After this meeting with him, they saw him again repeatedly, but no
incident, relating particularly to the subject of this memoir, occurred
on either of these occasions, except at the scene on lake Tiberias, so
fully and graphically given by John, in the last chapter of his gospel.
It seems that at that time, the disciples had, in accordance with the
earliest command of Jesus after his resurrection, gone into Galilee to
meet him there. The particular spot where this incident took place was
probably near Capernaum and Bethsaida, among their old familiar haunts.
Peter at this time residing at his home in Capernaum, it would seem,
very naturally, while waiting for the visit which Christ had promised
them, sought to pass the time as pleasantly as possible in his old
business, from which he had once been called to draw men into the grasp
of the gospel. With him at this time, were Thomas, or Didymus, and
Nathanael, and the sons of Zebedee, and two other disciples, whether of
the eleven or not, is not known. On his telling them that he was going
out a fishing, they, allured also by old habits and a desire to amuse
themselves in a useful way, declared that they also would go with him.
They went forth accordingly, and taking the fishing-boat, pushed off
in the evening as usual, the night being altogether the best time for
catching the fish, because the lake not then being constantly disturbed
by passing vessels, the fish are less disposed to keep themselves in
the depths of the waters, but feeling bolder in the stillness, rise
to the surface within reach of the watchful fisherman. But on this
occasion, from something peculiar in the state of the air or water,
the fish did not come within the range of the net; and that night they
caught nothing. Having given up the fruitless effort, they were towards
morning heavily working in towards the shore, and were about a hundred
yards from it, when they noticed some person who stood on the land;
but in the gray light of morning his person could not be distinguished.
This man called to them in a friendly voice, as soon as they came
within hailing distance, crying out in a free and familiar way, “Boys!
have you anything to eat?” To which they answered “No.” The unknown
friend then called to them in a confident tone, telling them to cast
the net on the right side of the ship, and they should find plenty.
They cast accordingly, and on closing and drawing the net, were not
able to pull it in, for the weight of the fishes taken in it. In a
moment flashed on the ready mind of John, the remembrance of the former
similar prodigy wrought at the word of Jesus near the same spot, and
he immediately recognized in the benevolent stranger, his Lord. Turning
to Simon, therefore, who had been too busy tugging at the net to
think of the meaning of the miracle, he said to him, “It is the Lord.”
Conviction burst on him with equal certainty as on his companion, and
giving way to his natural headlong promptitude in action, he leaped at
once into the water, after girding his great coat around him, and by
partly swimming and partly wading through the shallows, he soon reached
the shore, where his loved and long-expected Master was. At the same
time, with as little delay as possible, the rest of them, leaving their
large vessel probably on account of the shallows along that part of the
coast, came ashore in a little skiff, dragging the full net behind them.
In this they showed their considerate prudence, for had they all in
the first transport of impatience followed Peter, and left boat and net
together at that critical moment, the net would have loosened and the
fishes have escaped; thus making the kind miracle of no effect by their
carelessness. As soon as they were come to land they saw Jesus placed
composedly by a fire of coals which he had made, and on which he had
designed to cook for their common entertainment, some fish previously
caught, dished with some bread. Jesus without ceremony ordered them to
come and bring some of the fish they had just caught. Simon Peter now
mindful of his late heedless desertion of his comrades in the midst of
their worst labor, stepped forward zealously, and, unassisted, dragged
the heavy net out of the water; and though on opening it they found one
hundred and fifty-three large fishes in it, notwithstanding the weight,
the net was not broken. When they had obeyed his command, and supplied
the place of the fish already cooked on the fire by fresh ones from the
net, Jesus in a kind and hearty tone invited them to come and breakfast
with him on what he had prepared. The disciples, notwithstanding the
readiness with which they had come ashore to their Master, still seem
to have felt somewhat shy; not, however, because they had any solid
doubt as to his really being the person they had supposed him, for
no man durst say to him “who art thou?” knowing him to be the Lord.
Perhaps it was not yet full day-light, which may account for their
shyness and want of readiness in accepting his invitation. But Jesus,
in order fully to assure them, comes and takes bread, and puts it into
their hands, with a share of fish likewise to each. They now took hold
heartily, and without scruple sat down around the fire to breakfast
with him. So when they had done breakfast, as men are usually best
disposed to be social after eating, he on this occasion addressed
himself to Peter in words of reproof, warning and commission. He first
inquired of him, “Simon, son of Jonah, lovest thou me more than these?”
To this Peter readily replied, “Yea, Lord, thou knowest that I love
thee.” Jesus then said to him, “Feed my lambs.” Peter had learned some
humility by his late fall from truth and courage. Before, he had boldly
professed a regard for Christ, altogether surpassing in extent and
permanency the affection which the other disciples felt for him, and
had, in the fullness of his self-sufficiency, declared that though
all the rest should forsake him, yet would he abide by him, and follow
him even to prison and to death. But now that high self-confidence
had received a sad fall, and the remembrance of his late disgraceful
conduct was too fresh in his mind to allow him any more to assume that
tone of presumption. He therefore modestly confined his expression of
attachment to the simple and humble reference to the all-knowing heart
of his Divine Master, to which he solemnly and affectingly appealed as
his faithful witness in this assertion of new and entire devotion to
him, whom he had once so weakly denied and deserted. No more high-toned
boastings――no more arrogant assertion of superior pretensions to
fidelity and firmness; but a humble, submissive, beseeching utterance
of devoted love, that sought no comparisons to enhance its merit,
but in lowly confidence appealed to the searcher of hearts as the
undeceivable testifier of his honesty and truth. Nor was his deep and
renewed affection, thus expressed, disregarded; but Jesus accepting
his purified self-sacrifice, at once in the same words both offered
him the consoling pledge of his restoration to grace, and again
charged him with the high commission, which, while it proved his Lord’s
confidence, gave him the means of showing to all mankind the sincerity
and permanency of his change of heart. From the words of the Messiah’s
reply, he learned that the solid proof of his deserved restoration
should be seen in his devotion to the work which that Messiah had begun;
that by guiding, guarding and feeding the young and tender of Christ’s
flock, when left again without their Master, he might set forth his new
love. Already had Jesus, before that sad trial of their souls, in his
parting, warning words to his near and dear ones, told them, “If ye
keep my commandments ye shall abide in my love. Ye are my friends if
ye do whatsoever I command you. By this shall all men know that ye are
my disciples, if ye have love one to another.” And here, in practical
comment on that former precept, did he give his restored apostle this
test of unchanged love. So harmoniously and beautifully does the sacred
record make precept answer and accord with precept. In the minute
detail of mere common incident, we may wander and stagger bewildered
among insignificant differences and difficulties; but the rule of
action, the guide of life, leads steadily and clearly through every
maze, uneffaced by the changes of order, time and place.
“_Boys._”――The Greek word here (παιδια _paidia_) has a neuter
termination, and is applicable to persons of both sexes, like
the English word “_children_,” which is here given in the common
version. But Jerome’s Latin translation (the Vulgate) gives
“_pueri_,” “boys,” as the just meaning in this place, and I
have preferred it, as more in accordance with our usual forms of
familiar address in such cases, than the one given in the common
English version.
_Great coat._――This I consider as giving a better idea of the
garment called in the Greek επενδυτην, (_ependuten_,) which
is derived from a verb which means “putting on over another
garment,” and is of course described with more justice to the
original by the English “_great-coat_,” or “over-coat,” than by
“_fisher’s_ coat,” as in the common translation. I suppose it
was a rough outer dress designed as a protection against rain
and spray, and which he put on in such a way, that he might wade
in it without the inconvenience of its hanging about his legs.
It must have been a sort of “_over all_,” that he had pulled off
while at work, and _put on_ to wade in the water; for the verb
διαζωννυμι (_diazonnumi_) has also that meaning as well as “gird
about,” and his object in thus “putting on his over alls” may
have been to keep himself dry, by covering both his legs and
body from the water; for it may have come down over the legs
like a sort of outside trowsers, and being tied tight, would
make a very comfortable protection against cold water. See Poole
and Kuinoel on this passage, John xxi. 7.
Luther in his German translation has very queerly expressed
this word, “GUERTETE ER DAS HEMDE UM SICH,” “he girt his _shirt_
about him;” being led into this error probably, by taking the
following sentence in too strong a sense, concluding that he
was perfectly _naked_. But I have already alluded (note on page
101) to the peculiar force of this word in the Bible, nor can
it mean anything but that he was without his outer garments;
and it implies no more indecent exposure than in the case of
Christ, when laying aside his garments to wash his disciples’
feet. Besides, I have shown that the etymology of επενδυτης
(_ependutes_) will not allow any meaning to it, but that of an
“_outer_ garment” _worn over_ other clothes.
_A little skiff._――The Greek word here is πλοιαριον,
(_ploiarion_,) and means “a _small_ boat,” and is the diminution
of πλοιον, (_ploion_,) the word used in the third verse of the
same chapter, as the name of the larger vessel in which they
sailed, and which probably drew too much water to come close
to the shore in this part of the lake, where it was probably
shallow, so as to make it necessary for them to haul the net
ashore with this little skiff, which seems to have been a sort
of drag-boat to the larger vessel, kept for landing in such
places.
“_Come and BREAKFAST._”――This is certainly a vast improvement
on the common English version, which here gives the word
“_dine_.” For it must strike an ordinary reader as a very early
_dinner_ at that time of the morning, (John xix. 4,) and what
settles the question is, that the Greek word here is αριστησατε,
(_aristesate_,) which primarily and almost always was applied
only to the eating of the earliest meal, or breakfast, being
derived from αριστον, “breakfast,” the first meal in the day,
according to Homer and Xenophon.
Many other unrecorded words of wisdom and love must have been spoken at
this time, in the course of which Jesus again took occasion to put this
meaning and moving question, “Simon, son of Jonah, lovest thou me?” The
first answer of Peter had sufficiently shown, that he had no more of
that disposition to claim a merit superior to his fellow disciples, and
Jesus did not again urge upon him a comparison with them, but merely
renewed the inquiry in a simple, absolute form. Again Peter earnestly
expressed his love, with the same appeal to Christ’s own knowledge of
his heart for the testimony of his loyalty, “Yea, Lord, thou knowest
that I love thee.” He saith to him, “Feed my sheep.” If thou lovest
me, show that love, by supplying the place of my earthly care, to those
whom I love. Love and feed those for whom I have bled and died.――What
could be more simple and clear than this question? What more earnest
and honest than the answer? What more abiding than the impression made
by this charge? Yet did not the far-seeing Savior desist from trying
his disciple with these questions. Once more was it solemnly repeated,
“Simon, son of Jonah, lovest thou me?” Peter was grieved that he asked
him the third time, “lovest thou me?” He saw at last the reproachful
meaning of the inquiry. Three times had this same apostle, by his
false-hearted denial, renounced all love and interest in his Master,
and three times did that injured and forgiving Master call upon him
to pledge again his forfeited faith and affection. He thus pointed
out the past weakness of Peter, and showed the means of maintaining
and insuring future fidelity. Peter again still more movingly avowed
his honest attachment, half remonstrating at this repetition of the
question by one who must already know the heart of the answerer too
fully for words to inform him anew.――“Lord, thou knowest all things;
thou knowest that I love thee.” Jesus said to him, “Feed my sheep.”
He now passed on to a new prediction of his future fortunes, in the
service to which he had in these words devoted him, making known to
him the earthly reward which his services would at last receive. “I
solemnly say to 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.” This he said, to signify to him by what
sort of death he should glorify God. That is, he in these words plainly
foretold to him that he should, through all his toils and dangers in
his Master’s service, survive to old age; and he also alludes to the
loss of free agency in his own movements; but the circumstances are so
darkly alluded to, that the particular mode of his death could never
be made to appear clearly from the prediction. The particular meaning
of the expressions of this prophecy, can of course be best shown in
connection with the circumstances of his death, as far as they are
known; and to that part of his history the explanations are deferred.
After this solemn prediction, he said to him, “Follow me.” This command
seems not to have any connection, as some have supposed, with the
preceding words of Jesus referring to his future destiny, but to be a
mere direction to follow him on his return from the lake, either back
to Capernaum, or to the mountain appointed for his meeting with the
great body of his disciples. From what comes after this in the context,
indeed, this would seem to be a fair construction; for it is perfectly
plain that as Christ said these words, he turned and walked away; and
that not only Peter followed at the direction of Christ, but also John
of his own accord,――and it is perfectly natural to suppose that the
greater part of the disciples would choose to walk after Jesus, when
they had met under such delightful and unexpected circumstances; only
leaving somebody to take care of the boats and fish. Peter following
his Lord as he was commanded, turned around to see who was next to him,
and seeing John, was instantly seized with a desire to know the future
fortunes of this apostle, who shared with him the highest confidence
of his Master, and was even before him in his personal affections. He
accordingly asked, “Lord, and what shall this man do?” or more properly,
“What shall become of this man?” But the answer of Jesus was not at
all calculated to satisfy his curiosity, though it seemed, in checking
his inquiries, to intimate darkly, that this young apostle would
outlive him, and be a witness of the events which had been predicted in
connection with the destruction of Jerusalem, and the second coming of
Christ in judgment on his foes of the Jewish nation. This interesting
scene here abruptly closes,――the Savior and his followers passing off
this spot to the places where he remained with them during the rest of
the few days of his appearance after his resurrection.
_The mountain appointed for his meeting_, &c.――It would be
hard to settle the locality of this mountain with so few data
as we have, but a guess or two may be worth offering. Grotius
concludes it to have been Mount Tabor, “where,” as he says,
“Jesus formerly gave the three a taste of his majesty;” but
I have fully shown, on much better authority, that Tabor was
_not_ the mount of the transfiguration; nor can we value highly
the fact, that “habet veteris famae auctoritatem,” for we have
abundant reason to think that in such matters, “the authority of
ancient tradition” is not worth much.
There are better reasons, however, for believing Tabor to have
been the mountain in Galilee, where Christ met his disciples.
These are, the fact that it was near the lake where he seems to
have been just before, and was in the direction of some of his
former places of resort, and was near the homes of his disciples.
None of the objections that I brought against its being the
mount of the transfiguration, can bear against this supposition,
but on similar grounds I now _agree_ with the common notion.
Paulus suggests Mount Carmel, as a very convenient place for
such a meeting of so many persons who wished to assemble unseen,
it being full of caverns, in which they might assemble out of
view; while Tabor is wholly open (GANZ OFFEN) and exposed to
view; for it is evident that all the exhibitions of Christ to
his disciples after his resurrection, were very secret. For this
reason Rosenmueller remarks, that Jesus probably appointed some
mountain which was lonely and destitute of inhabitants, for the
meeting. But Tabor is, I should think, sufficiently retired for
the privacy which was so desirable, and certainly is capable
of accommodating a great number of persons on its top, so that
they could not be seen from below. The objection to Carmel is,
that it was a great distance off, on the sea coast, and should
therefore be rejected for the same reasons which caused us to
reject Tabor for the transfiguration.