the Week of Proper 25 / Ordinary 30
Click here to learn more!
Verse- by-Verse Bible Commentary
New American Standard Bible
Bible Study Resources
Clarke's Commentary
Verse John 21:25. Many other things — Before his disciples, is added by two MSS. The Scholia in several MSS. intimate that this verse is an addition; but it is found in every ancient version, and in Origen, Cyril, and Chrysostom.
Could not contain, c.] Origen's signification of the word χωρειν is to admit of, or receive favourably. As if he had said, the miracles of Christ are so many, and so astonishing, that if the whole were to be detailed, the world would not receive the account with proper faith but enough is recorded that men may believe that Jesus is the Son of God, and that in believing they may have life through his name: John 20:31.
We have already seen that this apostle often uses the term world to designate the Jewish people only; and if it have this sense here, which is possible, it will at once vindicate the above exposition of the word χωρειν. As if he had said, Were I to detail all the signs and miracles which Jesus did among his disciples, and in the private families where he sojourned, the Jewish people themselves would not receive nor credit these accounts; but enough is written to prove that this Christ was the promised Messiah.
Bishop Pearce has a very judicious note here, of which what follows is an abstract, with a few additions.
Even the world itself, c. This is a very strong eastern expression, to represent the number of miracles which Jesus wrought. But, however strong and strange this expression may seem to us of the western world, we find sacred and other authors using hyperboles of the like kind and signification. In Numbers 13:33, the spies who returned from the search of the land of Canaan say that they saw giants there of such a prodigious size that they were in their own sight as grasshoppers. In Daniel 4:11, mention is made of a tree, whereof the height reached unto the heaven and the sight thereof unto the end of all the earth. And the author of Ecclesiasticus, in 47:15, speaking of Solomon's wisdom, says, Thy soul covered the whole earth, and thou filledst it with parables: so here, by one degree more of hyperbole, it is said that the world would not contain all the books which should be written concerning Jesus's miracles, if the particular account of every one of them were given. In Josephus, Antiq. lib. xix. c. 20, God is mentioned as promising to Jacob that he would give the land of Canaan to him and his seed; and then it is added, οἱ πληρουσι πασαν, ὁσην ἡλιος ὁρᾳ, και γην και θαλασσαν. They shall fill all, whatsoever the sun illuminates, whether earth or sea. Philo in his tract De Ebriet, T. i. p. 362, 10, is observed to speak after the same manner, ουδε γαρ των δωρεων ἱκανος ουδεις χωρησαι το αφθονον πληθος, ισως δ' ουδ' ὁ κοσμος. Neither is any one able to contain the vast abundance of gifts; nor is the world capable of it. And in his tract De Posterit. Caini, T. i. p. 253, l. 38, he says, speaking of the fulness of God, Ουδε γαρ εις (ει) πλουτον επιδεικνυσθαι βουληθειη τον ἑαυτου, χωρησαι αν, ηπειρωθεισης και θαλαττης, ἡ συμπασα γη. And should he will to draw out his fulness, the whole compass of sea and land could not contain it."
Homer, who, if not born in Asia Minor, had undoubtedly lived there, has sometimes followed the hyperbolic manner of speaking which prevailed so much in the east, as in Iliad, b. xx. he makes AEneas say to Achilles: -
Αλλ' αγε μηκετι ταυτα λεγωμεθα, νηπυτιοι ὡς,
ἙϚαοτ' εν μεσσῃ ὑσμινῃ δηΐοτητος.
ΕϚι γαρ αμφοτεροισιν ονειδεα μυθησασθαι
Πολλα μαλ'· ουδ' αν νηυς ἑκατονζυγος αχθος αροιτο.
Στρεπτη δε γλωσς' εϚι βροτων, πολεες δ' ενι μυθοι,
Παντοιοι· επεων δε πολυς νομος ενθα και ενθα.
Ὁπποιον κ' ειπῃσθα επος, τοιον κ' επακουσαις.
Iliad, xx. v. 244-250.
But wherefore should we longer waste the time
In idle prate, while battle roars around?
Reproach is cheap. With ease we might discharge
Gibes at each other, till a ship that asks
A hundred oars should sink beneath the load.
The tongue of man is voluble, hath words
For every theme, nor wants wide field and long;
And, as he speaks, so shall he hear again.
COWPER.
Few instances of any thing like these have been found in the western world; and yet it has been observed that Cicero, in Philip ii. 44, uses a similar form: Praesertim cum illi eam gloriam consecuti sunt, quae vix coelo capi posse videatur - "especially when they pursued that glory which heaven itself seems scarcely sufficient to contain." And Livy also, in vii. 25, Hae vires populi Romani, quas vix terrarum capit orbis - "these energies of the Roman people, which the terraqueous globe can scarcely contain."
We may define hyperbole thus: it is a figure of speech where more seems to be said than is intended; and it is well known that the Asiatic nations abound in these. In Deuteronomy 1:28, cities with high walls round about them are said to be walled up to heaven. Now, what is the meaning of this hyperbole? Why, that the cities had very high walls: then, is the hyperbole a truth? Yes, for we should attach no other idea to these expressions than the authors intended to convey by them. Now, the author of this expression never designed to intimate that the cities had walls which reached to heaven; nor did one of his countrymen understand it in this sense - they affixed no other idea to it, (for the words, in common use, conveyed no other,) than that these cities had very high walls. When John, therefore, wrote, the world itself could not contain the books, c., what would every Jew understand by it! Why, that if every thing which Christ had done and said were to be written, the books would be more in number than had ever been written concerning any one person or subject: i.e. there would be an immense number of books. And so there would be for it is not possible that the ten thousandth part of the words and actions of such a life as our Lord's was could be contained in the compass of one or all of these Gospels.
There is a hyperbole very like this, taken from the Jewish writers, and inserted by BASNAGE, Hist. des Juifs, liv. iii. c. 1, s. 9. "Jochanan succeeded Simeon - he attained the age of Moses - he employed forty years in commerce, and in pleading before the Sanhedrin. He composed such a great number of precepts and lessons, that if the heavens were paper, and all the trees of the forest so many pens, and all the children of men so many scribes, they would not suffice to write all his lessons!" Now, what meaning did the author of this hyperbole intend to convey? Why, that Jochanan had given more lessons than all his contemporaries or predecessors. Nor does any Jew in the universe understand the words in any other sense. It is worthy of remark that this Jochanan lived in the time of St. John; for he was in Jerusalem when it was besieged by Vespasian. See Basnage, as above.
There is another quoted by the same author, ibid. c. v. s. 7, where, speaking of Eliezar, one of the presidents of the Sanhedrin, it is said: "Although the firmament were vellum, and the waters of the ocean were chanced into ink, it would not be sufficient to describe all the knowledge of Eliezar; for he made not less than three hundred constitutions concerning the manner of cultivating cucumbers." Now, what did the rabbin mean by this hyperbole? Why, no more than that Eliezar was the greatest naturalist in his time; and had written and spoken more on that subject and others than any of his contemporaries. This Eliezar flourished about seventy-three years after Christ. It is farther worthy of remark that this man also is stated to have lived in the time of St. John. John is supposed to have died A. D. 99.
Hyperboles of this kind, common to the east and to the west, to the north and to the south, may be found every where; and no soul is puzzled with them but the critics. The above examples, I trust, are sufficient to vindicate and explain the words in the text. It is scarcely necessary to add that the common French expression, tout le monde, which literally means the whole world, is used in a million of instances to signify the people present at one meeting, or the majority of them, and often the members of one particular family. And yet no man who understands the language ever imagines that any besides the congregation in the one case, or the family in the other, is intended.
Amen. — This word is omitted by ABCD, several others; Syriac, all the Arabic, and both the Persic; the Coptic, Sahidic, AEthiopic, Armenian, Syriac Hieros., Vulgate, and all the Itala but three.
The word amen, which has passed unaltered into almost all the languages of the world in which the sacred writings are extant, is pure Hebrew; and signifies to be steady, constant, firm, established, or confirmed. It is used as a particle of affirmation and adjuration. When a person was sworn to the truth of any fact, the oath was recited to him, and he bound himself by simply saying, אמן אמן amen, amen. See an instance of this, Numbers 5:22. In Deuteronomy 27:15-26, it is to be understood in the same sense; the persons who use it binding themselves, under the curse there pronounced, should they do any of the things there prohibited. It is often used as a particle of affirmation, approbation, and consent, examples of which frequently occur in the Old Testament. When any person commenced a discourse or testimony with this word, it was considered in the light of an oath; as if he had said, I pledge my truth, my honour, and my life to the certainty of what I now state.
Our Lord begins many of his discourses with this word, either singly, Amen, I say unto you; or doubled, Amen, amen, I say unto you; which we translate verily: as Christ uses it, we may ever understand it as expressing an absolute and incontrovertible truth. Instances of the use of the single term frequently occur: see Matthew 5:18, Matthew 5:26; Matthew 6:2, Matthew 6:5, Matthew 6:16; Matthew 8:10; Matthew 10:15, Matthew 10:23, Matthew 10:42, c., c. but it is remarkable that it is doubled by St. John, see John 1:51; John 3:3, John 3:5, John 3:11; John 5:19, John 5:24-25; John 6:26, John 6:32, John 6:47, John 6:53; John 8:34, John 8:51, John 8:58; John 10:1, John 10:7; John 12:24; John 13:16, John 13:20, John 13:21, John 13:38; John 14:12; John 16:20, John 16:23; John 21:18; and is never found iterated by any of the other evangelists. Some have supposed that the word אמן is contracted, and contains the initials of אדני מלך נעמן Adonai Malec Neeman, my Lord the faithful King; to whom the person who uses it is always understood to make his appeal. Christ is himself called the Amen, ὁ Αμην, Revelation 1:18; Revelation 3:14; because of the eternity of his nature and the unchangeableness of his truth. In later ages, it was placed at the end of all the books in the New Testament, except the Acts, the Epistle of James, and the third Epistle of John, merely as the transcriber's attestation to their truth; and, perhaps, it is sometimes to be understood as vouching to the fidelity of his own transcript.
The subscriptions to this Gospel, as well as to the preceding Gospels, are various in the different versions and manuscripts. The following are those which appear most worthy of being noticed.
"The most holy Gospel of the preaching of John the evangelist, which he spake and proclaimed in the Greek language at Ephesus, is finished." - SYRIAC in Bib. Polyglott.
"With the assistance of the supreme God, the Gospel of St. John the son of Zebedee, the beloved of the Lord, and the preacher of eternal life, is completed. And it is the conclusion of the four most holy and vivifying Gospels, by the blessing of God. Amen." - ARABIC in Bib. Polyglott.
"The four glorious Gospels, of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, are completed."-PERSIC in Bib. Polyglott.
Other subscriptions are as follow:-
"The end of the holy Gospel of John - delivered thirty years - thirty-two years after the ascension of Christ - in the Isle of Patmos - in the Greek tongue at Ephesus - under the reign of Domitian - written by John when he was an exile in Patmos - under the Emperor Trajan - and delivered in Ephesus by Gaius the host of the apostles. John, having returned from his exile in Patmos, composed his Gospel, being 100 years of age and lived to the age of 120." - SUIDAS.
In an AEthiopic MS. in the royal library in Paris, at the conclusion of this evangelist are these words: - "Now the sum of all the clauses of the four Gospels is 9700. - By the grace of the Lord, here are ended the four Gospels. The sections of the four Gospels are 217. The clauses of the holy Gospel, even from its beginning to its end, namely, the writing of St. John, are completed."
It may be just necessary to inform the reader that the most ancient MSS. have scarcely any subscription at all, and that there is no dependence to be placed on any thing of this kind found in the others; most of the transcribers making conclusions according to their different fancies. See the concluding note of the preceding chapter; and see the preface to this Gospel, where other subjects relative to it are discussed.
These files are public domain.
Clarke, Adam. "Commentary on John 21:25". "The Adam Clarke Commentary". https://www.studylight.org/​commentaries/​acc/​john-21.html. 1832.
Bridgeway Bible Commentary
165. At the Sea of Tiberias (John 21:1-25)
The disciples then returned to Galilee to wait for Jesus as they had been instructed (see Matthew 26:32; Matthew 28:10). Seven of them had spent an unsuccessful night fishing on Lake Galilee (the Sea of Tiberias) when Jesus appeared at the shore. He called out some directions to them, and although they did not recognize him they did as he said. As a result they caught a large number of fish (John 21:1-6).
No doubt some of the disciples recalled a similar incident years earlier, and this may have led John to recognize the person on the shore as Jesus (cf. Luke 5:1-11). The disciples were reminded again of the authority of Jesus and their dependence on him (John 21:7-9). They were reminded also of his care for them, as he prepared and served them breakfast (John 21:10-14).
Peter had once boasted that he loved Jesus more than the other disciples did, and that although they might fail him, he would not (see Mark 14:29). Yet three times he publicly disowned Jesus. Three times, therefore, he was asked publicly if he loved Jesus, as a reminder to him of the danger of over-confidence. Jesus’ public conversation with Peter also showed the others that he had forgiven him. More than that he gave Peter the responsibility to care for his people through the difficult days of the church’s beginning (cf. Luke 22:31-32). As a leader in that early group, receiving the full force of Jewish persecution, Peter would need more love for Jesus than the others (John 21:15-17).
If Peter was to follow Jesus, he would no longer be free to live the independent life of an energetic young fisherman. His life would be one of constant sacrifice and hard work in caring for Jesus’ people. In the end he would be captured and killed on account of his loyalty to Jesus (John 21:18-19; cf. 13:36).
As for John, Jesus refused to give any indication of how his life would end. Some misinterpreted this to mean that John would never die, so John added a note at the end of his book to correct the misunderstanding (John 21:20-23). He also pointed out that he had made no attempt to give a detailed account of the life of Jesus; but what he had given was the testimony of an eye witness, and it was to be believed (John 21:24-25).
These files are public domain.
Text Courtesy of BibleSupport.com. Used by Permission.
Fleming, Donald C. "Commentary on John 21:25". "Fleming's Bridgeway Bible Commentary". https://www.studylight.org/​commentaries/​bbc/​john-21.html. 2005.
Coffman's Commentaries on the Bible
And there are also many other things which Jesus did, the which if they should be written every one, I suppose that even the world itself would not contain the books that should be written.
I suppose … identifies this verse as a separate addendum to the Gospel, probably penned by John himself prior to its being sent to the churches. This statement, with the last two verses of John 20, are a categorical refutation of all critical positions founded on the failure of one Gospel or another to record what was related or omitted by another.
We have found many disagreements with scholars like Alan Richardson; but, despite this, his final words regarding this Gospel are magnificent. He said:
When in faith we have received John's testimony, and have learned from him that JESUS IS THE CHRIST THE SON OF GOD, we shall, from the depth of our inmost conviction, add our testimony to what he has written, and say, WE KNOW THAT HIS WITNESS IS TRUE.
What a marvelous testimony of Jesus Christ is the Gospel of John! Standing near the close of the first century of this era, and after a long and vigorous life of preaching and teaching God's word, the last eye-witness of the ministry of the Lord selected from the incredibly rich storehouse of his blessed memories of Jesus precisely those seven greatest signs of his power and Godhead that he could recall, the same being the great signs he had been preaching for a lifetime; and these he gathered into one final testimony of the divine Christ, launching his Gospel from the platform of a great congregation which attached the corroborative imprimatur of its presbytery. He leveled his witness squarely against the incipient Gnostic heresies beginning, even then, to show themselves in Asia Minor. He designed it so as to refute the false rumors of Peter's unworthiness, due to his denials, and the equally false rumor that the Lord had promised to return within his lifetime. The person of Jesus Christ as both God and perfect man was the theme throughout. There can be no marvel that Satan is very displeased with the Gospel of John; but, despite all satanic opposition to its teachings, the saints of all ages have received it as it is indeed the truth of God, ever rejoicing in its divine revelation of Jesus Christ our Lord.
Coffman's Commentaries reproduced by permission of Abilene Christian University Press, Abilene, Texas, USA. All other rights reserved.
Coffman, James Burton. "Commentary on John 21:25". "Coffman's Commentaries on the Bible". https://www.studylight.org/​commentaries/​bcc/​john-21.html. Abilene Christian University Press, Abilene, Texas, USA. 1983-1999.
Barnes' Notes on the Whole Bible
Many other things - Many miracles, John 20:30. Many discourses delivered, etc.
I suppose ... - This is evidently the figure of speech called a hyperbole. It is a mode of speech where the words express more or less than is literally true. It is common among all writers; and as the sacred writers, in recording a revelation to men, used human language, it was proper that they should express themselves as men ordinarily do if they wished to be understood. This figure of speech is commonly the effect of surprise, or having the mind full of some object, and not having words to express the ideas: at the same time, the words convey no falsehood. The statement is to be taken as it would be understood among the persons to whom it is addressed; and as no one supposes that the author means to be understood literally, so there is no deception in the case, and consequently no impeachment of his veracity or inspiration. Thus, when Longinus said of a man that “he was the owner of a piece of ground not larger than a Lacedaemonian letter,” no one understood him literally. He meant, evidently, a very small piece of land, and no one would be deceived. So Virgil says of a man, “he was so tall as to reach the stars,” and means only that he was very tall. So when John says that the world could not contain the books that would be written if all the deeds and sayings of Jesus were recorded, he clearly intends nothing more than that a great many books would be required, or that it would be extremely difficult to record them all; intimating that his life was active, that his discourses were numerous, and that he had not pretended to give them all, but only such as would go to establish the main point for which he wrote that he was the Messiah, John 20:30-31. The figure which John uses here is not uncommon in the Scriptures, Genesis 11:4; Genesis 15:5; Numbers 13:33; Daniel 4:20.
This gospel contains in itself the clearest proof of inspiration. It is the work of a fisherman of Galilee, without any proof that he had any unusual advantages. It is a connected, clear, and satisfactory argument to establish the great truth that Jesus was the Messiah. It was written many years after the ascension of Jesus. It contains the record of the Saviour’s profoundest discourses, of his most convincing arguments with the Jews, and of his declarations respecting himself and God. It contains the purest and most elevated views of God to be found anywhere, as far exceeding all the speculations of philosophers as the sun does the blaze of a taper. It is in the highest degree absurd to suppose that an unlettered fisherman could have originated this book. Anyone may be convinced of this by comparing it with what would be the production of a man in that rank of life now. But if John has preserved the record of what has occurred so many years before, then it shows that he was under the divine guidance, and is himself a proof, a full and standing proof, of the fulfillment of the promise which he has recorded that the Holy Spirit would guide the apostles into all truth, John 14:26. Of this book we may, in conclusion, apply the words spoken by John respecting his vision of the future events of the church: “Blessed is he that readeth and they that hear the words of this” book, “and keep those things which are written therein, for the time is at hand,” Revelation 1:3.
These files are public domain.
Barnes, Albert. "Commentary on John 21:25". "Barnes' Notes on the Whole Bible". https://www.studylight.org/​commentaries/​bnb/​john-21.html. 1870.
Calvin's Commentary on the Bible
25.There are also many other things that Jesus did. Lest any one should view his narrative with suspicion, as if it had been written through partiality, because Jesus loved him, he anticipates this objection, by saying, that he has passed over more than he has written. He does not speak of Christ’s actions of every kind, but of those which relate to his public office; nor ought we to think that the hyperbole is absurd, when we bear with many figures of speech of the same kind in heathen authors. Not only ought we to take into account the number of Christ’s works, but we ought also to consider their importance and magnitude. The majesty of Christ, which by its infinity swallowed up, if I may so speak, not only the senses of men, but heaven and earth, gave a miraculous display of its own splendor in those works. If the Evangelist, casting his eyes on that brightness, exclaims in astonishment, that even the whole world could not contain a full narrative, ought we to wonder at it? Nor is he at all to be blamed, if he employ a frequent and ordinary figure of speech for commending the excellence of the works of Christ. For we know how God accommodates himself to the ordinary’ way of speaking, on account of our ignorance, and sometimes even, if I may be allowed the expression, stammers.
Yet we ought to remember what we formerly stated, that the summary which the Evangelists have committed to writing, is sufficient both for regulating faith and for obtaining salvation. That man who has duly profited under such teachers will be truly wise. And, indeed, since they were appointed by God to be witnesses to us, as they have faithfully discharged their duty; so it is our duty, on the other hand, to depend wholly on their testimony, and to desire nothing more than what they have handed down to us; and especially, because their pens were guided by the sure providence of God, that they might not oppress us by an unlimited mass of narratives, and yet, in making a selection, might make known to us all that God knew to be necessary for us, who alone is wise, and the only fountain of wisdom; to whom be praise and glory for ever. Amen.
These files are public domain.
Calvin, John. "Commentary on John 21:25". "Calvin's Commentary on the Bible". https://www.studylight.org/​commentaries/​cal/​john-21.html. 1840-57.
Smith's Bible Commentary
Chapter 21
Now after these things Jesus showed himself again to the disciples at the sea of Tiberias; and this is how it happened. There were together Simon Peter, and Thomas called Didymus [the twin], and Nathanael of Cana in Galilee, and the sons of Zebedee [James and John], and two other [unnamed] disciples. Simon Peter said unto them, I'm going fishing. They said unto him, We'll go with you ( John 21:1-3 ).
Now, here's a classic example of human leadership. Simon was evidently a natural leader, and he said, "I'm going fishing." And they all said, "We'll go with you." In a sense, Simon is going back to the old life. He had been a fisherman before he ever met Jesus. That's the way he made his livelihood, that's the life he knew and no doubt enjoyed. He was fishing when Jesus called him to leave his nets and to follow Him. "And I will make you to become fishers of men." Jesus had told the women to tell the disciples to go up to Galilee, He would meet them up there. And they had, no doubt, come up to the Galilee, but Jesus hadn't shown up yet. Peter, being the impetuous, impatient person that he was, when the Lord didn't show, he said, "Well, I'm going fishing. This is probably all over. It was a great time; it was a marvelous experience, it was an exciting life. But, hey, we can't live forever in memories; we've got to get on with living. I'm going back fishing. I'm going fishing." They said, "Well, we'll go with you." And so, they got into the ship and they fished all night and caught nothing.
But when the morning was now come, Jesus was standing on the shore; but the disciples didn't know it was Jesus. And Jesus said unto them, Did you catch anything? ( John 21:4-5 )
Typical question to ask fishermen.
And they answered him, No. He said unto them, Cast your net on the right side of the ship, and you will find ( John 21:5-6 ).
Notice how sure Jesus is.
They cast therefore, and now they were not able to draw it in for the multitude of fish. And therefore that disciple whom Jesus loved, [John] said unto Peter, It is the Lord. When Simon Peter heard that it was the Lord, he girt his fisher's coat unto him, (for he was naked,) and dove into the sea and swam to shore ( John 21:6-7 ).
They were only about a hundred yards out.
And the other disciples came in a little ship, (for they were only about a hundred yards away,) and they were dragging the net with fishes ( John 21:8 ).
They had fished all night and caught nothing; they weren't going to let this catch go, dragging the net with fish.
And as soon as they were come to land, they saw a fire of coals there, and there were fish laid thereon, and bread. And Jesus said unto them, Bring the fish which you have now caught. And Simon Peter went up and drew the net to land full of great fish, a hundred and fifty-three: and for all there were so many, yet was the net not broken ( John 21:9-11 ).
Now, you remember the last time that Jesus told them to cast the nets on the other side, there were so many fish as they tried to draw them in, the nets began to break. But now, they draw it in, and though there was all of these great fish in it, yet the net was not broken.
Now, why the number one hundred fifty-three? I'll leave Chuck Missler to deal with those issues. It is interesting how that the mystiques always look for some significance in the numbers. And Augustine worked out a formula for the hundred and fifty-thee. And his formula is interesting in that he puts together: ten is the number of something and seven is the number of something, so you get seventeen. And you take all of the numbers from one to seventeen and add them up, and you get a hundred and fifty-three. You can play with numbers all kinds of ways and get all kinds of ideas out of them. But just why a hundred and fifty-three, I personally don't know. And I don't really put much stock into this juggling of numbers, and say, "Now, the real mystery here is..." I leave that for other fellows. I'm just too practical. I just say, "Hey, a hundred and fifty-three, that's interesting! I wonder why they counted them." Someone has suggested that that is the symbolic number of the church.
Now, we do know that there are symbolic numbers; that seven is the number of completion. Seven days in a week, seven notes on the scale. And seven is called the perfect number, the number of completion. Whereas eight is the number of new beginning. Because if you come to a complete seven, then the next note would be the eighth note, but you're beginning a new scale. Or you come to seven days, a complete week; and the eighth day is the beginning of the new week, so you come to a new week. And so, the number of new beginning is the number eight.
Now, significantly because Jesus is a new beginning for men, every name of Jesus in the Greek language, when the numeric value of the letters of the name are totaled, they are always divisible by eight. The Christos, the Curios, the Jesus and all...when you total the numeric value of the letters, they're always divisible by eight. We know that thirteen is the symbolic number for Satan. And all of the names for Satan in the New Testament, when you add the numeric value of the names, they are always divisible by thirteen. There are those who have written some very interesting books on this particular subject. One of them is "Biblical Numerics" by Pannon. And more recently, Jerry Lucas has written one called "Theomatics." But again, I leave it to others to get involved in these number kind of things.
Forty, for instance, is the number of judgment. Twelve is the number of human government. Twelve apostles, the twelve tribes...though there were actually thirteen, but always referred to as twelve tribes...the number of human government. Six is the number of man, imperfection. And the numbers do have a symbolic meaning.
And one-fifty-three, they say, is the symbolic number of the church, which I find to be interesting. That the net was full, and yet it didn't break. Jesus said, "All that the Father hath given Me are Mine. No man can pluck them out of My hand." Now, in the earlier net-breaking thing, you have maybe the evangelism, where you're gathering in all kinds, and you don't hold onto them all. But once they are truly in, no man plucks them out. "The net, yet for its number of great fish, yet it didn't break."
I find it interesting that what they could not all do in their own efforts out in the boat when they tried to pull the net into the boat, Peter was able to do by himself because Jesus told him to do it. Jesus said, "Now go draw the net," and Peter, because Jesus had commanded it, was able to do it by himself though all of them weren't able to do it earlier. The strength of the commands of Jesus. The very fact that He has told me to do it, if I will just endeavor, I can do it. Because He gives me the ability to obey any command that He gives to me. And so, service offered to the Lord. You see, we can sometimes go out and try and do things on our own and are totally unsuccessful. "I'm going fishing." "We'll go with you." Human energy, human effort. They knew how, they knew how to throw the nets. They knew where the fish usually were. But going out on their own, they were totally unsuccessful. Jesus comes along, and He says, "Hey, cast it over on the right side and you'll find." Now their service is directed by the Lord. And notice the difference; when you're doing something that the Lord is directing you to do, rather than just doing something out of your own impulses. Service directed by the Lord is so totally rewarding, you can't even pull in the nets.
And I often, when I go out and talk to people who want to hear about what God has done here at Calvary Chapel, I say to them, "Look, when the nets get so full, you can't pull 'em in any more, you know there's only one reason for it. Like John said, it's the Lord! It's just service directed by God, and it is always fruitful; it's always productive. It's the Lord! It isn't man's genius. It isn't some fancy program that we have. It isn't our great and glorious organ that we paid $500,000 for that has the largest pipes in the world. It isn't our marvelous choirs. It's the Lord!" People have a difficult time understanding this. But it's God-directed service. Jesus is the head of the body, the church, and directing the activities. They are fruitful.
Jesus said unto them, Come and eat. None of the disciples dared to ask him, Who are you? knowing that it was the Lord. Then Jesus came, and he took the bread, and he gave it to them, and the fish likewise ( John 21:12-13 ).
He had done this before, divided bread and fish among them.
Now this is the third time that Jesus showed himself to the disciples, after he was risen from the dead ( John 21:14 ).
So, John records the first three times. Jesus did appear on other occasions after this, but this was the third time in order.
When they were through eating, Jesus said to Simon Peter, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou me more than these? ( John 21:15 )
The word love here is agapas. It is a Greek word of deep love used of God's divine love. It is a supreme love. It is a giving love. "Lovest thou Me?" Agapas, divinely, fervently, more than these. What were the "these"? Maybe the one hundred fifty-three fish still flopping in the nets over there. "Do you love Me more than your livelihood? Do you love Me more than the greatest success in your chosen profession? Having the height of success in your chosen field, do you love Me more than that, Peter? How much do you love Me? Do you love Me more than these?"
Or the "these" could be referring to the other disciples whom Peter had avowed that he loved the Lord really more than them in an off-handed way. For Jesus had said to His disciples, "All of you are going to be offended tonight because of Me." And Peter said, "Lord, though they may all be offended, I will never be offended." In essence saying, "Lord, I am more faithful, and I love You more than the others." And Jesus said, "Peter, before the cock crows, you'll deny Me three times." "Impossible, Lord. If they would slay me, I would never deny You." But he did. And Jesus could be recalling that failure when He said, "Peter, lovest thou Me more than these?" And He could be referring to the other disciples there. We don't know the "these" because we weren't there to see what Jesus was looking at, or beckoning or motioning towards.
Peter said,
Yes, Lord; you know that I phileo you ( John 21:15 ).
Now, he did not use Jesus' word for love, but he used another Greek word, which is a word of fondness, or affection. "Lord, you know I am fond of You." Jesus didn't say, "Peter, are you fond of Me?" He said, "Peter, do you love Me...divinely, fervently?" Peter said, "Lord, you know that I am fond of You."
And Jesus said unto him, Feed by lambs ( John 21:15 ).
"You're not to be out here fishing, Peter. I told you to leave your nets and to follow Me. I'll make you to be fishers of men. Now, feed My lambs." The Lord is interested that His lambs be fed. Jeremiah said that, "The Lord will give them in that day pastors after His own heart, who will feed them with knowledge and understanding." That would be the knowledge and understanding of God. When I read that passage in Jeremiah after having been a pastor for many years, I realize my failing. And I repented before God. And I determined from that day on I wanted to be a pastor after God's heart who would feed the flock with the knowledge and the understanding of God. "Feed My lambs," Jesus said. "Do you love Me? Feed My lambs."
The second time Jesus said unto him, Simon, son of Jonas ( John 21:16 ),
Lovest--using the same Greek word as He did before, agapas,
lovest thou me [divinely, fervently]? And he said unto him, Yes, Lord; thou knowest that I phileo you ( John 21:16 ).
I am fond of you, Lord.
And he saith unto him, Feed my sheep ( John 21:16 ).
The word feed here is a different Greek word, and it literally means "to tend my sheep, or to watch over my sheep, to be a shepherd over my sheep, take care of my sheep."
And he said unto him a third time, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou me? ( John 21:17 )
And this time Jesus used Peter's word, phileo. "Peter, are you fond of Me?" And Peter was grieved because this third time, Jesus used his word and said, "Are you fond of Me?" It hurt Peter deeply that Jesus had reduce Himself to Peter's level.
God will always meet us on whatever level we will meet Him. But it is tragic when we bring God down to our level, rather than our rising to His level. But God will meet us on whatever level we will meet Him, and He will do His best for us on that level. I'm convinced that we often limit that work of God in our lives, because we won't rise to the level that God wants us to dwell upon.
God made concessions for the children of Israel. God wanted to be their King. He wanted them to be unlike all of the other nations, in that they would not have any visible king; but that the world would know that God ruled over these people. But they didn't want that. They came to Samuel and they said, "Appoint a king over us like the other nations." And Samuel was grieved. And the Lord said unto Samuel, "Don't grieve because they haven't rejected you, they have rejected Me from being king over them. And now, you anoint the one that I will show you to be the king." You see, God is now making a concession. He's coming down to their level. It's sad, though, when we bring God down to our level, rather than rise to His level, because we're not living then on the highest plane. And God would have us to live life in the highest plane. He'd draw us to His level if we would only but do so.
But Jesus came down to Peter's level. "Peter, are you fond of me?" And Peter was grieved because the Lord had to come down to his level. And he said, "Lord, you know all things." Despite what TV preachers say on Channel 40. "And you know that I am fond of You." He wouldn't come up, because he couldn't come up. He would love to, I'm sure. But Peter was always guilty of speaking impulsively and getting rebuked for it.
When Jesus said, "Who do men say that I am?", Peter said, "Well, thou art the Messiah, the Son of the living God." And Jesus said, "Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-Jonah. Flesh and blood did not reveal that unto you, but my Father which is in heaven." And I'm sure Peter puffed up and said, "Hey, fellows, you hear that? Revelation! I'm tuned in! You heard that, didn't you fellows?" And Jesus at that point, began to tell His disciples how that He was going to go to Jerusalem and be turned over to the hands of sinners and they would crucify Him and slay Him. And on the third day, He would rise again. And Peter said, "Oh, Lord, never, never, be that far from you!" And Jesus said, "Get thee behind Me, Satan. You're an offense unto Me. You can't tell the difference between what comes from God and what comes from man." His foot in his mouth, speaking impulsively! "All of you are going to be offended this night because of Me." "Oh, Lord, though they're all offended, I'll never be offended." "Peter, before the cock crows, you'll deny Me three times." "Though they kill me, I'd never deny You." Speaking impulsively, having to eat his words.
Now, Jesus had said, "He that hath My commandments, he it is who loves, agapas, Me." With a divine, fervent love. How is it shown? By keeping His commandments. Peter wasn't keeping His commandments. "I'm going fishing." Jesus didn't say, "Peter, go fishing." He said, "Wait in Galilee. I'll meet you there." He said, "Leave your nets and follow Me." And he was in the very act of disobeying the command of Christ, going back to the nets. And therefore when Jesus said, "Agapas, do you love Me divinely, fervently?" he could not say, "yes," because Jesus would then have said, "Then what are you doing out there in that boat leading these other fellows on this fishing venture when I didn't tell you to?" And Peter knew that he was trapped, and he knew that he couldn't say, "I love you divinely, fervently." And so, he had to use that lesser Greek word, "I'm fond of You," and tragically had to bring Jesus down to that level. And it hurt.
Jesus said, "Feed My sheep!" This is the word feed again. So, you have "feed My lambs, take care of My sheep, and feed My sheep." "Do you love Me?" This is what the Lord would have you to do. This is His command: feed the sheep.
And then He said unto him,
I tell you the truth, when you were young, you girded yourself [you dressed yourself], and you went wherever you wanted: but when you are old, you will stretch forth your hands, and another will gird you, and they'll carry you where you won't want to go. And this Jesus was speaking, signifying by what death he should glorify God ( John 21:18-19 ).
He was telling Peter that He's going to be crucified. "When you were young, you dressed yourself and you went where you wanted, but one of these days others are going to dress you and they're going to take you where you don't want to go." They're going to take you to a cross. And sure enough in years to come, when Peter was in Rome, he was sentenced to die on a cross. And Peter said, "I have one request. Please crucify me upside down; I'm not worthy to die as did my Lord." And he was crucified upside down. But it is interesting to me that Jesus here tells him by what death he's going to die.
And immediately after telling him what death he's going to die, he said, Follow me ( John 21:19 ).
"You can go back fishing, but follow Me. It's going to be tough; it's going to be a cross. You're not going to drive a Rolls Royce. You're not going to live in a fancy mansion. It's not going to be easy, Peter. But follow Me."
Then Peter, turning about, seeing the disciple whom Jesus loved following; ...he said unto him, What about him, Lord? ( John 21:20-21 )
Peter, back in the same old position, speaking out of turn again. "What about him, Lord? What shall this man do?" And Jesus in essence, said, "Peter, that's none of your business. I'm talking to you about you. You worry about yourself. Don't worry about him."
If I should will that he lived until I come again, what difference does that make? ( John 21:22 )
"You just hope, Peter. You're going to be crucified." "Oh, but what about him, Lord?" Jesus said, "Hey look, Peter, you take care of yourself, your relationship with Me. If I will that he should live until I come again, what's that to you? What difference does that make to you?"
You follow me ( John 21:22 ).
Now, the Lord always wants to deal with each of us personally, and that personal relationship with us. The Lord will talk to me and tell me about me, and the Lord will talk to you and tell you about you. I put very little stock in people coming up to me who say, "The Lord told me to tell you..." I wonder when He forgot my number. "What about him, Lord?" "No, Peter, I'm talking about you. It doesn't matter what I've intended for John. You follow me."
Now, because Jesus said, "If I will that he remain till I come," many picked up that statement and misinterpreted it. And they said Jesus said that He was going to come before John died. But John is careful to correct that misunderstanding. And John points out that is not what Jesus said. Jesus only said, "If I will that he should tarry till I come." And so, John seeks to correct that common mistake that had gone out within the early church, "Oh, the Lord is going to come before John dies." John said, "No, no, that's not what He said. He said, 'If I will that he tarry,' but he didn't say he will tarry."
but, If I will that he tarry, what is that to you? ( John 21:23 )
Now John tells us that he knows that the things he is writing are true because he witnessed them himself. And then he goes on to tell us that there are so many other things that actually happened, that could have been related. As he said earlier, "Many other things did Jesus which are not written in this book." And now he says,
There are a lot of other things that happened, and I suppose that if you would write down everything that could be written about Jesus, that the whole world could not contain the books that should be written on the subject ( John 21:25 ).
It's a subject that is so vast that we will never fully comprehend it on this side of eternity. But it is a subject that is so vast, it'll take all eternity to comprehend it. I look forward to eternity as a growing experience, a learning experience. As Paul tell us in Ephesians, "And God, through the ages to come, shall be revealing unto us what is the exceeding richness of His love and grace and mercy towards us in Jesus Christ" ( Ephesians 2:7 ). God's love for you and His mercy towards you is so vast, He's going to take all eternity to reveal its fullness. Throughout the ages to come, we'll be learning of how much God does love us. So, impossible to write it all in a book, or in books. The world isn't big enough to contain the libraries that should be written on the subject of Jesus Christ. It's an ever-enlarging revelation to our own hearts, that work of God's Spirit, that work of God's love in our lives. Shall we pray.
Father, we thank You, for all that You are and all that You've done. We thank You for sending Your Son who died and rose again, and who lives tonight making intercession for us. Lord, bless us we pray, as we learn of Thee and as we learn of Your love. And as we grow in this grace and in the knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. In whose name we pray. Amen.
May the Lord be with you and give you a beautiful week. May you just sense His presence to such an extent that you won't need any kind of an artifact or relic to remind you that the Lord is with you. But may you come to that consciousness and awareness of His presence by the things that He is doing in Your life. May things happen in such a way that you realize, "Ooh, the Lord is here with me." That's always a neat flush when you get that, ooh!...you know? The Lord is here. May you experience that this week, as you walk with Him in an ever-deepening and enriching fellowship through His Holy Spirit. "
Copyright © 2014, Calvary Chapel of Costa Mesa, Ca.
Smith, Charles Ward. "Commentary on John 21:25". "Smith's Bible Commentary". https://www.studylight.org/​commentaries/​csc/​john-21.html. 2014.
Dr. Constable's Expository Notes
C. The writer’s postscript 21:24-25
Some commentators refer to this ending as a colophon. A colophon is the finishing stroke and crowning touch to a document. It is an inscription placed at the end of a book or manuscript that contains basic information about it such as the title, writer’s name, and date and place of writing. However, it is more similar to a postscript because it contains only hints of the writer’s identity. Mainly it claims that this Gospel is a reliable though limited record of Jesus’ actions.
These files are public domain.
Text Courtesy of BibleSupport.com. Used by Permission.
Constable, Thomas. DD. "Commentary on John 21:25". "Dr. Constable's Expository Notes". https://www.studylight.org/​commentaries/​dcc/​john-21.html. 2012.
Dr. Constable's Expository Notes
This final verse, along with the one preceding it, returns to the broad perspective with which this Gospel began in its prologue (John 1:1-18). The prologue presents the Word humbling Himself and entering the world in incarnation. This verse presents the world as not able to contain all the revelation that the Word made. John’s final word was that what he wrote, and what everyone else could write, would be only a small part of what could be written to bring honor to Jesus Christ.
These files are public domain.
Text Courtesy of BibleSupport.com. Used by Permission.
Constable, Thomas. DD. "Commentary on John 21:25". "Dr. Constable's Expository Notes". https://www.studylight.org/​commentaries/​dcc/​john-21.html. 2012.
Barclay's Daily Study Bible
Chapter 21
THE RISEN LORD ( John 21:1-14 )
21:1-14 After these things Jesus again showed himself to the disciples by the Sea of Tiberias. This was the way in which he showed himself. Simon Peter, and Thomas, who is called Didymus, and Nathanael, who came from Cana in Galilee, and the sons of Zebedee, and two other disciples, were together. Simon Peter said to them: "I am going to fish." They said to him: "We, too, are coming with you." They went out, and went on board the boat, and that night they caught nothing. When early morning had come, Jesus stood on the seashore. But the disciples did not know that it was Jesus. So Jesus said to them: "Lads, have you got any fish?" They answered: "No." He said to them: "Cast your net on the right hand side of the ship, and you will find a catch." So they cast the net, and now they could not haul it in for the great number of the fishes. The disciple whom Jesus loved said to Peter: "It is the Lord." So, when Simon Peter heard that it was the Lord, he put on his tunic (for he was stripped for work) and jumped into the sea. The other disciples came to shore in the boat (for they were not far from the land, only about a hundred yards) dragging the net full of fishes. When they had disembarked on land, they saw a charcoal fire set there, and fish on it, and bread. Jesus said to them: "Bring some of the fish you have just caught." So Simon Peter went on board and hauled the net to land, full of large fishes, one hundred and fifty-three of them; and, although there were so many of them, the net was not broken. Jesus said to them: "come and have breakfast." None of the disciples dared to ask him: "Who are you?" because they knew that it was the Lord. Jesus came and took bread and gave it to them, and he gave them the fish in the same way. This was the third time Jesus showed himself to the disciples after he had been raised from among the dead.
It was certainly someone who knew the fishermen of the Sea of Galilee who wrote this story. Night-time was the best for fishing. W. M. Thomson in The Land and the Book describes night fishing: "There are certain kinds of fishing always carried on at night. It is a beautiful sight. With blazing torch, the boat glides over the flashing sea, and the men stand gazing keenly into it until their prey is sighted, when, quick as lightning, they fling their net or fly their spear; and often you see the tired fishermen come sullenly into harbour in the morning, having toiled all night in vain."
The catch here is not described as a miracle, and it is not meant to be taken as one. The description is of something which still frequently happens on the lake. Remember that the boat was only about a hundred yards from land. H. V. Morton describes how he saw two men fishing on the shores of the lake. One had waded out from the shore and was casting a bell net into the water. "But time after time the net came up empty. It was a beautiful sight to see him casting. Each time the neatly folded net belled out in the air and fell so precisely on the water that the small lead weights hit the lake at the same moment making a thin circular splash. While he was waiting for another cast, Abdul shouted to him from the bank to fling to the left, which he instantly did. This time he was successful.... Then he drew up the net and we could see the fish struggling in it.... It happens very often that the man with the hand-net must rely on the advice of someone on shore, who tells him to cast either to the left or the right, because in the clear water he can often see a shoal of fish invisible to the man in the water." Jesus was acting as guide to his fishermen friends, just as people still do today.
It may be that it was because it was the grey dark that they did not recognize Jesus. But the eyes of the disciple whom Jesus loved were sharp. He knew it was the Lord; and when Peter realized who it was he leaped into the water. He was not actually naked. He was girt with a loin cloth as the fisher always was when he plied his trade. Now it was the Jewish law that to offer greeting was a religious act, and to carry out a religious act a man must be clothed; so Peter, before he set out to come to Jesus, put on his fisherman's tunic, for he wished to be the first to greet his Lord.
THE REALITY OF THE RESURRECTION ( John 21:1-14 continued)
Now we come to the first great reason why this strange chapter was added to the already finished gospel. It was to demonstrate once and for all the reality of the Resurrection. There were many who said that the appearances of the Risen Christ were nothing more than visions which the disciples had. Many would admit the reality of the visions but insist that they were still only visions. Some would go further and say that they were not visions but hallucinations. The gospels go far out of their way to insist that the Risen Christ was not a vision, not an hallucination, not even a spirit, but a real person. They insist that the tomb was empty and that the Risen Christ had a real body which still bore the marks of the nails and the spear thrust in his side.
But this story goes a step further. A vision or a spirit would not be likely to point out a shoal of fish to a party of fishermen. A vision or a spirit would not be likely to kindle a charcoal fire on the seashore. A vision or a spirit would not be likely to cook a meal and to share it out. And yet, as this story has it, the Risen Christ did all these things. When John tells how Jesus came back to his disciples when the doors were shut, he says: "He showed them his hands and his side" ( John 20:20). Ignatius, when writing to the Church at Smyrna, relates an even more definite tradition about that. He says: "I know and believe that he was in the flesh even after the resurrection, and when he came to Peter and his company, he said to them: 'Take, handle me, and see that I am not a bodiless demon.' And straightway they touched him, and they believed, for they were firmly convinced of his flesh and blood.... And after his resurrection he ate and drank with them as one in the flesh."
The first and simplest aim of this story is to make quite clear the reality of the resurrection. The Risen Lord was not a vision, nor the figment of someone's excited imagination, nor the appearance of a spirit or a ghost; it was Jesus who had conquered death and come back.
THE UNIVERSALITY OF THE CHURCH ( John 21:1-14 continued)
There is a second great truth symbolized here. In the Fourth Gospel everything is meaningful, and it is therefore hardly possible that John gives the definite number one hundred and fifty-three for the fishes without meaning something by it. It has indeed been suggested that the fishes were counted simply because the catch had to be shared out between the various partners and the crew of the boat, and that the number was recorded simply because it was so exceptionally large. But when we remember John's way of putting hidden meanings in his gospel for those who have eyes to see, we must think that there is more to it than that.
Many ingenious suggestions have been made.
(i) Cyril of Alexandria said that the number 153 is made up of three things. First, there is 100; and that represents "the fullness of the Gentiles." 100, he says, is the fullest number. The shepherd's full flock is 100 ( Matthew 18:12). The seed's full fertility is 100-fold. So the 100 stands for the fullness of the Gentiles who will be gathered in to Christ. Second, there is the 50; and the 50 stands for the remnant of Israel who will be gathered in. Third, there is the 3; and the 3 stands for the Trinity to whose glory all things are done.
(ii) Augustine has another ingenious explanation. he says that 10 is the number of the Law, for there are ten commandments; 7 is the number of grace, for the gifts of the Spirit are sevenfold.
"Thou the anointing Spirit art,
Who dost thy sevenfold gifts impart."
Now 7+10 makes 17; and 153 is the sum of all the figures, 1+2+3+4..., up to 17. Thus 153 stands for all those who either by Law or by grace have been moved to come to Jesus Christ.
(iii) The simplest of the explanations is that given by Jerome. He said that in the sea there are 153 different kinds of fishes; and that the catch is one which includes every kind of fish; and that therefore the number symbolizes the fact that some day all men of all nations will be gathered together to Jesus Christ.
We may note a further point. This great catch of fishes was gathered into the net, and the net held them all and was not broken. The net stands for the Church; and there is room in the Church for all men of all nations. Even if they all come in, she is big enough to hold them all.
Here John is telling us in his own vivid yet subtle way of the universality of the Church. There is no kind of exclusiveness in her, no kind of colour bar or selectiveness. The embrace of the Church is as universal as the love of God in Jesus Christ. It will lead us on to the next great reason why this chapter was added to the gospel if we note that it was Peter who drew the net to land ( John 21:11).
THE SHEPHERD OF CHRIST'S SHEEP ( John 21:15-19 )
21:15-19 When they had breakfasted, Jesus said to Simon Peter: "Simon, son of Jonas, do you love me more than these?" He said to him: "Yes, Lord; you know that I love you." He said to him: "Be a shepherd to my lambs." Again he said to him a second time: "Simon, son of Jonas, do you love me?" He said to him: "Yes, Lord. You know that I love you." He said to him: "Be a shepherd to my sheep." He said to him the third time: "Simon, son of Jonas, do you love me?" Peter was vexed when he said to him the third time: "Do you love me?" So he said to him: "Lord, you know all things. You know that I love you." Jesus said to him: "Feed my sheep. This is the truth I tell you--when you were young, you fastened your girdle around you and you went where you wished. But when you grow old, you will stretch out your arms, and another will gird you, and will carry you to a place not of your own choosing." He said this to show by what kind of death Peter was going to glorify God. When he had said this, he said to Peter: "Follow me!"
Here is a scene which must have been printed for ever on the mind of Peter.
(i) First we must note the question which Jesus asked Peter: "Simon, son of Jonas, do you love me more than these?" As far as the language goes that can mean two things equally well.
(a) It may be that Jesus swept his hand round the boat and its nets and equipment and the catch of fishes, and said to Peter: "Simon, do you love me more than these things? Are you prepared to give them all up, to abandon all hope of a successful career, to give up a steady job and a reasonable comfort, in order to give yourself for ever to my people and to my work?" This may have been a challenge to Peter to take the final decision to give all his life to the preaching of the gospel and the caring for Christ's folk.
(b) It may be that Jesus looked at the rest of the little group of the disciples, and said to Peter: "Simon, do you love me more than your fellow-disciples do?" It may be that Jesus was looking back to a night when Peter said: "Though they all fall away because of you, I will never fall away" ( Matthew 26:33). It may be that he was gently reminding Peter how once he had thought that he alone could be true and how his courage had failed. It is more likely that the second meaning is right, because in his answer Peter does not make comparisons any more; he is content simply to say: "You know that I love you."
(ii) Jesus asked this question three times; and there was a reason for that. It was three times that Peter denied his Lord, and it was three times that his Lord gave him the chance to affirm his love. Jesus, in his gracious forgiveness, gave Peter the chance to wipe out the memory of the threefold denial by a threefold declaration of love.
(iii) We must note what love brought Peter. (a) It brought him a task. "If you love me." Jesus said, "then give your life to shepherding the sheep and the lambs of my flock." We can prove that we love Jesus only by loving others. Love is the greatest privilege in the world, but it brings the greatest responsibility. (b) It brought Peter a cross. Jesus said to him: "When you are young you can choose where you will go; but the day will come when they will stretch out your hands on a cross, and you will be taken on a way you did not choose." The day came when, in Rome, Peter did die for his Lord; he, too, went to the Cross, and he asked to be nailed to it head downwards, for he said that he was not worthy to die as his Lord had died. Love brought Peter a task, and it brought him a cross. Love always involves responsibility, and it always involves sacrifice. We do not really love Christ unless we are prepared to face his task and take up his Cross.
It was not for nothing that John recorded this incident. He recorded it to show Peter as the great shepherd of Christ's people. It may be, indeed it was inevitable, that people would draw comparisons in the early Church. Some would say that John was the great one, for his flights of thought went higher than those of any other man. Some would say that Paul was the great one, for he fared to the ends of the earth for Christ. but this chapter says that Peter, too, had his place. He might not write and think like John; he might not voyage and adventure like Paul; but he had the great honour, and the lovely task, of being the shepherd of the sheep of Christ. And here is where we can follow in the steps of Peter. We may not be able to think like John; we may not be able to go out to the ends of the earth like Paul; but each of us can guard some one else from going astray, and each of us can feed the lambs of Christ with the food of the word of God.
THE WITNESS TO CHRIST ( John 21:20-24 )
21:20-24 Peter turned and saw the disciple whom Jesus loved following, the disciple who at their meal reclined on Jesus' breast and said: "Lord, who is it who is to betray you?" When Peter saw this disciple, he said to Jesus: "Lord, what is going to happen to this man?" Jesus said to him: "If I wish him to remain till I come, what has that to do with you? Your job is to follow me." So this report went out to the brethren, that this disciple would not die. But Jesus did not say to him that he would not die. What he did say was: "If I wish him to remain till I come, what has that got to do with you?" This is the disciple who bears witness to these things, and who has written these things, and we know that his witness is true.
This passage makes it quite clear that John must have lived to a very old age; he must have lived on until the report went round that he was going to go on living until Jesus came again. Now, just as the previous passage assigned to Peter his place in the scheme of things, this one assigns to John his place. It was his function to be pre-eminently the witness to Christ. Again, people in the early Church must have made their comparisons. They must have pointed out how Paul went away to the ends of the earth. They must have pointed out how Peter went here and there shepherding his people. And then they may have wondered what was the function of John who had lived on in Ephesus until he was so old that he was past all activity. Here is the answer: Paul might be the pioneer of Christ, Peter might be the shepherd of Christ, but John was the witness of Christ. He was the man who was able to say: "I saw these things, and I know that they are true."
To this day the final argument for Christianity is Christian experience. To this day the Christian is the man who can say: "I know Jesus Christ, and I know that these things are true."
So, at the end, this gospel takes two of the great figures of the Church, Peter and John. To each Jesus had given his function. It was Peter's to shepherd the sheep of Christ, and in the end to die for him. It was John's to witness to the story of Christ, and to live to a great old age and to come to the end in peace. That did not make them rivals in honour and prestige, nor make the one greater or less than the other; it made them both servants of Christ.
Let a man serve Christ where Christ has set him. As Jesus said to Peter: "Never mind the task that is given to someone else. Your job is to follow me." That is what he still says to each one of us. Our glory is never in comparison with other men; our glory is the service of Christ in whatever capacity he has allotted to us.
THE LIMITLESS CHRIST ( John 21:25 )
21:25 There are many other things that Jesus did, and if they were written down one by one, I think that not even the world itself would be big enough to hold the written volumes.
In this last chapter the writer of the Fourth Gospel has set before the Church for whom he wrote certain great truths. He has reminded them of the reality of the Resurrection; he has reminded them of the universality of the Church; he has reminded them that Peter and John are not competitors in honour, but that Peter is the great shepherd and John the great witness. Now he comes to the end; and he comes there thinking once again of the splendour of Jesus Christ. Whatever we know of Christ, we have only grasped a fragment of him. Whatever the wonders we have experienced, they are as nothing to the wonders which we may yet experience. Human categories are powerless to describe Christ, and human books are inadequate to hold him. And so John ends with the innumerable triumphs, the inexhaustible power, and the limitless grace of Jesus Christ.
-Barclay's Daily Study Bible (NT)
FURTHER READING
John
C. Kingsley Barrett, The Gospel According to Saint John (G)
J. H. Bernahrd, St. John (ICC; G)
E. C. Hoskyns (ed. F. M. Davey), The Fourth Gospel (E)
R. H. Lightfoot, St. John's Gospel: A Commentary (E)
G. H. C. Macgregor, The Gospel of John (MC; E)
J. N. Saunders (ed. B. A. Mastin), The Gospel According to Saint John (ACB; E)
R. V. G. Tasker, The Gospel According to Saint John (TC; E)
B. F. Westcott, The Gospel According to Saint John (E)
The Speaker's Commentary (MmC; G)
Abbreviations
ACB: A. and C. Black New Testament Commentary
ICC: International Critical Commentary
MC: Moffatt Commentary
MmC: Macmillan Commentary
TC: Tyndale Commentary
E: English Text G: Greek Text
-Barclay's Daily Study Bible (NT)
These files are public domain.
Text Courtesy of BibleSupport.com. Used by Permission.
Barclay, William. "Commentary on John 21:25". "William Barclay's Daily Study Bible". https://www.studylight.org/​commentaries/​dsb/​john-21.html. 1956-1959.
Gann's Commentary on the Bible
John 21:25
John’s closing observation emphasizes the limitless magnitude of all that Jesus accomplished for mankind’s salvation.
John acknowledges that the story he has described is larger than anything he can imagine or fully communicate. While it is glorious for us to read, John’s account is pale in comparison to the glory of the person it describes.
- - - - - - -- - - - -
Notes from this book are often from:
Bernard, J. H. (1929). A critical and exegetical commentary on the Gospel according to St. John. (A. H. McNeile, Ed.). New York: C. Scribner’ Sons.
Barry, J. D., Mangum, D., Brown, D. R., Heiser, M. S., Custis, M., Ritzema, E., … Bomar, D. (2012, 2016). Faithlife Study Bible (Jn 15:16). Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press.
Crossway Bibles. (2008). The ESV Study Bible. Wheaton, IL: Crossway Bibles.
King James Version study Bible . (1997). (electronic ed., Jn 15:26). Nashville: Thomas Nelson.
MacArthur, J., Jr. (Ed.). (1997). The MacArthur Study Bible (electronic ed., p. 1616). Nashville, TN: Word Pub.
New Living Translation Study Bible. (2008). (Jn 15:18–27). Carol Stream, IL: Tyndale House Publishers, Inc.
NIV Zondervan Study Bible: Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.
These files are public domain.
Text Courtesy of BibleSupport.com. Used by Permission.
Gann, Windell. "Commentary on John 21:25". Gann's Commentary on the Bible. https://www.studylight.org/​commentaries/​gbc/​john-21.html. 2021.
Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible
And there are also many other things which Jesus did,.... Which refer not to his doctrines and discourses, his sermons and prayers, and the conversation he had with his disciples, and others, on different accounts; but to the signs, and wonders, and miraculous operations, which were done by him, that are neither recorded in this, nor in any of the evangelists:
the which, if they should be written everyone; with all the particular circumstances relating to them:
I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written. The Arabic version renders it, "the things written in the books"; and the Syriac, "that the world would not be sufficient for the books that should be written"; and so the Persic, which adds, "and the Scribes of the world would fail, or be deficient"; there would not be Scribes enough in the world to write them; nor could they be read by men, if they were written; the world would be overloaded with them; and therefore the Holy Ghost has not thought fit to lay such a burden on men they could not bear, as to read such numbers of volumes; but has reduced them into a brief compendium, which may be read with ease, delight, and pleasure; and which is abundantly sufficient to attest the truth of Christ's incarnation, miracles, doctrines, obedience, sufferings, death, resurrection, ascension, session at God's right hand, c. and of the whole of Christianity, and all that appertains to it, or whatever is necessary to be known, for the salvation of men: for this cannot be understood of the carnal and unbelieving part of the world, not receiving and bearing what would be contained in such volumes, were they written for they are not able to receive and bear what is now written, but reject and despise it as foolishness. Some understand this as an hyperbolical expression; but the sense above given, may be admitted without an hyperbole; though an hyperbole may very well be allowed of; nor, taken literally, will it appear greater than some others used in Scripture; as when the posterity of Abraham are said to be as numerous as the stars of the sky; and especially when said to be as the sand by the sea shore, innumerable, Hebrews 11:12 and when Capernaum is said to be exalted unto heaven, or to reach unto it, Matthew 11:23 and particularly the Jews have no reason to object, as one of them does g, to such a way of speaking, whose writings abound in hyperbolical expressions, and in some like to this; as when one of their Rabbins says h,
"if all the seas were ink, and the bulrushes pens, and the heavens and the earth volumes, and all the children of men Scribes, אין מספיקין לכתוב תורה, "they would not be sufficient to write the law", which have learned, c.''
and it is commonly said i by them, if this, or that, or the other thing was done, לא יכיל עלמא למסבל, "the world would not be able to bear them". And a later writer k of theirs, speaking of the different interpretations given by some of their Rabbins of a certain passage, says, they are so many, that an ass is not able to carry their books. And the intention of this expression, supposing it hyperbolical, is to show, that but a few of the wonderful things done by Christ were recorded by the evangelist, in comparison of the many which he every day did, in all places where he came for he was continually going about doing good, and healing all manner of diseases; but these that were written are sufficient to prove him to be the true Messiah, and to require faith in him as such. To all which the evangelist sets his "Amen", as attesting and confirming the truth of all he had written; and which may be depended upon, and assented to, as truth, by all that read this Gospel. The Alexandrian copy, and Beza's Cambridge copy, have not the word "Amen"; nor have the Vulgate Latin, Syriac, Arabic, and Persic versions. In some copies the following words are added,
"the Gospel according to John was given out thirty two years after the ascension of Christ;''
which would fall on the year of Christ 66, and so before the destruction of Jerusalem; which is contrary to the common opinion of learned men, some placing it in the year 97, others in the year 99.
(John starts his Gospel by stating: "All things were made by him". If one were to attempt to even summarise the works of creation, there is no way the world could contain the resulting volumes! Editor.)
g Jacob Aben ben Amram, porta veritatis, No. 1094. apud Kidder, Demonstration of the Messiah, par. 3. p. 67. Ed. fol. h Shirhashirim Rabba, fol. 4. 2. i Zohar in Exod. fol. 106. 4. & in Lev. fol. 26. 2. & 49. 3. & in Num. fol. 52. 2. & 59. 3. & 63. 3. & 64. 4. & 82. 3, 4. k R. Abraham Seba in Tzeror Hammor, fol. 79. 1.
The New John Gill's Exposition of the Entire Bible Modernised and adapted for the computer by Larry Pierce of Online Bible. All Rights Reserved, Larry Pierce, Winterbourne, Ontario.
A printed copy of this work can be ordered from: The Baptist Standard Bearer, 1 Iron Oaks Dr, Paris, AR, 72855
Gill, John. "Commentary on John 21:25". "Gill's Exposition of the Entire Bible". https://www.studylight.org/​commentaries/​geb/​john-21.html. 1999.
Henry's Complete Commentary on the Bible
Christ's Conference with Peter; Conclusion of John's Gospel. |
|
20 Then Peter, turning about, seeth the disciple whom Jesus loved following; which also leaned on his breast at supper, and said, Lord, which is he that betrayeth thee? 21 Peter seeing him saith to Jesus, Lord, and what shall this man do? 22 Jesus saith unto him, If I will that he tarry till I come, what is that to thee? follow thou me. 23 Then went this saying abroad among the brethren, that that disciple should not die: yet Jesus said not unto him, He shall not die; but, If I will that he tarry till I come, what is that to thee? 24 This is the disciple which testifieth of these things, and wrote these things: and we know that his testimony is true. 25 And there are also many other things which Jesus did, the which, if they should be written every one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written. Amen.
In these verses, we have,
I. The conference Christ had with Peter concerning John, the beloved disciple, in which we have,
1. The eye Peter cast upon him (John 21:20; John 21:20): Peter, in obedience to his Master's orders, followed him, and turning about, pleased with the honours his Master now did him, he sees the disciple whom Jesus loved following likewise. Observe here, (1.) How John is described. He does not name himself, as thinking his own name not worthy to be preserved in these records; but gives such a description of himself as sufficiently informs us whom he meant, and withal gives us a reason why he followed Christ so closely. He was the disciple whom Jesus loved, for whom he had a particular kindness above the rest; and therefore you cannot blame him for coveting to be as much as possible within hearing of Christ's gracious words during those few precious minutes with which Christ favoured his disciples. It is probable that mention in here made of John's having leaned on Jesus's breast and his enquiring concerning the traitor, which he did at the instigation of Peter (John 13:24; John 13:24), as a reason why Peter made the following enquiry concerning him, to repay him for the former kindness. Then John was in the favourite's place, lying in Christ's bosom, and he improved the opportunity to oblige Peter. And now that Peter was in the favourite's place, called to take a walk with Christ, he thought himself bound in gratitude to put such a question for John as he thought would oblige him, we all being desirous to know things to come. Note, As we have interest at the throne of grace, we should improve it for the benefit of one another. Those that help us by their prayers at one time should be helped by us with ours at another time. This is the communion of saints. (2.) What he did: he also followed Jesus, which shows how well he loved his company; where he was there also would this servant of his be. When Christ called Peter to follow him, it looked as if he designed to have some private talk with him; but such an affection John had to his Master that he would rather do a thing that seemed rude than lose the benefit of any of Christ's discourse. What Christ said to Peter he took as said to himself; for that word of command, Follow me, was given to all the disciples. At least he desired to have fellowship with those that had fellowship with Christ, and to accompany those that attended him. The bringing of one to follow Christ should engage others. Draw me and we will run after thee,Song of Solomon 1:4. (3.) The notice Peter took of it: He, turning about, seeth him. This may be looked upon either, [1.] As a culpable diversion from following his Master; he should have been wholly intent upon that, and have waited to hear what Christ had further to say to him, and then was he looking about him to see who followed. Note, The best men find it hard to attend upon the Lord without distraction, hard to keep their minds so closely fixed as they should be in following Christ: and a needless and unseasonable regard to our brethren often diverts us from communion with God. Or, [2.] As a laudable concern for his fellow-disciples. He was not so elevated with the honour his Master did him, in singling him out from the rest, as to deny a kind look to one that followed. Acts of love to our brethren must go along with actings of faith in Christ.
2. The enquiry Peter made concerning him (John 21:21; John 21:21): "Lord, and what shall this man do? Thou hast told me my work-to feed the sheep; and my lot--to be carried whither I would not. What shall be his work, and his lot?" Now this may be taken as the language, (1.) Of concern for John, and kindness to him: "Lord, thou showest me a great deal of favour. Here comes thy beloved disciple, who never forfeited thy favour, as I have done; he expects to be taken notice of; hast thou nothing to say to him? Wilt thou not tell how he must be employed, and how he must be honoured?" (2.) Or of uneasiness at what Christ had said to him concerning his sufferings: "Lord, must I alone be carried whither I would not? Must I be marked out to be run down, and must this man have no share of the cross?" It is hard to reconcile ourselves to distinguishing sufferings, and the troubles in which we think we stand alone. (3.) Or of curiosity, and a fond desire of knowing things to come, concerning others, as well as himself. It seems, by Christ's answer, there was something amiss in the question. When Christ had given him the charge of such a treasure, and the notice of such a trial, it had well become him to have said, "Lord, and what shall I do then to approve myself faithful to such a trust, in such a trial? Lord, increase my faith. As my day is, let my strength be." But instead of this, [1.] He seems more concerned for another than for himself. So apt are we to be busy in other men's matters, but negligent in the concerns of our own souls-quick-sighted abroad, but dim-sighted at home-judging others, and prognosticating what they will do, when we have enough to do to prove our own work, and understand our own way. [2.] He seems more concerned about events than about duty. John was younger than Peter, and, in the course of nature, likely to survive him: "Lord," says he, "what times shall he be reserved for?" Whereas, if God by his grace enable us to persevere to the end, and finish well, and get safely to heaven, we need not ask, "What shall be the lot of those that shall come after us?" Is it not well if peace and truth be in my days? Scripture-predictions must be eyed for the directing of our consciences, not the satisfying of our curiosity.
3. Christ's reply to this enquiry (John 21:22; John 21:22), "If I will that he tarry till I come, and do not suffer as thou must, what is that to thee. Mind thou thy own duty, the present duty, follow thou me."
(1.) There seems to be here an intimation of Christ's purpose concerning John, in two things:-- [1.] That he should not die a violent death, like Peter, but should tarry till Christ himself came by a natural death to fetch him to himself. The most credible of the ancient historians tell us that John was the only one of all the twelve that did not actually die a martyr. He was often in jeopardy, in bonds and banishments; but at length died in his bed in a good old age. Note, First, At death Christ comes to us to call us to account; and it concerns us to be ready for his coming. Secondly, Though Christ calls out some of his disciples to resist unto blood, yet not all. Though the crown of martyrdom is bright and glorious, yet the beloved disciple comes short of it. [2.] That he should not die till after Christ's coming to destroy Jerusalem: so some understand his tarrying till Christ comes. All the other apostles died before that destruction; but John survived it many years. God wisely so ordered it that one of the apostles should live so long as to close up the canon of the New Testament, which John did solemnly (Revelation 22:18), and to obviate the design of the enemy that sowed tares even before the servants fell asleep. John lived to confront Ebion, and Cerinthus, and other heretics, who rose betimes, speaking perverse things.
(2.) Others think that it is only a rebuke to Peter's curiosity, and that his tarrying till Christ's second coming is only the supposition of an absurdity: "Wherefore askest thou after that which is foreign and secret? Suppose I should design that John should never die, what does that concern thee? It is nothing to thee, when or where, or how, John must die. I have told thee how thou must die for thy part; it is enough for thee to know that, Follow thou me." Note, It is the will of Christ that his disciples should mind their own present duty, and not be curious in their enquiries about future events, concerning either themselves or others. [1.] There are many things we are apt to be solicitous about that are nothing to us. Other people's characters are nothing to us; it is out of our line to judge them, Romans 14:4. Whatsoever they are, saith Paul, it makes no matter to me. Other people's affairs are nothing to us to intermeddle in; we must quietly work, and mind our own business. Many nice and curious questions are put by the scribes and disputers of this world concerning the counsels of God, and the state of the invisible world, concerning which we may say, What is this to us? What do you think will become of such and such? is a common question, which may easily be answered with another: What is that to me? To his own Master he stands or falls. What is it to us to know the times and the seasons? Secret things belong not to us. [2.] The great thing that is all in all to us is duty, and not event; for duty is ours, events are God's-our own duty, and not another's; for every one shall bear his own burden--our present duty, and not the duty of the time to come; for sufficient to the day shall be the directions thereof: a good man's steps are ordered by the Lord, (Psalms 37:23); he is guided step by step. Now all our duty is summed up in this one of following Christ. We must attend his motions, and accommodate ourselves to them, follow him to do him honour, as the servant his master; we must walk in the way in which he walked, and aim to be where he is. And, if we will closely attend to the duty of following Christ, we shall find neither heart nor time to meddle with at which does not belong to us.
4. The mistake which arose from this saying of Christ, that that disciple should not die, but abide with the church to the end of time; together with the suppressing of this motion by a repetition of Christ's words, John 21:23; John 21:23. Observe here,
(1.) The easy rise of a mistake in the church by misconstruing the sayings of Christ, and turning a supposition to a position. Because John must not die a martyr, they conclude he must not die at all.
[1.] They were inclined to expect it because they could not choose but desire it. Quod volumus facile crediumus--We easily believe what we wish to be true. For John to abide in the flesh when the rest were gone, and to continue in the world till Christ's second coming, they think, will be a great blessing to the church, which in every age might have recourse to him as an oracle. When they must lose Christ's bodily presence, they hope they shall have that of his beloved disciple; as if that must supply the want of his, forgetting that the blessed Spirit, the Comforter, was to do that. Note, We are apt to dote too much on men and means, instruments and external helps, and to think we are happy if we may but have them always with us; whereas God will change his workmen, and yet carry on his work, that the excellency of the power may be of God, and not of men. There is no need of immortal ministers to be the guides of the church, while it is under the conduct of an eternal Spirit.
[2.] Perhaps they were confirmed in their expectations when they now found that John survived all the rest of the apostles. Because he lived long, they were ready to think he should live always; whereas that which waxeth old is ready to vanish away,Hebrews 8:13.
[3.] However, it took rise from a saying of Christ's, misunderstood, and then made a saying of the church. Hence learn, First, The uncertainty of human tradition, and the folly of building our faith upon it. Here was a tradition, an apostolical tradition, a saying that went abroad among the brethren. It was early; it was common; it was public; and yet it was false. How little then are those unwritten traditions to be relied upon which the council of Trent hath decreed to be received with a veneration and pious affection equal to that which is owing to the holy scripture. Here was a traditional exposition of scripture. No new saying of Christ's advanced, but only a construction put by the brethren upon what he did really say, and yet it was a misconstruction. Let the scripture be its own interpreter and explain itself, as it is in a great measure its own evidence and proves itself, for it is light. Secondly, The aptness of men to misinterpret the sayings of Christ. The grossest errors have sometimes shrouded themselves under the umbrage of incontestable truths; and the scriptures themselves have ben wrested by the unlearned and unstable. We must not think it strange if we hear the sayings of Christ misinterpreted, quoted to patronise the errors of antichrist, and the impudent doctrine of transubstantiation--for instance, pretending to build upon that blessed word of Christ, This is my body.
(2.) The easy rectifying of such mistakes, by adhering to the word of Christ, and abiding by that. So the evangelist here corrects and controls that saying among the brethren, by repeating the very words of Christ. He did not say that the disciple should not die. Let us not say so then; but he said, If I will that he tarry till I come, what is that to thee? He said so, and no more. Add thou not unto his words. Let the words of Christ speak for themselves, and let no sense be put upon them but what is genuine and natural; and in that let us agree. Note, The best end of men's controversies would be to keep to the express words of scripture, and speak, as well as think, according to that word, Isaiah 8:20. Scripture language is the safest and most proper vehicle of scripture truth: the words which the Holy Ghost teacheth,1 Corinthians 2:13. As the scripture itself, duly attended to, is the best weapon wherewith to wound all dangerous errors (and therefore deists, Socinians, papists, and enthusiasts do all they can to derogate the authority of scripture), so the scripture itself, humbly subscribed to, is the best weapon-salve to heal the wounds that are made by different modes of expression concerning the same truths. Those that cannot agree in the same logic and metaphysics, and the propriety of the same terms of air, and the application of them, may yet agree in the same scripture terms, and then may agree to love one another.
II. We have here the conclusion of this gospel, and with it of the evangelical story, John 21:24; John 21:25. This evangelist ends not so abruptly as the other three did, but with a sort of cadency.
1. This gospel concludes with an account of the author or penman of it, connected by a decent transition to that which went before (John 21:24; John 21:24): This is the disciple which testifies of these things to the present age, and wrote these things for the benefit of posterity, even this same that Peter and his Master had that conference about in the John 21:15-25 --John the apostle. Observe here, (1.) Those who wrote the history of Christ were not ashamed to put their names to it. John here does in effect subscribe his name. As we are sure who was the author of the first five books of the Old Testament, which were the foundation of that revelation, so we are sure who were the penmen of the four gospels and the Acts, the pentateuch of the New Testament. The record of Christ's life and death is not the report of we know not who, but was drawn up by men of known integrity, who were ready not only to depose it upon oath, but, which was more, to seal it with their blood. (2.) Those who wrote the history of Christ wrote upon their own knowledge, not by hearsay, but what they themselves were eye and ear witnesses of. The penman of this history was a disciple, a beloved disciple, one that had leaned on Christ's breast, that had himself heard his sermons and conferences, had seen his miracles, and the proofs of his resurrection. This is he who testifies what he was well assured of. (3.) Those who wrote the history of Christ, as they testified what they had seen, so they wrote what they had first testified. It was published by word of mouth, with the greatest assurance, before it was committed to writing. They testified it in the pulpit, testified it at the bar, solemnly averred it, stedfastly avowed it, not as travellers give an account of their travels, to entertain the company, but as witnesses upon oath give account of what they know in a matter of consequence, with the utmost caution and exactness, to found a verdict upon. What they wrote they wrote as an affidavit, which they would abide by. Their writings are standing testimonies to the world of the truth of Christ's doctrine, and will be testimonies either for us or against us according as we do or do not receive it. (4.) It was graciously appointed, for the support and benefit of the church, that the history of Christ should be put into writing, that it might with the greater fulness and certainty spread to every place, and last through every age.
2. It concludes with an attestation of the truth of what had been here related: We know that his testimony is true. This may be taken either, (1.) As expressing the common sense of mankind in matters of this nature, which is, that the testimony of one who is an eye-witness, is of unspotted reputation, solemnly deposes what he has seen, and puts it into writing for the greater certainty, is an unexceptionable evidence. We know, that is, All the world knows, that the testimony of such a one is valid, and the common faith of mankind requires us to give credit to it, unless we can disprove it; and in other cases verdict and judgment are given upon such testimonies. The truth of the gospel comes confirmed by all the evidence we can rationally desire or expect in a thing of this nature. The matter of fact, that Jesus did preach such doctrines, and work such miracles, and rise from the dead, is proved, beyond contradiction, by such evidence as is always admitted in other cases, and therefore to the satisfaction of all that are impartial; and then let the doctrine recommend itself, and let the miracles prove it to be of God. Or, (2.) As expressing the satisfaction of the churches at that time concerning the truth of what is here related. Some take it for the subscription of the church of Ephesus, others of the angels or ministers of the churches of Asia to this narrative. Not as if an inspired writing needed any attestation from men, or could thence receive any addition to its credibility; but hereby they recommended it to the notice of the churches, as an inspired writing, and declared the satisfaction they received by it. Or, (3.) As expressing the evangelist's own assurance of the truth of what he wrote, like that (John 19:35; John 19:35), He knows that he saith true. He speaks of himself in the plural number, We know, not for majesty-sake, but for modesty-sake, as 1 John 1:1, That which we have seen; and 2 Peter 1:16. Note, The evangelists themselves were entirely satisfied of the truth of what they have testified and transmitted to us. They do not require us to believe what they did not believe themselves; no, they knew that their testimony was true, for they ventured both this life and the other upon it; threw away this life, and depended upon another, on the credit of what they spoke and wrote.
3. It concludes with an et cetera, with a reference to many other things, very memorable, said and done by our Lord Jesus, which were well known by many then living, but not thought fit to be recorded for posterity, John 21:25; John 21:25. There were many things very remarkable and improvable, which, if they should be written at large, with the several circumstances of them, even the world itself, that is, all the libraries in it, could not contain the books that might be written. Thus he concludes like an orator, as Paul (Hebrews 11:32), What shall I more say? For the time would fail me. If it be asked why the gospels are not larger, why they did not make the New Testament history as copious and as long as the Old, it may be answered,
(1.) It was not because they had exhausted their subject, and had nothing more to write that was worth writing; no, there were many of Christ's sayings and doings not recorded by any of the evangelists, which yet were worthy to be written in letter of gold. For, [1.] Every thing that Christ said and did was worth our notice, and capable of being improved. He never spoke an idle word, nor did an idle thing; nay, he never spoke nor did any thing mean, or little, or trifling, which is more than can be said of the wisest or best of men. [2.] His miracles were many, very many, of many kinds, and the same often repeated, as occasion offered. Though one true miracle might perhaps suffice to prove a divine commission, yet the repetition of the miracles upon a great variety of persons, in a great variety of cases, and before a great variety of witnesses, helped very much to prove them true miracles. Every new miracle rendered the report of the former the more credible; and the multitude of them renders the whole report incontestable. [3.] The evangelists upon several occasions give general accounts of Christ's preaching and miracles, inclusive of many particulars, as Matthew 4:23; Matthew 4:24; Matthew 9:35; Matthew 11:1; Matthew 14:14; Matthew 14:36; Matthew 15:30; Matthew 19:2; and many others. When we speak of Christ, we have a copious subject before us; the reality exceeds the report, and, after all, the one half is not told us. St. Paul quotes one of Christ's sayings, which is not recorded by any of the evangelists (Acts 20:35), and doubtless there were many more. All his sayings were apophthegms.
(2.) But it was for these three reasons:-- [1.] Because it was not needful to write more. This is implied here. There were many other things, which were not written because there was no occasion for writing them. What is written is a sufficient revelation of the doctrine of Christ and the proof of it, and the rest was but to the same purport. Those that argue from this against the sufficiency of the scripture as the rule of our faith and practice, and for the necessity of unwritten traditions, ought to show what there is in the traditions they pretend to be perfective of the written word; we are sure there is that which is contrary to it, and therefore reject them. By these therefore let us be admonished, for of making many books there is no end,Ecclesiastes 12:12. If we do not believe and improve what is written, neither should we if there had been much more. [2.] It was not possible to write all. It was possible for the Spirit to indite all, but morally impossible for the penmen to pen all. The world could not contain the books. It is a hyperbole common enough and justifiable, when no more is intended than this, that it would fill a vast and incredible number of volumes. It would be such a large and overgrown history as never was; such as would jostle out all other writings, and leave us no room for them. What volumes would be filled with Christ's prayers, had we the record of all those he made, when he continued all night in prayer to God, without any vain repetitions? Much more if all his sermons and conferences were particularly related, his miracles, his cures, all his labours, all his sufferings; it would have been an endless thing. [3.] It was not advisable to write much; for the world, in a moral sense, could not contain the books that should be written. Christ said not what he might have said to his disciples, because they were not able to bear it; and for the same reason the evangelists wrote not what they might have written. The world could not contain, choresai. It is the word that is used, John 8:37; John 8:37, "My word has no place in you." They would have been so many that they would have found no room. All people's time would have been spent in reading, and other duties would thereby have been crowded out. Much is overlooked of what is written, much forgotten, and much made the matter of doubtful disputation; this would have been the case much more if there had been such a world of books of equal authority and necessity as the whole history would have swelled to; especially since it was requisite that what was written should be meditated upon and expounded, which God wisely thought fit to leave room for. Parents and ministers, in giving instruction, must consider the capacities of those they teach, and, like Jacob, must take heed of over-driving. Let us be thankful for the books that are written, and not prize them the less for their plainness and brevity, but diligently improve what God has thought fit to reveal, and long to be above, where our capacities shall be so elevated and enlarged that there will be no danger of their being over-loaded.
The evangelist, concluding with Amen, thereby sets to his seal, and let us set to ours, an Amen of faith, subscribing to the gospel, that it is true, all true; and an Amen of satisfaction in what is written, as able to make us wise to salvation. Amen; so be it.
These files are public domain and are a derivative of an electronic edition that is available on the Christian Classics Ethereal Library Website.
Henry, Matthew. "Complete Commentary on John 21:25". "Henry's Complete Commentary on the Whole Bible". https://www.studylight.org/​commentaries/​mhm/​john-21.html. 1706.
Kelly Commentary on Books of the Bible
In John 15:1-27 our Lord substitutes Himself for Israel, as the plant of God, responsible to bear fruit for Him on earth (not merely for man, as such, openly sinful and lost). He takes the place of that which most put itself forward as being according to God here below. As our Lord Himself said (in John 4:1-54), "Salvation is of the Jews:" this place of privilege and promise made their actual condition so much the guiltier. Our Lord, therefore, sets aside openly, and for ever, as regards those that He was now calling out of the world, all connection with Israel. "I am the true vine," He says. We all know that Israel of old is called the vine the vine that the Lord had brought out of Egypt. But Israel was empty, fruitless, false: Christ was the only true vine. Whatever might be the responsibility of Israel, whatever their boasted privileges (and they really were much every way), whatever the associations and hopes of the chosen people, all outside Christ had fallen under the power of the adversary. The only blessing for a soul now was found in Christ Himself; and so He opens the discourse (or, as we saw, closes what went before) with "Rise up: let us go hence." There was an abandonment, not only for Himself, but for them, of all connection with nature, or the world, even in their religion. It was Christ now, or nothing. As in the beginning of John 13:1-38, He had risen up anticipatively as a sign of His work for them on high; so here He calls them to quit all their earthly belongings with Himself; they were now definitively done with. Thus we have the Lord taking now the place substitutionally of all that had exercised religious power over their spirits. It was now proved to be neither a blessing nor even safety for a soul on earth.
"I," He says, "am the true vine, and my Father is the husbandman." He puts Himself in the place of all to which they had been attached and belonged here below, and the Father in lieu of Almighty God, or the Jehovah of Israel. So had He been known. to the fathers and the children of Israel; but it was His Father, as such, to whose care He commends them now. "Every branch in me that beareth not fruit;" for fruit was what God looked for, not merely acts or obligations, but bearing fruit: "Every branch in me that beareth not fruit he taketh away; and every branch that beareth fruit, he purgeth it, that it may bring forth more fruit." This is the general statement. There is a two-fold dealing with those who took the place of being branches of the true vine. Where no fruit was borne, there was judgment in excision; where fruit appeared, purging followed, that there might be more.
The Lord applies this truth particularly: "Already ye are clean through the word that I have spoken to you. Exhortation follows in verses 4, 5; the results distinctively for "a man," for any one ( τις ) who does not abide, and for the disciples who do, are found respectively in verse 6, and in verses 7, 8.
In this chapter it is never simply a question of divine grace saving sinners, blotting out iniquities, remembering sins and transgressions no more; but the power of the word is morally applied to judge whatever is contrary to God's character displayed in Christ, or, rather, to the Father's will revealed in Him. No standard less than this could be entertained, now that Christ was revealed. They then (for Judas was gone) were already clean through the word Christ had spoken to them. The law of Moses, divine as it was, would not suffice: it was negative; but Christ's word is positive. "Abide in me, and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself, except it abide in the vine; no more can ye, except ye abide in me." It is not what God is in grace towards those that are outside Him and lost, but the appraisal of the ways of those associated with Christ, the dealings of God, or more strictly of His Father, with those who professed to belong to the Lord. I say "professed," because it is to me evident that He does not contemplate in His view those exclusively who really had life everlasting. Still less do branches of the vine mean the same thing as members of Christ's body, but His followers, who might even abandon Him, as some in the earliest days walked no more with Him. This alone explains our chapter, without forcing it.
The Lord, then, has in view those who then surrounded Him, already branches in the vine, and, of course, in principle, all that should follow, including those that would nominally, and at first to all appearance really, abandon Israel and all things for Him. It was no light matter, but one of much seriousness; and surely, therefore, if a man did thus come out from all that claimed his affections and conscience, from his religion; in short, if a man came out at the cost of every thing, finding most of all foes in those of his own household, there was that which presumed sincerity of conduct, but had still to be proved. The proof would be abiding in Christ. There is no word more characteristic of John than the very word "abiding," and this in the way both of grace and of government. Here it is the disciples put to the proof. For Christianity is the revelation, not of a dogma, but of a person who has wrought redemption; doubtless, also, of a person in whom is life, and who gives it. Thence flows a new sort of responsibility; and a very important thing it is to see this most strikingly kept up in him, who, of all the evangelists, most strongly brings in the absolute unconditional love of God. Take the early part of the gospel, where the gift of Jesus in divine love, the sending Him into the world not to judge, but to save, makes known what God is to a lost world. There we have grace without a single thought of any thing on man's part, save the depth of need. "For God," He says, "so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved." (John 3:16-17) But here the ground is different. We see those who had come out to Christ from all that they had previously valued in the earth. Alas! flesh is capable of imitating faith; it can go a long way in religiousness, and in renunciation of the profane world. Soon there would be multitudes who would come out from Israel and be baptized unto Christ; but still they must be fully tested. None would stand by baptism, or by any other ordinance, but by abiding in Christ.
"Abide in me, and I in you." Here He always puts man's part first, because it is a question, as we have seen, of responsibility; where it is the grace of God, His part is first necessarily, and, further, it necessarily abides. Whereas, if man's responsibility is before us, it is evident that there can be no necessary permanence here: all turns on dependence on Him who always abides the same yesterday, today, and for ever. Thus the reality of God's work in the soul proves itself, so to speak, by continual looking and clinging to Christ. In verse 4 it is not, "Except I abide in you," but, "Except ye abide in me."
"I am the vine, and ye are the branches: he that abideth in me, and I in him, the same bringeth forth much fruit: for without me ye can do nothing." (Verse 5) It is not here believing, but "doing," though faith be the spring, of course. The Lord would have us bear much fruit, and the only way in which fruit is to be borne is by abiding in Him in whom we believe. What can be a weightier consideration for us, after receiving Christ! Do you go after some other thing or person in order to bear fruit? The result in God's sight is bad fruit.
Thus Christ is not only everlasting life to the soul that believes in Him, but He is the only source of fruit-bearing, all the course through, for those that have received Him. The secret is the heart occupied with Him, the soul dependent on Him, Himself the object in all trials, difficulties, and duties even; so that, though a given thing be a duty, it be not done now barely as such, but with Christ before the eye of faith. But where there is not a life exercised in self-judgment and in enjoyment of Christ. as well as prayer, men get tired of this; they turn away from Him to the nostrums of the day, whether novel or antique, moral or intellectual. They find their attraction in religious feelings, experiences, frames, or visions; in imagining some new good self, or in anatomizing the old bad self; in sacerdotalism, ordinances, or legalism, of one sort or another. Thus they really return, in some shape or degree, to the false vine, instead of cleaving to the true. They lose themselves thus. It may even be a slip back into the world, into the open enemy of the Father; for this is no uncommon result, where there is for a time an abandonment of the old fleshly vine, the religion of ordinances, of human effort, and of assumed privilege. All this was found in its fulness and apparent perfection in Israel; but it was now discovering its utter hopeless hollowness and antagonism to the mind of God; and this was manifested, as we shall find later on in this chapter, in their causeless hatred of the Father and the Son. Christ is ever the test, and this the close declares, as much as the beginning sets Him forth as the only power of preparing for, and producing fruit.
This appears again in the sixth verse, and remarkably too: "If a man abide not in me, he is cast forth as a branch." Apply such language to life everlasting, or, still more, to union with Christ, and there is nothing but endless confusion. Where Scripture speaks of union with Christ, or, again, of life in Him, you never have such a thought as a member of Christ cut off, or one that had eternal life losing it. It is very possible that some who have accurate knowledge might give it, or plunge into all; and this is what Peter speaks of in his second epistle. There is no preservative energy in knowledge ever so full. Such might allow stumbling-blocks, disappointments, etc., to hinder their following Christ, and so practically abandon what they know, the result of which would be the surest and most disastrous ruin. They are worse even than before. So Jude speaks of men twice dead; and, in fact, experience proves that men who have no life in Christ, after having professed awhile, become fiercer adversaries, if not grosser sinners, against the Lord than before any such profession was made.
This is the case our Lord describes here: "If a man abide not in me, he is cast forth as a branch, and is withered; and they gather them, and cast them into the fire, and they are burned." It was one who had come out from the world, and had followed Christ. But there was no attraction of heart, no power of faith, and consequently no dependence on Christ; and this is the Lord's sentence pronounced on all such, whether in that day or in any other.
On the other hand, He says, "If ye abide in me, and my words abide in you, ye shall ask what ye will, and it shall be done unto you." Not only is the heart occupied with Christ, but also His words weigh there. The Old Testament alone would not suffice. It had been used of God when there was nothing more. Blessed of God at all times it would surely be; and he that valued Christ's words would never slight those that witnessed of Christ before He came. But the soul that would make light of the words of Christ, or do without them, after they were communicated, would evince its own faithlessness. The Christian that really prizes the word of God in the Old Testament would still more set his heart on that in the New. He that had no more than a naturally reverent attachment to the law and the prophets, without faith, would prove his real condition by inattention to Christ's words. Thus, to this day, the Jews are themselves the great witness of the truth of our Lord's warning. They are clinging to the empty vine; and so all their religious profession is as empty before God. They may seem to cleave to the words of Moses, but it is mere human tenacity, not divine faith: else the words of Christ would be welcome above all. As the Lord had told them at an earlier moment, had they believed Moses, they would have believed Christ. for Moses wrote of Christ: in truth, there was no divine persuasion as to either. Again, the great test now is Christ's words abiding in us. Old truth, even though equally of God as the new, ceases to be a test when new truth is given and refused, or slighted; and the same thing is true not merely of God's word as a whole, but of a particular truth, when God reawakens it at any given time for the actual exigency of the Church or of His work. It is vain, for instance, to fall back now on the principles put forward and acted on two or three hundred years ago. Of course it is right and of God to hold fast all He gave at any time; but if there be real faith, it will be found out ere long that the Holy Ghost has before Him the present need for the Lord's glory in the Church; and those that have real confidence in His power will not merely hold fast the old but accept the new, in order so much the more to walk in communion with Him who ever watches and works for the name of Christ and the blessing of His saints.
In this case, however, it is the larger subject the all-importance of Christ's words abiding in us: "If ye abide in me, and my words abide in you." There is first the person, then the expression of His mind. Prayer follows: "Ye shall ask what ye will, and it shall be done unto you." It is not prayer first (for this should not take the place either of Christ or of intelligence in His mind), but Christ Himself, the prime object; then His words, as forming fully the heart, according to His thoughts and will; and, lastly, the going out of the heart to the Father, on the ground both of Christ and of His revealed mind, with the annexed assurance that so it should come to pass for them. (Verse 7)
The prayer of Christians is often far from this. How many prayers are there where nothing seems to be done! This way be true, not merely of poor failing souls, such as any of us here; but even an apostle might find the same thing in his course, and God Himself be the witness of it. Indeed, the apostle Paul is the chronicler of the fact to us, that his prayers were not always in this communion. We know he besought the Lord thrice to take away that which was an immense trial to him, making him despicable in the eyes of the less spiritual. We can understand this: nothing is more natural; but, for that very reason, it was not all in the power of the Spirit of God, with Christ as the first object. He was thinking of himself, of his brethren, and of the work; but God graciously brought him to Christ, as the One sustained and sustaining object to abide in Him, as it is said here, and to have Christ's words abiding in himself, and then all the resources of God were at his command. "And he said unto me, My grace is sufficient for thee; for my strength is made perfect in weakness. Most gladly, therefore, will I rather glory in my infirmities, that the power of Christ may rest upon me." (Compare also Philippians 4:6-13) It is only so that there is the certainty of the answer, at least, of what we ask being done.
The object is to show how God the Father answers and acts in accordance with those who are thus practically associated in heart with Christ. And so it is written, "Herein is my Father glorified, that ye bear much fruit, and ye shall become my disciples." (Verse 8) "Disciples," be it noted; for we must carefully bear in mind that we have not the Church as such here, and, indeed, we have never the Church, strictly speaking, in John. The reason is manifest, because the object of this gospel is not to point out Christ in heaven, but God manifesting Himself in Christ on the earth. I do not mean that we have no allusion to His ascent or presence there; for we have seen that there is here some such allusion, especially when the Holy Ghost replaces Him here, and we shall have it repeatedly in what follows. At the same time, the main testimony of John is not so much Christ as man in heaven, but God in Him manifest on the earth. It is evident that, He being the Son, the special place of privilege found in the gospel of John is that of children not members of Christ's body, but sons of God, as receiving and associated with the Son, the only-begotten Son of the Father.
Here He speaks of them as disciples; for, in point of fact, the relationship of which John 15:1-27 speaks was already true. They had already come to Christ; they had forsaken all to follow Him, and were then around Him. He was the Vine now and here. It was not a new place He was going to enter. They, too, were branches then, and more than that, they were clean through the word He had spoken to them. Not that they were then cleansed by blood, but, at least, they were born of water and of the Spirit. They had this cleansing, this moral operation, of the Spirit wrought in their souls. They were bathed or washed all over, and henceforth needed not save to wash their feet.
"As the Father hath loved me, so have I loved you: continue [abide] ye in my love." (Ver. 9) It is all a question of the Father's government and the disciples' responsibility; not of a people having to do with a governor nationally, as Jehovah was to Israel, but of Christ's disciples in relation with the Father, according to the revelation of Himself in Christ. Nor is it here His grace delivering souls, but, what is true along with that, the full maintenance of individual responsibility, according to the manifestation of His nature and relationship in Christ here below. Thus, as compared with the past, the standard is raised immensely. For when once God had brought out Christ, He neither could nor would go back to anything less. It is not merely that He could not own anything short of Christ as a means of salvation, because this is always true; and never was any one brought to God at any time since the world began save by Christ, however scanty the testimony or partial the knowledge of Him. Under the law there was, comparatively speaking, little or no acquaintance with His work as a distinct thing, nor could there be, perhaps (at any rate there was not), even after He came, till the work was done. But here we have God's ways and character as manifested in Christ, and nothing less than this would suit His disciples, or be agreeable to the Father. As already remarked, the application of this to life everlasting only induces contradiction. Thus, if we suppose that the subject of the chapter is, e.g., life or union with Christ, just see into what difficulties this false start plunges one at once: all would be made conditional, and those united to Christ might be lost. "If ye keep my commandments" what has that to do with life eternal in Christ? Does union with Christ, does life eternal, depend on keeping His commandments? Clearly not; yet there is a meaning, and a most weighty meaning for those that belong to Christ, in these words. Apply them, not to grace but to government, and all is plain and sure and consistent.
The meaning is, that it is impossible to produce fruit for the Father, impossible to keep up the enjoyment of Christ's love, unless there be obedience, and this to Christ's commandments. I repeat, that he who values the Master will not despise the servant; but there are many who do acknowledge their responsibility to the law of Moses without appreciating and obeying the words of Christ. He that loves Christ will enjoy all truth, because Christ is the truth. He will cherish every expression of God's mind; he will find guidance in the law, the prophets, the psalms everywhere; and so much the more where there is the fullest revelation of Christ Himself. Christ is the true light. Therefore, as long as Christ is not the One in and through whose light the Scriptures, whether old or new, are read, a man is but groping his way in the dark. When he sees and believes in the Son, there is for him a sure way through the wilderness, and also a bright way in the word of God. The darkness passes away; bondage is no more; there is no condemnation, but, on the contrary, life, light, and liberty; but, at the same time, it is a liberty used in the sense of responsibility to please our God and Father, measured by the revelation of Himself in Christ.
So the Lord says, "If ye keep my commandments, ye shall abide in my love; even as I have kept my Father's commandments, and abide in his love." The consequence is, that where there is carelessness in one who belongs to Christ, in a living, branch of the vine, the Father as the husbandman deals in purging judgment. Where habitual obedience is found, there is habitual enjoyment of Christ's love. "These things have I spoken unto you, that my joy might remain in you, and that your joy might be full."
Supposing that for a time there is a departure from Christ, what is the effect of it? No matter how really a man may be a child of God, he is miserable; the more real, the more miserable. One that had not a conscience exercised before God might sleep over sin and accustom himself to evil for a while; and an unreal disciple would grow. tired of carrying on the profession of Christ along with indulged evil; nor would God allow it to go beyond a certain point as an ordinary rule. But for a saint, true-hearted in the main, nothing is more certain than that Christ would deal with him, and that he would lose meanwhile all sense of the love of Christ as a present practical thing. It is a matter of communion, not of salvation. And surely it ought to be so, and we would not desire it to be otherwise. Who would desire an unreal thing the keeping up an appearance, the parade of words and sentiments beyond the heart's state? There is nothing more calamitous for a soul than to be going on badly, and withal keeping up a vain, exaggerated semblance of feeling, where there is a scanty answer to it within.
With the enjoyment of Christ's love, then, goes obedience; and where the disciple fails in obedience, there cannot be a real abiding in His love. Here it is not a question of love everlasting, but of present communion. He only abides in Christ's love who walks in His will faithfully. We must discriminate in the love of Christ. Unconditionally, of pure grace, He loved them that were His. Again, there was love, in a broad sense even for those that were not His, as we have seen more than once. Besides, there is the special personal love of approbation for him who is walking in the ways of God.
Some there are a little sensitive on these subjects. They do not like to hear, save of eternal love of the elect; and certainly, if this were weakened or denied, they might have reason to resent it. But as it is there cannot be a more painful proof of their own state. The reason why they cannot bear this farther truth is because it condemns them. If these things are in Scripture, (and deny them who dares?) our business is to submit; our duty is to seek to understand them; our wisdom is to correct and challenge ourselves, if peradventure we find insubjection within us to anything that concerns Him and our own souls. Not to speak of Christ, even on the lowest ground, we are depriving ourselves of what is good and profitable. What, indeed, can be more ruinous than putting aside that which condemns any state in which we find ourselves?
I need not enter into all the details of our chapter, though I have rather minutely gone over it thus far, believing it to be of special importance, because it is so much and generally misunderstood. Here the Lord presents Himself as the only source, not of life, as elsewhere, but of fruit-bearing for disciples, or His professed followers. What He shows is, that they need Him just as much for every day as for eternity; that they need Him for the fruit the Father expects from them now, just as much as for a title to heaven. Hence He speaks of that which pertains to a disciple on the earth; and accordingly the Lord speaks of having Himself kept His Father's commandments, and of His own abiding in His love; for, indeed, He had ever been here below the dependent man, to whom the Father was the moral source of the life He lived; and so He would have us now to live because of Himself.
I entreat any who have misread this chapter to examine thoroughly what I am now urging on my hearers. It is incalculable the quantity of scripture that is passed over without distinct exercise of faith. Souls receive it in a general way; and too often one reason why it is received so easily is, because they do not face the truth, and their conscience is not exercised by it. If they thought, weighed, and let into their souls the real truth conveyed, they might at first be startled, but the way and the end would be blessed to them. What a return for these wondrous communications of Christ, just to slip over them perfunctorily, without making the light our own! Our Lord then clearly shows that He, as man here below, had Himself walked under the government of His Father. It was not merely that He was born of a woman, born under the law, but, as He says here, "Even as I have kept my Father's commandments." It went much farther than the ten words, or all the rest of the law; it embraced every expression of the Father's authority, from whatever quarter it came. And as He could not but perfectly keep His Father's commandments, He abode in His love. As the eternal Son of the Father, of course He was ever loved of the Father; as laying down His life (John 10:1-42), He was therefore loved of His Father; but, besides, in all His earthly path, He kept His Father's commandments, and abode in His love. The Father, looking upon the Son as man walking here below, never found the slightest deflection; but, on the contrary, the perfect image of His own will in Him who, being the Son, made known and glorified the Father as He never was nor could be by any other. This was not simply as God, but rather as the Man Christ Jesus here below. I admit that, being such an One, there could be no failure. To suppose I will not say the fact, but the possibility even, of a flaw in Christ, either as God or as man, proves that he who admits the thought has no faith in His person. There could be none. Still, the trial was made under the most adverse circumstances; and He who, though God Himself, was at the same time man, walked as man perfectly, as truly as He was perfect man; and thus the Father's love rested governmentally upon Him fully, unwaveringly, absolutely in all His ways.
Now we, too, are placed upon the true ground as the disciples, strictly speaking, who were then there; but, of course, the same principle applies to all.
Another thing comes in after this. Gathered round Christ, the disciples were called on by Christ to love one another. (Ver. 12) Loving one's neighbour was not the point now; nor is it so here. Of course, loving one's neighbour abides always, but this, no matter how accomplished, ought not to be enough for a disciple of Christ. Such a demand was right and seasonable for a man in the flesh for a Jew especially; but it could not suffice for the heart of a Christian, and, in fact, he who denies this, quarrels with the Lord's own words. A Christian, I repeat, is not absolved from loving his neighbour nobody means that, I trust; but what I affirm is, that a Christian is called to love his fellow Christian in a new and special manner, exemplified and formed by the love of Christ; and I cannot but think that he who confounds this with love to his neighbour has a great deal to learn about Christ, and Christianity too.
The Lord evidently introduces it as a new thing. "This is my commandment." It was His commandment specially. He it was that first gathered the disciples. They were a distinct company from Israel, though not yet baptized into one body; but they were gathered by Christ, and round Himself, severed from the rest of the Jews so far. "This is my commandment, that ye love one another." But according to what measure? "As I have loved you. Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends." Shall I be told that any man ever loved, before Christ came into the world, as He loved? If a man will be ignorant, let him be ignorant, and show his unbelief by such an assertion, if he will. Now I say that there is a love looked for, such as could only be since Christ manifested it, and that His love fills and fashions after its own nature and direction. The disciples were now to love one another according to the pattern of Him who laid down His life for them as His friends. Indeed, He died for them when they were enemies; but this is out of sight here. They were His friends, if they did whatever He commanded them. (Ver. 14) He called them friends, not slaves; for the slave knows not what his master does; but He called them friends, for He made them His confidants in all He had heard of His Father. They had not chosen Him, but He them, and set them to go and bear fruit, abiding fruit, that He might give them whatsoever they asked the Father in His name. 'These things I command you, that ye love one another." (Verses 15-17)
And truly they would need the love of one another, as Christ loved them. They had become objects of the hatred of the world. (Verses 18, 19) The Jews knew no such experience. They might be disliked of the Gentiles. They were a peculiar people, no doubt, and the nations could ill brook a small nation raised to such a conspicuous place, whose law condemned them and their gods. But the disciples were to have the hatred of the world, of the Jew as much or more than of the Gentile. They had this indeed already, and they must make up their minds to it from the world. The love of Christ was on them, and, working in them and by them, would make them the objects of the world's hatred, and after that sort which He had Himself known. As He says here: "If the world hate you, ye know that it hated me before it hated you. If ye were of the world, the world would love his own: but because ye are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you." I refer to this for the purpose of showing, that the revelation of Christ has brought in not merely a total change in the consciousness of eternal life and salvation when the work was done, as well as the overthrow of all distinctions between Jew and Gentile, which we find, of course, in the epistles but, besides that practically, has 'brought in a power of producing fruit that could not be before, a mutual love peculiar to Christians, and a rejection and hatred from the world beyond all that had been. In every way possible Christ gives us now His own portion, from the world as well as from the Father. "Remember the word that I said unto you, The servant is not greater than his lord. If they have persecuted me, they will also persecute you; if they have kept my saying, they will keep yours also." (Verse 20)
Fully do I admit that there were works of faith, deeds of righteousness, holy, wise, obedient ways, in saints of God from the beginning. You could not have faith without a new nature, nor this again without the exercise practically of that which was according to God's will. Therefore, as all saints from the beginning had faith, and were regenerate, so also there were spiritual ways in accordance with it.
But God's revelation in Christ makes an immense accession of blessing; and the consequence is, that this brings out the mind of God in a way that was not and could not have been before, just because there was no manifestation of Christ, and nobody but Christ could bring it adequately out. With this revelation the hatred of the world is commensurate; and the Lord puts it in the strongest possible way. "But all these things will they do unto you for my name's sake, because they know not him that sent me. If I had not come and spoken unto them, they had not had sin." (Ver. 21, 22) What can be plainer than the enormous change that was coming in now? We know that there had been sin all along, in the dealings of God with His ancient people; but what does the Lord here mean? Are we to fritter away the meaning of His language? Are we not to believe that, whatever there was before, the revelation of Christ brought sin to such a head, that what had been before was, comparatively speaking, a little thing when put beside the evil that was done against, and measured by, the glory of Christ the Son, the rejection of the Father's love; in short, the hatred shown to grace and truth yea, the Father and the Son fully revealed in the Lord Jesus? Clearly so. It is not, then, a question of judging sin by right and wrong, by law, or by conscience all well and in place for Israel and man as such. But when One who is more than man comes into the world, the dignity of the person sinned against, the love and light revealed in His person, all bear on the estimate of sin; and the consequence is, there could be no such character of sin till Christ was manifested, though, of course, heart and nature are the same.
But the revelation of Christ forced everything to a point, sounded the condition of man as nothing else could, and proved that, bad as Israel might be, when measured by a law a holy, just, good law of God, yet, measured now by the Son of God, all sin previously was as nothing compared with the still deeper sin of rejecting the Son of God. "He that hateth me hateth my Father also." (Ver. 23) It is not merely God as such, but "my Father" that was hated. "If I had not done among them" not now His words only, but works "if I had not done among them the works which none other man did, they had not had sin: but now have they both seen and hated both me and my Father." (Verse 24) There was a full testimony, as we have seen already, in John 8:1-59; John 9:1-41. (His words in John 8:1-59, His works in John 9:1-41); but the manifestation of His words and of His works only brought out man thoroughly hating the Father and the Son. Had they only failed to meet the requirements of God, as man had done under the law, there was ample provision to meet him in mercy and power; but now, under this revelation of grace, man, and Israel most of all, the world (for in this they are all merged now) stood out in open hostility to, and implacable hatred of, the fullest display of divine goodness here below. But this dreadful hopeless hatred, evil as it was, ought not to surprise one who believes the word of God; it was, "that the word might be fulfilled which was written in their law, They hated me without a cause." (Verse 25) There is nothing that so demonstrates man's total alienation and enmity. This is precisely what Christ here urges. The disciples accordingly, having received this grace in Christ, were called into a like path with Him, the epistle here below of Christ who is above. Fruit-bearing is the great point throughout John 15:1-27, as the end of it and John 16:1-33 bring before us testimony. "When the Comforter is come, whom I will send unto you from the Father, even the Spirit of truth, which proceedeth from the Father, he shall testify of me: and ye also shall bear witness, because ye have been with me from the beginning." Here is a twofold testimony that of the disciples who had seen Christ and heard His words. Hence they were called to bear witness of Him "because ye have been with me from the beginning." It was not only the great manifestation at the end, but the truth from the beginning, grace and truth always in Him. Dealing differently, no doubt, according to that which was before Him; still it was in Christ ever the value of what came, not what He found, which was the great point. And to this testimony (for He is showing now the full testimony which the disciples were called to render) the Holy Ghost would add His, (wondrous to say and know it true!) as distinct from the witness of the disciples. We know right well that a disciple only renders testimony by the power of the Holy Ghost. How, then, do we find the Holy Ghost's testimony spoken of as distinct from theirs? Both are true, especially when we bear in mind that He would testify of the heavenly side of truth. In John 14:26, it was said, "The Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you." There the Holy Ghost is both a teacher and helper. As it is said, "He will teach you all things" what they never knew, besides bringing to remembrance things that they had known.
In the end ofJohn 15:1-27; John 15:1-27 there is a good deal more. The Holy Ghost, "when he is come," (not "whom the Father will send," but) "whom I will send from the Father." (Ver. 26) The Holy Ghost was both sent by the Father, and sent by the Son; not the same thing, but quite consistent. There is a distinct line of truth in the two cases. You could not transplant from John 15:1-27 into John 14:1-31, nor the reverse, without dislocating the whole order of the truth. Surely it all deserves to be weighed, and demands from us that we should wait upon God to learn His precious things. In John 14:1-31 it is evidently the Father giving another Comforter to the disciples, and sending Him in Christ's name: Christ is looked at there as One who prays, and whose value acts for the disciples. But in John 15:1-27 it is One who is Himself everything for the disciples from on high. Here He was the one spring of whatever fruit was borne, and He is gone on high, but is the same there; and so not merely asks the Father to send, but Himself sends them from the Father the Spirit of truth, who proceeds from with the Father, if so literal a turn may be allowed. His own personal glory on high is in full view, and so He speaks and acts, while the connection with the Father is always kept up. Still, in the one case it is the Father who sends; in the other, the Son; and this last, where the point is to show the new glory of Christ above. "He shall testify of me, and ye also shall bear witness, because ye have been with me from the beginning." There would be the testimony of the Holy Ghost sent from the Son, and bearing witness of Him according to the place whence He came to replace Him here. The Holy Ghost, sent thus from above, would bear witness of the Son in heaven; but the disciples also would bear witness of what they knew when He was upon the earth, because they had been with Him from the beginning ( i.e. of His manifestation here). Both we have in Christianity, which not only maintains the testimony of Christ, as manifested on the earth, but also the Holy Ghost's witness of Christ known on high. To leave out either is to strip Christianity of half its value. There is that which never can make up for Christ on the earth; and certainly there is that revealed of Christ in heaven which no manifestation on the earth can supply. They have, both of them, a divine place and power for the children of God.
John 16:1-33 seems to be based rather on this last. The main difference is, that the Holy Ghost is more spoken of here apart from the question of who sends. It is more the Holy Ghost coming than sent here; that is, the Holy Ghost is looked at not certainly as acting independently, but yet as a distinct person. He comes, not to display His own power and glory, but expressly to glorify Christ. At the same time, He is looked at in more distinct personality than in John 14:1-31; John 15:1-27. And our Lord had the wisest reason for making known to the disciples what they had to expect. They were now entering on the path of testimony, that always involves suffering We have seen what should befall them in bearing fruit as Christ's disciples and friends. This is enough for the world, which hates them as Him, because they are not of it, but are loved and chosen of Christ. These two things unite the disciples. The hatred of the world and the love of Christ press them so much the more together. But there is also the hatred which befalls them in testifying, not as disciples so much as witnesses. Witnessing as the disciples did of what they had known of Christ here, witnessing of what the Spirit taught them of Christ on high, the consequence would be, "They shall put you out of the synagogues: yea, the time cometh, that whosoever killeth you will think that he doeth God service." It is clearly religious rancour created by this full testimony, not the world's general ill-feeling, but special hatred to their testimony. Hence, it would be putting them, not merely into prisons, but out of the synagogues; and this under the notion of doing God service. It is religious persecution. "And these things will they do unto you, because they have not known the Father, nor me. How perfectly the truth shines here on Christian as well as on Jewish hatred of all full testimony to Christ! Spite of the liberalism of the day, this peeps out where it dares. They talk about God; they speculate about the Deity, providence, fate, or chance. They may even be zealous for the law, and tack on Christ to it. There a great deal of the world's religion ends. But they know not the Father nor the Son. It is irreverence to draw near and cry, Abba, Father! It is presumption for a man in this life to count himself a child of God! The consequence is, that wherever there is this ignorance of the Father and the Son, there is inveterate hostility against such as are joyful in the communion of the Father and the Son. This hatred every true witness, without compromise, and separate from the world, must more or less experience. The Lord would not have them surprised. Jewish brethren might have thought that, having received Christ, everything was to be smooth, bright, and peaceful. Not so. They must expect special and increasing, and, worst of all, religious hatred. (Verses 1-4)
"But now I go my way to him that sent me." The path lay through death, no doubt; but He puts it as going to Him that sent Him. Let them be comforted, then, as surely they would if they rightly thought of His Father's presence. But "none of you asketh me, Whither goest thou?" (Ver. 5) They felt natural sadness at the thought of His departure. Had they gone a step farther, and asked whither He was going, it would have been all right, they would have felt glad for Him; for though it were their loss, it was most surely His gain and joy the joy that was set before Him, the joy of being with His Father, with the comfort for His own of an accomplished redemption (attested by His thus going on high). "But because I have said these things unto you, sorrow hath filled your heart. Nevertheless I tell you the truth; It is expedient for you that I go away: for if I go not away, the Comforter will not come unto you." (Ver. 7) It is the Comforter coming. No doubt Christ sends; and there lies the connection with the end of John 15:1-27. Still there is the special form of presenting Him as one that comes, which is confirmed in the next verse. "And when he is come, he will reprove [or convince] the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment." (Ver. 8) This is a sentence much to be pondered. It is now God's Spirit dealing according to the gospel with individual souls, which is perfectly true and most important. Conviction of sin is wrought in all who are born of God. What confidence could there be in a soul professing to have found redemption, even forgiveness of sins, through His blood, unless there were an accompanying sense of sin? The Spirit of God does produce this. Souls must be simple and distinct in it as truly as in believing in Christ Jesus. There is a real individual work in those, yea, in all brought to God. For a sinner, repentance remains an eternal necessity.
Here, however, the Holy Ghost is not spoken of as dealing with individuals when He regenerates them and they believe, but as bringing conviction to the world of sin because of unbelief There is no real conviction of sin unless there be faith. It may be but the first working of God's grace in the soul that produces it. There may not be faith so as to have peace with God, but assuredly enough to judge of one's own ways and condition before God; and this is precisely the way in which He does ordinarily work. At the same time there is also the conviction of which the Lord speaks: the Holy Ghost, when He is come, will convince the world of sin. Why? Because they have broken the law? Not so. This may be used, but is not the ground nor the standard when Christ is the question. The law remains, and the Spirit of God often employs it, specially if a man be in self-righteousness. But the fact is clear, that the Holy Ghost is sent down; as it is also clear, that the Holy Ghost, being here, convicts the world i.e., what is outside where He is. Were there faith, the Holy Ghost would be in their midst; but the world does not believe. Hence Christ is, as everywhere in John, the standard for judging the condition of men. "When he is come, he will convince the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment: of sin, [not when they begin to believe in me, but] because they believe not in me." Again, the conviction of righteousness is equally remarkable. There is no reference even to the blessed Lord when on earth, or to what He did here. "Of righteousness, because I go to my Father, and ye see me no more." (Verses 8-10)
Thus there is a twofold conviction of righteousness. The first ground is, that the only righteousness now is in Christ gone to be with the Father. So perfectly did Christ glorify God in death, as He always did in life the things that pleased His Father, that nothing short of putting Him as man at His own right hand could meet the case. Wondrous fact! a man now in glory, at the right hand of God, above all angels, principalities, and powers. This is the proof of righteousness. It is what God the Father owed to Christ, who had so perfectly pleased and so morally glorified Him, even in respect of sin. All the world, yea, all worlds, would be too little to mark His sense of value for Christ and His work nothing less than setting Him as man at His right hand in heaven. But there is another though negative, as that was the positive, proof of righteousness that the world has lost Christ, "and ye see me no more." When Christ returns, He will gather His own to Himself, as inJohn 14:1-31; John 14:1-31. But as for the world, it has rejected and crucified Christ. The consequence is, that it will see Christ no more till He comes in judgment, and this will be to put down its pride for ever. Thus there is this double conviction of righteousness: the first is Christ gone to be with the Father on high; the second is Christ seen no more consequently. The rejected Christ is accepted and glorified in the highest seat above, which condemns the world and proves there is no righteousness in it or man; but more than this, the world shall see Him no more. When He returns, it is to judge man; but as far as concerns the offer of blessing to man in a living Christ, it is gone for ever. The Jews did and do look for Him; but when He came, they would not have Him. The best of the world, therefore, the choicest and most divinely privileged of men, have turned out the most guilty. A living Messiah they will never see. If any have Him now, it can only be a rejected and heavenly Christ.
But there is another thing the Spirit will convince the world "of judgment." What is the conviction of judgment? It is not the destruction of this place or that. Such was the way in which God manifested His judgment of old; but the Holy Ghost bears witness now, that the prince of this world is judged. He led the world to cast out the truth, and God Himself, in the person of Christ. His judgment is sealed. It is fixed beyond hope of change. It is only a question of the moment in God's hands, and the world with its prince will be treated according to the judgment already pronounced. "Of judgment," He says, "because the prince of this world is judged." (Verse 11) In John we have the truth, without waiting for what will be manifest. The Spirit here judges things at the roots, dealing with things according to their reality in God's sight, into which the believer enters.
Thus everywhere there is absolute opposition between the world and the Father, expressed morally when the Son was here, and proved now that the Spirit is come. The great mark of the world is that the Father is unknown. Hence, like Jews, or even heathen, they can pray to Almighty God to bless their leagues, or their arms, their crops, their herds, or what not. Thereby they flatter themselves perhaps that they may do God service; but the Father's love is unknown never in such a condition can He be fully known. Even when we look at children of God, scattered here and there in the waste, they are trembling and fearful, and practically at a distance, instead of consciously near in peace, as if it were God's will that His children should now stand off in Sinai distance and terror. Who ever heard even of an earthly father, worthy of the name, so sternly repelling his children? Certainly this is not our Father as we know Him through Christ Jesus. Brethren, it is the spirit of the world which, when sanctioned, invariably tends to destroy the knowledge of the Father, and of our proper relationship, even among His real children, because it necessarily slips more or less into Judaism.
But the Holy Ghost has another work. He convinces the world of the truth they do not know, by the very fact that He is outside the world, and has nothing to do with it. He dwells with the children of God. I do not deny His power in the testimony of the gospel to souls. This is another thing not spoken of here. But, besides, we have His direct immediate action among the disciples. "I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now. Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth." (Verses 12, 13) Thus the disciples, favoured as they were, were far from knowing all that the Lord desired for them, and would have told them if their state had admitted of it. When redemption was accomplished, and Christ was raised from the dead, and the Holy Ghost was given, then they were competent to enter into all the truth, not before. Hence, Christianity awaits not only Christ's coming, but the accomplishment of His work, and also the mission and personal presence of the Holy Ghost, the Comforter, consequent on that work. But He would take no independent place, any more than the Son had. "He shall not speak from himself; but whatever he shall hear, he shall speak: and he will report (or announce) to you things to come. He shall glorify me; for he shall receive of mine, and shall report it to you." (Verses 13, 14)
It is not said, as some think, that He shall not speak about Himself; for the Holy Ghost does speak, and tells us much concerning Himself and His operations; and never so much as under the Christian revelation. The fullest instruction as to the Spirit is in the New Testament; and, pray, who speaks of the Holy Ghost if it be not Himself? Was it merely Paul? or John? or any other man? The fact is, that the Authorised Version gives rather obsolete English. The meaning is, that He shall not speak of His own authority, as if He had nothing to do with the Father and the Son. For He is come here to glorify the Son, just as the Son, when here, was glorifying the Father. And this explains why, although the Holy Ghost is worthy of supreme worship, and of being, equally with the Father and the Son, personally addressed in prayer, yet, having come down for the purpose of animating, directing, and effectuating the work and worship of God's children here, He is never presented in the epistles as directly the object, but rather as the power, of Christian prayer. Therefore, we find them praying in, and never to, the Holy Ghost. At the same time, when we say "God," of course we do mean not only the Father, but the Son, and the Holy Ghost too. In that way, therefore, every intelligent believer knows that he includes the Spirit and the Son with the Father, when he addresses God; because the name "God" does not belong to one person in the Trinity more than to another. But when we speak of the persons in the Godhead distinctively, and with knowledge of what God has done and is doing, we do well to remind ourselves and one another, that the Spirit has come down and taken a special place among and in the disciples now; the consequence of which is, that He is pleased administratively (without renouncing His personal rights) to direct our hearts thus towards God the Father and the Lord Jesus. He is thus (if we may speak so, as I believe we may and ought reverentially) serving the interests of the Father and the Son here below in the disciples. The fact we have noticed, the administrative position of the Spirit, is thus owing to the work He has voluntarily undertaken for the Father and the Son, though, of course, as a question of His own glory, He is equally to be adored with the Father and the Son, and is always comprehended in God as such.
The rest of the chapter, without entering into minute points, shows that the Lord, about to leave the disciples, would give them a taste of joy a testimony of what will be. (Verses 16-22) The world might rejoice in having got rid of Him; but He would give His own joy, which would not be taken from them. In measure, this was made good by our Lord's appearing after He rose from the dead; but the full force of it will only be known when He comes again.
Then there is another privilege. The Lord intimates a new character of drawing near to the Father, which they had not yet known. (Verses 23-26) Hitherto they had asked nothing in His name. "In that day," He says, "ye shall ask me nothing." 'We are in "that day" now. "In that day" does not mean in a future day, but in one that is come, Instead of using Christ's intervention as Martha proposed, instead of begging Christ to ask* the Father, demanding each thing they needed of Christ Himself, they might reckon on the Father's giving them whatsoever they should ask Him in Christ's name. It is not a question of a Messianic link to get what they wanted, but they would be able to ask the Father in His name themselves. How blessed to know the Father thus hearkening to the children asking in the Son's name! It is of children on earth now the Lord speaks, not of the Father's house by-and-by. Evidently this is a capital truth, bearing powerfully on the nature of the Christian's prayers, as well as on his worship.
*It is remarkable that Martha puts a word ( αἰτήσῃ ) into Christ's mouth (that is, uses an expression for asking the Father), which is never used nor warranted by Himself. It makes the Lord a mere petitioner, lowering the glory of His person, and obscuring, if not denying, the intimacy of His relationship with the Father.
It is exactly what accounts for the fact, that we are here on ground quite different from that of the precious and blessed form of prayer which the Lord gave His disciples when they wanted to know how to pray, as John taught his disciples. The Lord necessarily gave them that which was suited to their then condition. Now, I believe, it is little to say that there is not, nor ever was, a formula of prayer comparable with the Lord's prayer. Nor is there, to my thinking, a single petition of that prayer which is not a model for the prayers of His followers ever since; but all remains true and applicable at all times at least, till our Father's kingdom come. Why, then, was it not employed formally by the apostolic Church? The answer lies in what is now before us. Our Lord here, at the end of His earthly course, informs the disciples that hitherto they had demanded nothing in His name. They had, no doubt, been using the Lord's prayer for some time; nevertheless they had asked nothing in His name. In that day they were to ask the Father in His name. What I gather from this is, that those who had even used the Lord's prayer, as the disciples had done up to this time, did not know what it was to ask the Father in the Lord's name. They still continued at a comparative distance from their Father; but this is not the Christian state. By the Christian state I mean that in which a man is conscious of his nearness to his God and Father, and able to draw near in virtue of the Holy Ghost even. On the contrary, prayers that suppose a person to be an object of divine displeasure, anxious, and doubtful whether he is to be saved or not such an experience supposes one incapable of speaking to the Father in Christ's name. It is speaking as still tied and bound with the chain of their sins, instead of standing in known reconciliation, and, with the Spirit of adoption, drawing near to the Father in the name of Christ. Who can honestly, or at least intelligently, deny it? Thus, whatever the blessing through the Lord's ministry, there was certainly an advance here foreshown, founded on redemption, resurrection, and the Spirit given. Why should men limit their thoughts, so as to ignore that incomparable blessing to which even in this gospel Christ was ever pointing, as the fruit of His death and of the presence of the Comforter who would bring in "that day"? It was impossible to furnish a prayer which could reconcile the wants of souls before and after the work of the cross, and the new place consequent on it. And, in fact, the Lord has done the contrary; for He gave the disciples a prayer on principles of everlasting truth, but not anticipating that which His death and resurrection brought to view. Of these new privileges the Holy Ghost sent down was to be the power. Be assured this is no secondary matter, and that traditional views slight unwittingly the infinite efficacy and value of what Christ has wrought, the results of which the Holy Ghost was sent down to apply to our souls. And the gift of that divine person to dwell in us is this, too, a secondary matter? or is there no radical change which accompanies the work of Christ when accomplished and known? If, indeed, everything be secondary to the supply of man's need, if the unfolding of God's glory and ways in Christ be comparatively a cipher, I understand as much as I hate a principle so base and unbelieving.
It appears to me that the Lord Jesus Himself clearly sets forth the new thing at the highest value, which no general reasonings of men ought to weaken in the least. That immense change, then, let us accept on His authority who cannot deceive us, assured that our brethren, who fail to see how full association with the efficacy of His work and the acceptance of His person, made good in the presence of the Spirit, accounts for the difference between prayer before and prayer after, put no intentional slight on His words in this chapter, or on His work of atonement. But I beseech them to consider whether they are not allowing habits and prejudices to blind them to what seems to me the mind of Christ in this grave question.
In the close ofJohn 16:25-33; John 16:25-33, the Lord puts, with perfect plainness, both their coming position in His name, and as immediate objects of the Father's affection, and His own place as coming from and going to the Father, above all promise and dispensation. This the disciples thought they saw distinctly; but they were mistaken: their words do not rise higher than "We believe that thou camest forth from God." The Master thereon warns them of that hour, even then come in spirit, when His rejection should prove their dispersion deserted, yet not alone, "because the Father is with me." He spoke, that in Him they might have peace, as in the world they should have tribulation. "But be of good cheer: I have overcome the world." It was an enemy of the Father and of them, but an enemy overcome of Him.
On John 17:1-26 I must be brief, though its treasures might well invite one to devote ample space to weigh them. A few words, however, may perhaps give the general outline. The Lord, lifting up His eyes to heaven, no longer speaks to the disciples, but turns to His Father. He lays a double ground before Him: one, the glory of His person; the other, the accomplishment of His work. He seeks from the Father for His disciples a place of blessing in association with Himself suitable both to His person and work.
Be it observed, that from verse 6 He develops the relationship of the disciples with His Father, having manifested the Father's name to those who were the Father's, and given them the words which the Father gave Him, and spoken as He did now that they might have His joy fulfilled in them. From verse 14 He develops it with the world, they being not of it, and wholly sanctified from it, while sent into it like Himself. And observe, here, that He has given them the Father's word ( λόγον ) for their testimony (as before His words, ῥήματα ), but sanctifies them, not by this only, which kept them from the evil of the world, but by Himself, always separate from sin, but now made higher than the heavens, so as to fill them with an object there that could engage and expand and purify their affections. From verse 20 He extends this place of privilege and responsibility to those who should believe on Him through the word of the apostles, the moral unity of verse 11 being now enlarged into a unity of testimony, that the world might believe that the Father sent the Son; and carried onward, even to the display of glory "I in them, and thou in me" when they shall be perfected into one, and the world shall know (not then "believe") that the Father sent the Son, and loved them as He loved Him. (Compare 2 Thessalonians 1:10)
Lastly, from verse 24 to the end, we have, if possible, deeper things than even these; and here the Lord expresses His heart's desire, for it is no longer, as before, in the form of a request ( ἐρωτῶ ) but, "Father, I will," or desire ( θέλω ). This word indicates a new character of plea: "I desire that they also, whom thou hast given me, be with me where I am." The earlier section laid His person and His work as the ground for His being glorified on high, according to the title of the one, and in the accomplishment of the other. Verse 24, as it were, takes up that position of glory with the Father before the world was, into which Christ has gone, with His heart's expression of desire that they should be with Him where He is, that they might behold His glory, which the Father gave Him; "for thou lovedst me before the foundation of the world." Thus, if the central portion gave us the disciples on the earth in relation with the Father on the one hand, and in total separation from the world on the other, with subsequent believers brought into one, both in testimony and in glory by-and-by before the world, the closing verses take up Christians, as it were, with the Father in an unearthly, heavenly glory, and His desire that they should be with Him there. It is not merely sought for them, that they should be thoroughly, as far as, could be, in His own place of relationship with the Father, and apart from the world, but also that they should be brought into intimacy of nearness with Himself before the Father. Then, in verse 25, the breach between the world and the Father and the Son being complete, He says, "O righteous Father, the world hath not known thee; but I have known thee, and these have known that thou hast sent me." There is always this opposition between the Father and the world, proved by His person in the world. But the disciples had known that the Father sent the Son, as the Son knew the Father. He had made known to them the Father's name, and would yet more, "that the love wherewith thou hast loved me may be in them, and I in them;" this last verse bringing into them, as it were, the Father's love, as the Son knew it, which was the secret source of all the blessing and glory, and Christ Himself in them, whose life by the Spirit was the sole nature capable of enjoying all. Thus they should have a present enjoyment of the Father, and of Christ, according to the place of nearness they had as thus associated with Him.
On the concluding chapters of our gospel I cannot speak particularly now. Yet I must, in passing point out that even in these solemn closing scenes the glory of the Son's person is ever the prominent figure. Hence we have no notice of His agony in the garden, nor of God's forsaking Him on the tree. Matthew depicts Him as the suffering Messiah, according to psalms and prophets; Mark, as the rejected Servant and Prophet of God; Luke, as the perfect and obedient Son of man, who shrank from no trial either for soul or body, but even on the cross prayed for His enemies, filling a poor sinner's heart with the good news of salvation, and committing His spirit with unwavering confidence to His Father. The point here is the Son of God with the world, the Jews especially being His enemies. Hence, John tells us (John 18:1-40) what no other gospel does, that when the band came to take Jesus, led by one who knew too well the spot where His heart had so often, poured itself out to the Father, at once they went backward, and fell to the ground. Do you suppose Matthew let it slip? or that Mark and Luke never heard of it? Is it conceivable that a fact so notorious the very world being the objects of the divine power that cast them prostrate to the ground could be hidden from, or forgotten by, friends or foes? Or if even men (not to speak of the Spirit's power) would forget such a thing, did the rest think it too slight for their mention? All such suppositions are preposterous. The true explanation is, that the gospels are written with divine design, and that here, as everywhere, John records a fact which falls in with the Spirit's object in his gospel. Did these men come to seize Jesus? He was going to be a prisoner, and to die; in the one case, as much as in the other, He would prove it was not of man's constraint, but of His own will and in obedience to His Father's. He was a willing prisoner, and a willing victim. If none could take His life unless He laid it down, so none could take Him prisoner unless He gave Himself up. Nor was it simply that He could ask His Father for twelve legions of angels, as He says in Matthew; but, in John, did He want angels? They might and did ascend and descend on Him as Son of man; but He had only to speak, and it was done. He is God.
The moment He said, "I am he," without lifting a finger, or even audibly expressing a desire, they fell to the ground. Could this scene be suitably given by any other than John? Could he leave it out who presents his Master as the Son and the Word who was God?
Again, we have our Lord's calm rebuke to Peter, who had cut off the ear of Malchus. Let Luke alone tell us of the Lord's gracious healing (for Jehovah's power to heal was not absent); John alone adds, "The cup which my Father hath given me, shall I not drink it?" He preserves throughout His personal dignity and His conscious relationship, but withal in perfect submission to His Father.
Then follows the notice of Peter's sad history with that other disciple which was known to the high priest. Next, our Lord is before the high priest, Caiaphas, as previously before his father-in-law Annas, and, finally, before Pilate. Suffice it to say, that the one point which meets us here, as distinct from the other gospels, is His person. Not that He was not King of the Jews, but His kingdom is not of this world, not from hence, and He Himself is born and come into the world to bear witness to the truth. Here it is the Jews insist He ought by their law to die, because He made Himself the Son of God. (John 19:1-42) Here, too, He answers Pilate, after scourging and mockery, "Thou couldest have no power at all against me, except it were given thee from above: therefore he that delivered me unto thee hath the greater sin." (Verse 11) It was the Jews, led on by Judas, that had this greater sin. The Jew ought to have known better than Pilate, and Judas better than the Jew. The glory of the Son was too bright for their eyes. Afterwards there is another characteristic scene, the blending of the most perfect human affection with His divine glory He confides His mother to the disciple whom He loved. (Verses 25-27)
The gospel which most of all shows Him to be God is careful to prove Him man. The Word was made flesh.
"After this, Jesus knowing that all things were now accomplished, that the scripture might be fulfilled, saith, I thirst." I know not a more sweet and wonderful proof of how completely He was divinely superior to all circumstances. He had before Him with perfect distinctness all the truth of God. Here was a scripture which He remembers as unaccomplished. It was a word in Psalms 69:1-36. It was enough. "I thirst." What absorption in His Father's will! "Now there was set a vessel full of vinegar: and they filled a spunge with vinegar, and put it upon hyssop, and put it to his mouth. When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar, he said, It is finished." (Verses 29, 30) Where could such a word as this be but in John? Who could say, "It is finished," except Jesus in John? Matthew and Mark both give our Lord saying, "My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?" This could not be in John. Luke gives us, "Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit," because there the perfect man never abandons His perfect reliance on God. God must, in the judgment of our sins, forsake Him, but He would never forsake God. The atonement would not have been what it is unless God had thus forsaken Him. But in Luke it is the sign of absolute trust in His Father, and not God's abandonment. In John He says, "It is finished," because He is the Son, by whom all worlds were made, Who but He could say it? Who but John could mention that He delivered up ( παρέδωκε ) His spirit? In every point of difference the fullest possible proof of divine glory and wisdom appears in these gospels. Put to death no doubt He was but at the same time it was His own voluntary will; and who could have this about death itself but a divine person? In a mere man it would be sin; in Him it was perfection. Then come the soldiers, breaking the legs of the others crucified with Him; but finding Jesus dead already, one pierces His side, land forthwith came thereout blood and water. And he that saw it bare record."
Thus a double scripture is fulfilled. The apostle John does not quote many scriptures; but when he does, the person of the Son is the great point. Accordingly this was the case now; for not a bone was to be broken. It was true. Nevertheless, He was to be pierced. He was singled out from the others, even while dead between the dying thieves. He has a place even here that belonged to Him alone.
Joseph charges himself with the body too; and Nicodemus, who came first by night is here by day, honoured by association with Jesus crucified, of whom he had been ashamed once, spite of the miracles He was doing.
In John 20:1-31 is the resurrection, and this in a remarkable light. No such outward circumstance is here as in Matthew, no soldiers trembling, no walk with disciples, but as ever the person of God's Son, though disciples prove how little they entered into the truth. Peter "saw, and believed. For as yet they knew not the Scriptures, that He must rise again from the dead." (Verses 8, 9) It was evidence; and there is no moral value in accepting on evidence. Believing the word of God has moral value, because it gives God credit for truth. A man gives up himself to confide in God. Believing the Scriptures, therefore, has another character altogether from a judgment formed on a matter of fact. Mary Magdalene, with as little understanding of the Scriptures as they, stood without at the sepulchre weeping, when they went to their own homes. Jesus meets her in her sorrow, dries her tears, and sends her to the disciples with a message of His resurrection. But He does not permit her to touch Him. In Matthew the other women even retain Him by the feet. Why? The reason appears to be that in the earlier gospel it is the pledge of a bodily presence for the Jews in the latter day; for whatever be the consequences of Jewish unbelief now, God is faithful. The gospel of John has here no purpose of showing God's promises for the circumcision; but, on the contrary, sedulously detaches the disciples from Jewish thoughts. Mary Magdalene is a sample or type of this. The heart must be taken off His bodily presence. "Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father." The Christian owns Christ in heaven. As the apostle says, even if we had known Christ after the flesh, "henceforth know we him no more." The cross, as we know it, closes all connection with even Him in this world. It is the same Christ manifested in life here upon earth. John shows us, in Mary Magdalene contrasted with the woman of Galilee, the difference between the Christian and the Jew. It is not outward corporeal presence on earth, but a greater nearness, though He is ascended to heaven, because of the power of the Holy Ghost. "But go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God." (Verse 17) Never had He put Himself and His disciples so together before.
The next scene (verses 19-23) is the disciples gathered together. It is not a message individually, but they are assembled on the same first day at evening, and Jesus stands, spite of closed doors, in the midst of them, and showed them His hands and His side. "Then said Jesus to them again, Peace be unto you: as my Father hath sent me, even so send I you. And when he had said this, he breathed on them, and saith unto them, Receive ye the Holy Ghost: whose soever sins ye remit, they are remitted unto them; and whose soever sins ye retain, they are retained." It is a picture of the assembly that was about to be formed at Pentecost and this is the assembly's function. They have authority from God to retain or to remit sins not at all as a question of eternal forgiveness, but administratively or in discipline. For instance, when a soul is received from the world, what is this but remitting sins? The Church again, by restoring a soul put outside, puts its seal, as it were, to the truth of what God has done, acts upon it, and thus remits the sin. On the other hand, supposing a person is refused fellowship, or is put away after being received, there is the retaining of sins. There is no real difficulty, if men did not pervert Scripture into a means of self-exaltation, or cast away truth, on the other side, revolting from the frightful misuse known in popery. But Protestants have failed to keep up consciously the possession of so great a privilege, founded on the presence of the Holy Ghost.
Eight days after we have another scene. (Verses 24-29) One of the disciples, Thomas, had not been with the others when Jesus had thus appeared. Clearly there is a special teaching in this. Seven days had run their course before Thomas was with the disciples, when the Lord Jesus Christ meets his unbelief, pronouncing those more blessed who saw not, and yet believed. Of what is this the symbol? Of Christian faith,? The very contrary. Christian faith is essentially believing on Him that we have not seen: believing, "we walk by faith, not by sight." But the day is coming when there will be the knowledge and the sight of glory in the earth. So the millennium will differ from what is now. I deny not that there will be faith, as there was faith required when Messiah was on earth. Then faith saw underneath the veil of flesh this deeper glory. But, evidently, proper Christianity is after redemption was wrought, and Christ takes His place on high, and the Holy Ghost is sent down, when there is nothing but faith. Thomas, then, represents the slow mind of unbelieving Israel, seeing the Lord after the present cycle of time is completely over. What makes it the more remarkable is the contrast with Mary Magdalene in the previous verses, who is the type of the Christian taken out of Judaism, and no longer admitted to Jewish contact with the Messiah, but witnesses of Him in ascension.
Mark, too, the confession of Thomas; not a word about "My Father and your Father," but, "My Lord, and my God." Just so the Jew will acknowledge Jesus. They shall look on Him whom they pierced, and own Jesus of Nazareth to be their Lord and their God. (See Zechariah 12:1-14) It is not association with Christ, and He not ashamed to call us brethren, according to the position He has taken as man before His and our God and Father, but the recognition forced on Him by the marks of the cross, which drew out the confession of Christ's divine glory and Lordship.
In John 21:1-25, the appended scene is the fishing. After a night of failure, a vast multitude of fish is taken in the net, without breaking it or risking the ships (Luke 5:1-39), or the need of gathering the good into vessels and of casting the bad away. (Matthew 13:1-58) This I conceive to be a gathering in from the Gentiles. The sea is continually used in contrast to the land in prophetic Scripture. Thus, if the last was the Jewish scene when the Church state closed, this is the figure of the Gentiles in the great day of the earth's jubilee, the age to come contrasted with this age. From verse 15 to the end is the deep personal dealing of our Lord with Peter; also John's place. As I have no doubt there is a significance typically in what we have just glanced at, so it appears to me with regard to this also. The intermediate ministry of Paul is, of course, not here noticed; for he was the witness of Christ glorified in heaven Head of the Church His body, wherein is neither Jew nor Gentile. To Peter, the Lord, thoroughly restoring his soul after proving him to the core, commits His sheep and lambs (His Jewish flock, as we know from elsewhere). A violent end comes, though to God's glory. But if the full heavenly testimony is left for its own due place in Paul's completing the word of God that hidden mystery, John is seen witnessing in principle to the end. (Compare verses 22, 23 with the Revelation) However, I do not enlarge here, but rather apologise for the time that I have occupied in going over so large an extent of God's word. I pray the Lord that even these suggestions may be blessed of God in stirring up fresh desire to study, and weigh, and pray over these precious gospels. Surely it will be sweet reward now, if God deign thereby to give some of His children to approach His word with more reverence and a more childlike trust in every word He has written. May He vouchsafe this through Christ our Lord.
These files are public domain.
Text Courtesy of BibleSupport.com. Used by Permission.
Kelly, William. "Commentary on John 21:25". Kelly Commentary on Books of the Bible. https://www.studylight.org/​commentaries/​wkc/​john-21.html. 1860-1890.