore. He ran to the only one who could heal his memories, who could rewrite the terrible pictures and sounds of his recent past—the courtyard, the charcoal fire, the young woman. The miracle demonstrated that despite Peter’s failings, Jesus was still on his side, cooking a good meal for friends, having fun filling nets with fish. Then the invitation to affirm his love three times drowned out the echoes of his betrayal that haunted him. The last time Peter stood over a charcoal fire, he denied Jesus (18:18). Now Jesus makes him stand over another charcoal fire (21:9) and with it, review old memories and remove them.
Many pastors and laypersons in ministry need to visit the shores of Tabgha in Galilee and reread John 21. The work of the church can only go forward when we are unburdened of our destructive memories through the gracious forgiveness of God. When this happens, we will be empowered and transformed and made ready to represent Jesus with a rejoicing heart.37
Peter and John. We have had a number of occasions to note the not-so-subtle comparison made between Peter and the Beloved Disciple (or John). Throughout the latter parts of the Gospel, John appears as a man of remarkable insight and wisdom. He is the one who enjoys an intimate conversation with Jesus in the Upper Room (13:21–30) while Peter must make his inquiries through him. In chapter 18 he is also known to the high priest, which gains Peter access to the courtyard. And when Jesus is on the cross, John stands faithfully with Jesus’ mother, not only lending support but also serving as a witness to Jesus’ suffering and death (19:25–37). While Peter may race first to the empty tomb, John looks in and believes (20:1–10). Now in the present episode, it is John who recognizes Jesus (Peter seems oblivious) and while Peter sprints to shore, John remains behind hauling the fish to shore (20:1–14).
In the history of the interpretation of John, scholars have tried to attach some fairly grand theories to this so-called rivalry. For instance, some have argued that these two characters were merely symbols of two rival churches—one Greek, one Jewish—that struggled for dominance in the first century.38 The trouble with such theories is not only their speculative nature, but their denial of any historical reminiscence in the Gospel. I prefer to see this as a genuine reflection of Peter and John’s relationship. All sources portray Peter as a strong leader, impulsive perhaps, but nevertheless possessing valuable skills. This is possibly why Jesus cultivates him as a leader along with James and John in the Synoptic Gospels. In our present chapter Peter announces, “I’m going out to fish” (21:3), and the others follow. As the story in Acts unfolds, Peter’s prominence and strength are underscored so that he becomes a vital and trusted leader in the early church.
The Synoptic picture also places John within this inner circle of disciple-leaders. He is invited to observe some of Jesus’ most powerful miracles (Mark 5:37) and even to witness Jesus’ transfiguration (9:2). In the early chapters of Acts, John joins Peter as they become articulate defenders of the faith. A casual reading of the letters of John demonstrates that this apostle likewise possessed many leadership traits. Able to confront and decisive in thought, John understands the heresy that has gripped his community and has chosen to fight it.
But John has one characteristic that sets him apart. The style of his Gospel and the form of his letters hint at it. John is a perceptive, abstract thinker. He probes the inner meaning of Jesus, and what he may have lacked in Peter’s personal presence, he makes up for in his faith, insight, and intelligence. His Gospel’s prologue, for instance, reaches heights of discovery unmatched in any other Gospel.
Two strong men; one Christian movement. Yet John possessed intuitive skills that permitted him to grasp aspects of Christ’s personhood in a way that may have eluded others. The leadership of the body of Christ demands a diversity of gifts, and John possessed his own unique set. For this we can be thankful. When in later centuries Christian theologians debated the nature of the Trinity or the character of the Incarnation, they frequently turned to John’s writing to help them sort through the issues.
Thus the ministries of John and Peter would be different. Peter would be the shepherd, John the seer; Peter the preacher, John the penman; Peter the foundational witness, John the faithful writer; Peter would die in the agony and passion of martyrdom, John would live on to a great age and pass away in quiet serenity.39
Following Jesus’ reaffirmation of his commitment to Peter (and Peter’s love for Jesus), Jesus discloses that Peter will some day follow him in martyrdom. This will be an opportunity when his courage and strength will glorify God. But rather than thinking about his own discipleship, Peter does something that surprises us: He wants to know how John will fare. Will John likewise have this opportunity? Will this become another moment of one-upmanship for Peter? Jesus’ rebuke in 21:22 is firm.
Personal competition and rivalry destroy the work of the church. Men and women with differing gifts frequently find themselves looking over their shoulder at someone else (as Peter noticed John), wondering if another’s successes are outpacing their own. This is another good reason for us to visit the shores of Tabgha on Galilee. This is the site not simply of Peter’s restoration to Jesus Christ, but the scene of Jesus’ exhortation. Peter’s healing thus had to move in two directions. Christ’s flock has need of many shepherds and (thankfully) each will bring to the community a variety of gifts.40
Peter and the church. Peter’s restoration to Christ makes possible his service to the church. Jesus’ command to feed and tend his sheep becomes Peter’s mandate for life. He affirms his love for Jesus, but now he understands that this means a great deal more. Jesus does not come to us as a “single person” (as it were), unattached. He is “married,” and the bride whom he loves and for which he sacrifices himself is the church (Eph. 5:25).41 To be in a relationship with Christ and to love him genuinely means that we must also love the church. For us to disparage the church is no more acceptable to Jesus than for us (in a human context) to disparage our good friend’s spouse.
Peter—and each of us—is called to embrace the body of Christ, to love it, to tend it, and to protect it. A quick glimpse at Peter’s letters gives some insight into the depth of his commitment to this mission. In later years Peter wrote to later church leaders who were expected to take up the same commission:
To the elders among you, I appeal as a fellow elder, a witness of Christ’s sufferings and one who also will share in the glory to be revealed: Be shepherds of God’s flock that is under your care, serving as overseers—not because you must, but because you are willing, as God wants you to be; not greedy for money, but eager to serve; not lording it over those entrusted to you, but being examples to the flock. And when the Chief Shepherd appears, you will receive the crown of glory that will never fade away. (1 Peter 5:1–4)
The chief images of John 21 (fish and sheep) both speak to us about the work of the church. We must gather up those to whom Christ directs us and nurture those who live in his flock. This is labor, divinely directed labor that must be inspired by our devotion to Christ.
But note that Jesus participates in these efforts too. We misuse the story of the great catch of fish if we use it to illustrate the work Christ has for us to do. We often view the story as Jesus’ exhortation for Peter to give his fishing “one more try.” With extra effort, with diligent work, with persistence that goes beyond our fatigue, Jesus can bless because he will join us in fruitful labor, serving the church. But this is not the meaning of the story. To throw a cast net into the ocean, especially after sunup and when no encircling net is present, is an act of desperation. No expert fisherman would assume he could make a significant catch.
Jesus is not calling for renewed skill or renewed energy, but for faith. He has challenged Peter to do what may appear ridiculous or fanciful. But in doing it, Peter discovers unmistakably that the fruit of his labor is a gift from God. No energy or expertise can make a catch like this. Thus Jesus desires to participate in our labors, and at his direction the burden of our work will be lifted.
But how does Jesus continue to participate in the labor of the church? How does he assist his shepherds in their work? This answer is found in the sustained emphasis on the Holy Spirit not only in the pages of John’s Gospel, but also in the five short letters penned by Peter and John. Each man understood that the Spirit is not merely an ambiguous spiritual influence, but is rather the Spirit of Jesus himself living in his followers (1 Peter 1:11; 1 John 3:24; cf. John 14:23). The work of the church, therefore, is not religious energy fueled by our sense of commission; it is a call to work, wed to a divine empowering; it is ministering knowing that Christ himself (through the Spirit) is ministering in and through our efforts.
Ministry is thus the service of healed men and women who understand their personal histories (and handicaps) well, who have made their brokenness transparent before God and been forgiven as well as transformed by the Spirit of God. They are fishermen (seeking those Christ calls them to “net”) and shepherds (nurturing those who have joined the flock). But above all they are people who love the church because they love Jesus Christ. As he was the good Shepherd, so they strive to be good shepherds, serving and leading and in some cases (as with Peter) discovering that sacrifice may be included in their call.
This realization of sacrifice (even to death) remained with Peter throughout his life. In 2 Peter 1:12–15 the apostle wrote about his life and the reality of his death. His ministry always took on a marked degree of intensity since (he writes) “I know that my death will come soon, as indeed our Lord Jesus Christ has made clear to me” (2 Peter 1:14 NRSV).
Such good shepherds are not people whose ministry promotes ego and personal glory, who disguise their own ambitions in pursuits of “excellence” in so-called great churches and institutions (ministries, denominations, colleges, or mission agencies). These are not people whose competitiveness harms other shepherds, who always look over their shoulder to see if someone else will enjoy a parallel glory. These are men and women who simply hear Jesus’ words, “Follow me,” and obey, thinking about their own discipleship more than that of others.
The result is a rich life that glorifies God in humility as it bears witness to Jesus (21:24). Peter understands this lesson given by Jesus on the lakeshore. His pastoral exhortations in his two letters point again and again to the demeanor of the Christian leader: “Therefore, rid yourselves of all malice and all deceit, hypocrisy, envy, and slander of every kind” (1 Peter 2:1). “Now that you have purified yourselves by obeying the truth so that you have sincere love for your brothers, love one another deeply, from the heart” (1:22). Peter is a pastor whose heart has been purged of envy and comparison, which facilitates the great love he has for the sheep he tends.
This profile no doubt describes the life of John as well. He has written his Gospel and supplied us with his testimony. His three letters show that he was a man who loved the church and defended it with all his might. John’s disciples knew that he was the “Beloved Disciple” because Jesus held a special affection for him. But this title also has another meaning (have we not seen countless double meanings in this Gospel?). This amazing title also describes one church’s love for its own shepherd. John was likewise beloved among those he led, and this Gospel, this beloved Gospel now concluded by his devoted disciples, stands as a memorial of John’s witness and work for the church.