JOHN 21
FER This chapter comes in quite supplementarily — the teaching of the gospel, the burden of it, was quite finished at the end of chapter 20.
Ques It comes in in quite another character?
FER Yes; it is very remarkable in that way, it is an appendix.
Ques And what would you say was the object [p. 462] of it?
FER Well, it is exceedingly important, because it gives you, in a very remarkable way, the future of Israel. It is not the believing Jew, you get that in Thomas, but it is a picture of Israel, Israel in a larger sense. That is what I understand by the hundred and fifty and three fishes caught out of the sea. As to the mere facts which come out in the chapter, they are very interesting; but they are not recorded simply for the purpose of interesting us, but they have a typical character. It is very interesting to note the disciples who are mentioned; there are seven of them, and the first three are mentioned by name, but the last four are not. And the association of the first three is very curious; there are Simon Peter, Thomas and Nathanael of Cana in Galilee. Simon Peter — the apostle of the circumcision, Thomas, a type of the Jewish remnant, and Nathanael, of whom the Lord Himself said, “Behold an Israelite indeed, in whom is no guile”. Then James and John are not mentioned by name, only as “the two sons of Zebedee”, and there are two others with them whose names are unknown. It is very peculiar and interesting to me, these first three. Nathanael was not an apostle at all. I think it gives you a pretty good idea of the character of the picture. The sheep and lambs whom the Lord charges Peter to feed were undoubtedly the Jews of that time. Peter fulfils his mission and dies, he suffers martyrdom. Then Thomas is representative, and Nathanael is undoubtedly representative too, he confessed Christ to be the King of Israel. Then it is very striking to see that, in the absence of Jesus, they catch nothing. There may be a certain kind of activity, but it will all end in nothing. It is my impression that men will set to work, in a kind of human way, to bring the Jews back to their own land, but it will all end in failure. Then Jesus comes and everything is changed. It is a beautiful picture, though it is given in a rather obscure way, as many things are in Scripture.
[p. 463] It is remarkable that John is thus employed to put out things in this symbolical and obscure way, as in the Revelation.
Ques The morning would indicate a new day?
FER Yes.
Ques. And the shore?
FER Well, it is the gathering of Israel out of the sea of nations. No one knows where to find them today, and the effort of those who try to find them before the Lord comes is all abortive. When He comes, then they cast the net on the right side of the ship, and the result is obtained; but they will never do it until the fulfilment of the Lord’s words takes place, “He shall send ... and gather together his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other”.
Rem What about “Children, have ye any meat?”
FER The Lord says things which expose people. They had not eaten much, for all their fishing; they had gone back, in that way, to what was human. Peter, James, and John had been called from their fishing, but they had returned to it, and the Lord says to them virtually, “Well, what have you got by it? You have not got much by it”.
Rem It is a question which we all have to face, how little we have got by our great activity.
FER Yes. Then we get afterwards what is deeply interesting — the last step in the restoration of Peter. He had already been restored in conscience, but here what takes place is in order that he should be restored in heart. It answers to the third and seventh days of cleansing of Numbers 19. He judged himself, no doubt.
Ques What did you refer to in the third and seventh days?
FER With the unclean person there was the sprinkling on the third and seventh days. I think the conscience is always restored before the heart. The conscience is set at rest first, but a man might have [p. 464] the sense that he had really judged himself, and yet be deeply conscious that he had lost communion. Here you see Peter jumping out of the boat in order to be the first to reach the Lord, but when he gets there he feels he is not free with Him. The Lord afterwards goes to the root of the matter. It is the root of the matter which He deals with, and not the actual breakdown which had occurred. There is often a kind of self-confidence in a person that puts him in the position of thinking that he has more affection and regard for the Lord than anybody else.
Rem John speaks of himself as the “disciple whom Jesus loved”.
FER Yes; that is a very much safer way of speaking. Peter gave himself credit for loving the Lord more than anybody else, but here, the one who recognised Him first was John. Peter casts himself into the sea to reach Him, but it was John who recognised Him, it was by affection.
Then as to Peter, the challenge, “Lovest thou me?” comes just corresponding to his denial. Peter had denied the Lord three times, and the Lord puts the challenge three times, and then Peter sees that he is entirely cast upon the Lord: he says, “Lord, thou knowest all things; thou knowest that I love thee”; as much as to say, “Other people may not know it, but Thou knowest that I love Thee”. Then it all closes up with the special commission given to Peter, and with the intimation that he was to die. With John, as regards the character of his testimony, he remains until the coming of the Lord, he brings Christ in again, as to his testimony. Peter’s testimony all passes away, his special testimony and his work all pass away. He was to feed the sheep and the lambs of the Jews, and they would be merged in the church, and therefore, to all appearance, his work all passed away, and even his testimony was superseded. But John’s testimony brings Christ in again in the Revelation.
Paul’s testimony does not exactly bring Christ back, it is John’s testimony that does that; it is John who is the writer of the Apocalypse, and he brings in the Lord’s return — he brings again into the world the Only-begotten. So the Lord says of him, “If I will that he tarry till I come”. It refers to, and is identified with, John’s testimony, not simply with John as a man, but as identified with his testimony, and so it abides.
Ques Is it affection that brings Him in?
FER Yes; “The Spirit and the bride say, Come. And let him that heareth say, Come. And let him that is athirst come. And whosoever will, let him take the water of life freely”. It is the bride that says, “Come”.
Ques Is there a difference between the lambs and the sheep?
FER Well, only as looked at from the Lord’s point of view; the Lord could discern the difference between them. You see, lambs need to be carried; they will become sheep some day, no doubt, but they need to be carried now. “He shall carry the lambs in his bosom”, they have to be tenderly shepherded and cared for. It is first “feed” and then “shepherd”.
Then I think it was a great mark of confidence on the part of the Lord as “the great shepherd of the sheep”, to entrust to Peter now the sheep and the lambs. While He probes Peter to the bottom, He yet gives to him this distinct mark of His own confidence. It is very wonderful to see all this on the part of the Lord in resurrection. It is Christ in resurrection that you have before you here.
Ques Did He not prepare Peter to face death?
FER Yes; because He says to him, “Follow me”, and Peter follows, with his life in his hand; Peter occupied the path, with the knowledge of what it would end in.
[p. 466] Rem It is very sweet to see the way the Lord lingers here.
FER Yes, until everything was done, until the restoration of Peter; Peter had to be prepared to bear witness. The Lord puts everything straight — I think it was the Lord’s object to leave, in that way, everything ready and prepared for the reception of the Holy Spirit, who was to be the great, divine Witness of Himself as the ascended One, as indicated by the Lord in chapter 15.