The fish sign. 21:1–14

OTHER SOURCES MAY SUGGEST that Jesus revealed himself on a regular basis to the disciples immediately after the resurrection; Luke seems most emphatic about this point (Acts 1:3), though he omits the Galilean appearances and may therefore refer to a state after the disciples had returned to Jerusalem (reading Luke, one would not know that they had left Jerusalem). In any case, John is emphatic that this is the disciples» third revelation (21:14); that Jesus manifested himself to them also frames this sign narrative (21:1, 14), underlining the significance of this appearance. When John counts, it may be primarily to tie events together (compare 2:1,19; 2:11 with 4:54); this event takes the previous resurrection appearances to a fuller level, though Thomas's christological confession was climactic.

What is John's point? In the light of the rest of the Gospel, Jesus again provides food for his people (6:10–11; cf. Rev 7:16–17; 12:6); the emphasis here will be spiritual food (4:32–34; 6:35; 10:9; see 21:15–17). Given the following dialogue, the point of the narrative seems to be to define more specifically the character of Jesus» call in 20:21, especially for church leaders: loving Jesus requires Jesus» servants to love Jesus» followers.

These verses provide examples of typical Johannine language in the nontheological vocabulary when one would least expect it from a later hand: for example, «after these things» (21:1; see 3:22; 5:1,14; 6:1; 7:1). Likewise, only this Gospel calls the lake «the sea of Tiberias» (6:1) or mentions Tiberias at all (6:23). In the very incomplete list of Jesus» followers here,¹⁰⁸⁵³ the two named characters besides Peter (who is necessary to the following story) are distinctly Johannine: only in this Gospel does Thomas appear outside lists of names (11:16; 14:5; 20:24–28) and is he called Didymus, meaning «Twin» (11:16; 20:24) ;¹⁰⁸⁵⁴ and only in this Gospel do Nathanael and Cana appear (1:45–49; 2:1,11; 4:46).¹⁰⁸⁵⁵ The «sons of Zebedee» admittedly weigh against the thesis that this epilogue stems from the same author or source, since the rest of the Gospel reflects a studied, probably deliberate avoidance of mentioning them; but it is noteworthy that even here they are not individually named. The mention of Thomas (21:2) provides a connection with the previous narrative (20:24–29),¹⁰⁸⁵⁶ demonstrating that he did persevere.

That Jesus «manifested himself» to the disciples (21:1; this provides an inciusio with 21:14) is also Johannine language (1:31; 2:11; 3:21; 7:4; 9:3; 17:6) and, on a theological level, reflects the expectation in 14:21–23 of postresurrection encounters with Christ (albeit normally in the Spirit after the first encounter of 20:19–23). Jesus was, literally, «on the sea» (21:1); this is acceptable language for «beside the sea» (Mark 4:1; 5:21; cf. John 21:4,9–10). It might recall Jesus» theophany on the sea (6:19; cf. Mark 6:47–49); but this is probably overexegesis (see 6:16). When John concludes the narrative by reminding the reader that this is the «third» time Jesus was revealed to the disciples (21:14), he includes in this count only the two appearances in the upper room (20:19–23,24–29). Like John's other counts (2:1,11; 4:46, despite the plural «signs» in 3:2), however, his language may indicate only the third time in the narrative, not the third appearance altogether.¹⁰⁸⁵⁷ That John 21 does not enumerate all the gospels» resurrection appearances but counts only those in this Gospel seems to me a further piece of evidence favoring Johannine authorship of this chapter.¹⁰⁸⁵⁸

This passage reflects knowledge of the tradition that Peter and at least some of his colleagues (21:3)–here presumably the sons of Zebedee (21:2)–were fishermen, a tradition undoubtedly widely known in the early church (cf. Mark 1:16–20).¹⁰⁸⁵⁹ It has often been argued as well that the passage reflects knowledge of the same tradition as appears in Luke 5:1–10; although the argument depends, to some degree, on the relative paucity of extant traditions available for our modern perusal, it is probably correct.

Peter acts in character, taking the lead in 21(13:24; 18:10,15; cf. Mark 14:31, 37), as some students in ancient schools were known to do.¹⁰⁸⁶⁰ He also displays for Jesus his physical prowess in 21and 21:11; this might appeal to heroic or masculine ideals in the ancient Mediterranean world–perhaps acceptable provided it was used to demonstrate loyalty to his Lord (as it was in 21:7, ll).¹⁰⁸⁶¹ This might also be in character; at least some ancient people viewed fishermen as «tough,» inured to the labors of their trade.¹⁰⁸⁶²

At night (21:3), fish were more apt to be in deep water, when the circular throwing net (typically about fifteen feet in diameter) used for shallow water would be useless and a large dragnet between two boats would be more usefu1.¹⁰⁸⁶³ Such a dragnet and second boat may have been unavailable here. Still, fishermen worked in the night as well as in the day, at night using torchlight with their nets.¹⁰⁸⁶⁴ Night fishing is said to be more profitable on the Lake of Galilee than day fishing (cf. Luke 5:5); those who fished at night could also sell their fish in the morning, getting a jump on most of their competition.¹⁰⁸⁶⁵ They nevertheless caught nothing (ούδέν) all night (21:3); probably John illustrates the principle that apart from Jesus they could do ούδέν, «nothing» (15:5),¹⁰⁸⁶⁶ for only at his intervention (21:6) and after their own admission of inability (21:5; cf. 2:3; 5:6–7; 6:5–9) are they able to obtain fish.

Fish miracles appear elsewhere in ancient sources,¹⁰⁸⁶⁷ as should be expected in a world where fishers were common and peoples looked to deities for help with nature. (It is the modern industrial and postindustrial secular mind-set that is unusual from the standpoint of the broader scope of human history.) One Amphimnestus vowed a tenth of his catch of fish to Asclepius; when he failed to fulfill his vow, Asclepius caused fish to attack him in punishment.¹⁰⁸⁶⁸ In a widely told Jewish story, a fish jumps from the River Euphrates to devour Tobias, but with Raphael's help Tobias gets special medicine from the fish.¹⁰⁸⁶⁹ God could also provide abundance as a reward for faithful behavior; cooking, preparing, and sharing fish with others (cf. 21:9–12) was considered generous behavior warranting God's repayment in onés catching more fish (T. Zeb. 6:5–6).

Many commentators view the disciples» fishing (21:3) as apostasy from the work of the kingdom, from which Jesus must call them again to ministry (21:15–22). But this view does not comport well with any sense of realism in the story world. The disciples made use of free time,¹⁰⁸⁷⁰ and as Beasley-Murray complains, «Even though Jesus be crucified and risen from the dead, the disciples must still eat!"¹⁰⁸⁷¹ As in other passages in the Gospel (e.g., 2:1–11; 5:6–8; 6:5–12), Jesus does care about «mundane» needs and provides for others through their obedience to his commands (e.g., 2:7; 5:8–9; 6:10–12).¹⁰⁸⁷²

MacGregor appeals to the use of παιδία («lads,» 21:5) to suggest simply men at work,¹⁰⁸⁷³ but in Johannine literature the term appears interchangeably with τεκνία (the former in 1 John 2:14, 18; the latter in 1 John 2:1,12, 28; 3:7, 18; 4:4; 5:21), which Jesus elsewhere applies to the disciples (John 13:33). Jesus» question follows the appropriate Greek idiom to inquire whether fishers or hunters had experienced success but is framed to anticipate a negative response.¹⁰⁸⁷⁴ As before Jesus miraculously provided bread and fish in 6:11, here he asks the disciples if they have sufficient resources on their own (6:5–6; 21:5), forcing them to recognize afresh that «without him they can do nothing» (15:5).

Jesus gives seemingly nonsensical instructions (21:6), underlining the principle that obedience to one wiser than oneself is more prudent than depending on onés own wisdom (cf., e.g., Prov 3:5). It has been argued that because the steering oar would be on the right side, nets would normally be cast on the left, making Jesus» command unusual;¹⁰⁸⁷⁵ such an image would fit the emphasis of the narrative wel1. Scholars often suggest that the net in view here is a large seine net (cf. Matt 13:47–50), which normally would have floats on top and weights on the bottom; one end would be attached to the shore or to another boat, allowing the boat to which the other end was attached to surround and catch fish.¹⁰⁸⁷⁶ Since Jesus tells them to cast it from the boat, however, the net envisioned here may be different, although undoubtedly large.

The story at this point communicates a moral lesson rather than an allegory; that the disciples obey the master indicates the obedience involved in discipleship.¹⁰⁸⁷⁷ This is especially the case if casting from the right side of the boat was unusua1. That they remain as yet unaware of his identity–or at least uncertain–may suggest the ambiguity of initial revelation (cf. 1Cor 13:12), which one must obey to receive fuller revelation (cf. John 14:15–16, 21). More likely, however, John provides a moral based on what the audience knows, even though the disciples do not.

Although the disciples did not immediately recognize Jesus, as in 20(on his temporary unrecognizability, see comment there), the miracle revealed him at least to the beloved disciple. The world did not know Jesus (1:10), but his own recognized him when he called them by name (20:16) or they heard his voice (10:3; 21:5–7).

The beloved disciple here, as in 20:4–8, proves quicker to believe than Peter (see comment there on the significance of such comparisons); some sort of competition, albeit on a collégial level, seems to continue in the background here (21:20). If the disciple whom Jesus loved is assumed to be one of the disciples of 21(which is almost certainly understood to be the case), he could be Thomas or Nathanael if willing to name himself; otherwise he is one of Zebedeés sons (as church tradition holds) or one of the two anonymous disciples (protecting still more fully his anonymity, more in accordance with most contemporary scholarly views).¹⁰⁸⁷⁸

Once Peter recognized Jesus, however, he immediately came to him (21:7); this suggests his zealous love for Jesus (cf. 10:4; 21:15–17).¹⁰⁸⁷⁹ The narrative of Peter's coming to Jesus for the breakfast prepared on shore illustrates another principle the Gospel previously articulated: those who come to him will not hunger (6:35).

While one could read 21as claiming that Peter was working completely naked (a frequent use of γυμνός and one not unexpected for work),¹⁰⁸⁸⁰ this might not fit as well what we know about Palestinian Judaism or about the sort of conservative Diaspora Jewish communities from which most early Christians came.¹⁰⁸⁸¹ Further, he had been laboring during the night (21:3), and it was only now daybreak (21:4), so the air may have been cooler than during the day. The term «naked» also applied to having little clothing or being less than fully clothed;¹⁰⁸⁸² it could apply even to being without armor or shield.¹⁰⁸⁸³ Possibly, Peter had removed his outer garment for work¹⁰⁸⁸⁴ but now clothed himself more appropriately out of respect for the teacher.¹⁰⁸⁸⁵ Perhaps Peter was wearing one of his garments loosely, since normally one would not simply don a garment before hurling into water; then, as today, people recognized that it was much easier to swim naked!¹⁰⁸⁸⁶

It seems most likely that Peter already had a garment on, whether his tunic (undergarment) alone, his outer garment, or both. Whether or not he had his outer garment loosely on, he now wrapped it around his waist, tucking up the lower part of it to avoid restricting his legs.¹⁰⁸⁸⁷ The verb form διεζώσατο is the third singular aorist middle of διαζώννυμι, which is used for girding oneself around, as with a belt. Cognates of this term for «gird» are frequent, and though they can function more generally, in the NT they usually indicate girding about the waist or breast;¹⁰⁸⁸⁸ the LXX usually employs the cognate ζώννυμι for girding on like a belt.¹⁰⁸⁸⁹ The particular term appears elsewhere in the NT and the LXX only in John 13:4–5. Perhaps Peter did not want to leave his cloak in the boat, but given the greater inconvenience of having it wet, the action is more likely symbolic, recalling Jesus» action of service in John 13: Peter now comes to serve Jesus.¹⁰⁸⁹⁰ Unknown to Peter, this show of devotion may prefigure his martyrdom (cf. the girding in 21:18–19).¹⁰⁸⁹¹

A description of swimming prowess, like other kinds of athletic prowess, can function epideictically as praise for the protagonist,¹⁰⁸⁹² though here, in contrast to 20:4, there is no suggestion of competition with the beloved disciple. Peter has apparently donned or failed to remove his outer tunic despite its impediment to swimming, yet he may beat the boat to land (21:8). He is eager to prove his devotion to Jesus and demonstrates his commitment by physical exertion (undoubtedly as a «young man» who can devote his strength to God's glory; cf. 1 John 2:14).

That fish were already being cooked before they hauled in their own catch (21:9) reinforces their conviction that Jesus has complete control over nature. Perhaps as in 4:27, the disciples do not need to say anything (21:12); here, in fact, they did not «dare» to do so, probably recalling Jesus» recent responses to their questions and affirmations in 13and 14:5, 8, experiences probably also recalled in 16:19, 23, 30.

Jesus invites the disciples to have «breakfast» (άριστήσατε, 21:12); the άριστον was typically a morning meal,¹⁰⁸⁹³ a sense dictated here by the context (21:4). Well-to-do Romans in particular ate three times a day, breakfast being a light fare of bread and cheese.¹⁰⁸⁹⁴ Earlier Greeks typically ate άριστον near midday and δεΐπνον nearer sundown.¹⁰⁸⁹⁵ The earlier meal was so important that an army might insist on having it before marching or facing battle.¹⁰⁸⁹⁶ But it was also held that in earlier times Greeks ate around dawn.¹⁰⁸⁹⁷ Whenever the disciples customarily ate, they would undoubtedly be prepared for this early meal (21:4) after an arduous night of work (21:3). The early hour may also recall the first resurrection appearances (20:1; cf. also Jesus» condemnation, 18:28).

John omits the Last Supper but presents Jesus at a wedding banquet (2:1–11) and here feeding his disciples (21:12–13); the use of bread and fish (21:13) plainly recalls Jesus» pro-vision of food in 6:11, probably emphasizing that as Jesus acted the part of host before the passion, he remains the host after the resurrection.¹⁰⁸⁹⁸ Thus Jesus» public ministry begins at a wedding feast where he provides wine (2:1–11), and closes with a meal for his disciples here. Some find in this passage a messianic meal¹⁰⁸⁹⁹ or a deliberate allusion to the Eucha-rist;¹⁰⁹⁰⁰ but the presence of the fish provide no clear eucharistie overtones, and this passage lacks mention of breaking bread, drinking, or giving of thanks.¹⁰⁹⁰¹ Our comments about the Eucharist in ch. 6 should obtain here as well, where one finds far less potentially eucharistie language than in ch. 6. Rather, it provides the setting for Peter's commission; just as Jesus has now fed his followers, so Peter must tend Jesus» sheep (21:15–17), which would particularly entail grazing, and hence feeding, them. Given our interpretation of ch. 6, this would mean not merely serving the Eucharist but providing them the living bread through proclaiming the message that mediates Jesus» presence (16:7–11; cf. Rev 3:20).

By pulling the heavy net to shore (21:11), Peter uses his physical prowess to demonstrate the same devotion as he did by swimming to shore in 21:7.¹⁰⁹⁰² In the context of the preceding passion narratives, he presumably wishes to demonstrate his devotion to Jesus despite his earlier denials, which demonstrated lack of faith. The counting of fish (21:11) suggests the great abundance of Jesus» miracle; as in the case of the fish already cooking (21:9), it suggests the unlimited supply available from Jesus (cf. also 6:12–13). Scholars have struggled long over the meaning of 153. Some solve it by the Jewish hermeneutical practice gematria;¹⁰⁹⁰³ although mainly known to us in rabbinic texts, it has earlier anteced-ents.¹⁰⁹⁰⁴ Thus some suggest, for example, that 153 is the numerical value of בני אלהים, «children of God,» those whom the fishers would gather in.¹⁰⁹⁰⁵ This proposal assumes that Peter's gathering of fish stands for (rather than is replaced by) his call to shepherd,¹⁰⁹⁰⁶ importing a ministry image from Mark 1that John never explicitly mentions (though he undoubtedly knew of it). Others suggest a gematria allusion to the names of fishing villages in Ezek 47:10, to which some think John's fish image alludes.¹⁰⁹⁰⁷ One scholar suggests «Nathanael gamma» (for the third appearance to Nathanael) or «alpha Maria» (one Mary, for the unified church); «For allegorists,» he contends, «the same word or object may symbolize several different things at the same time, and this may be the case here.»¹⁰⁹⁰⁸ One wonders whether John could have expected any members of his original audience to catch another suggested view, an allusion to Mount Pisgah that might compare to Moses» departure Jesus» passing on the mission to Peter.¹⁰⁹⁰⁹

Most forced of all, to arrive at ΙΧΘ, short for Ιχθύς and an acronym for Ιησούς Χριστός Θεός, one scholar suggests revising the numerical value of letters by counting the original (rather than Koine) Greek alphabet backward as if it were Hebrew!¹⁰⁹¹⁰ Another scholar argues that, including the fish on the fire in 21:9,154 fish are in view, suggesting by gematria the word «day» (ήμέρα), which was an early title for Jesus.¹⁰⁹¹¹ Yet this view seems unlikely not only for its less than obvious gematria but also because John specifically numbers only the 153.

But all such appeals to gematria require too much complexity for a reader to discover without already knowing the proposed «answer,» and their very abundance demonstrates the extreme subjectivity with which their examination is blighted.¹⁰⁹¹² Ultimately any suggestion of gematria must meet the same fate in this passage; an appeal to reconstruct a Hebrew original without explicit clues pointing to it must have eluded John's audience. (Revelation 13:18, by contrast, explicitly invites the use of gematria.)

Some note Jeromés claim that there were held to be 153 kinds of fish;¹⁰⁹¹³ this computation would make the 153 fish in this passage symbolic for Jesus» lordship over all kinds of fish. It is not impossible that this is true; such symbolism would not violate John's style, and Jeromés commentary on Ezek 47:9–12 mentions that both Latin and Greek biologists (including a particular poet) classified 153 kinds of fish. This intriguing proposal, however, appears to falter for lack of extant evidence;¹⁰⁹¹⁴ none of Jeromés reputed sources survive, and it is possible that the ones he had (especially the one he clearly named) were influenced by this passage in John.¹⁰⁹¹⁵ Certainly 153 was not the only count of fish species circulating in his day; thus, for all Pliny the Elder's comments on fish,¹⁰⁹¹⁶ the one place he numbers them yields 74 species of fish, plus 30 more with a hard covering.¹⁰⁹¹⁷

The number 153 is also a triangular number, the sum of numbers from 1 to 17;¹⁰⁹¹⁸ triangular numbers represent the number of blocks from which one could build a triangle with none left over. This is the sort of observation that would have interested neo-Pythagorean interpreters in antiquity.¹⁰⁹¹⁹ But while there is only one chance in nine that a random number would be a triangular number, if one asks the odds of finding a number that was triangular or square or a prime number or a multiple of 7,12, or 50, the «coincidence» decreases somewhat; nothing in advance leads us to predict a triangular number here, and with many randomly selected numbers it is possible to retroactively observe peculiar features not found elsewhere. Further, it is difficult to see what bearing a triangular number has on interpreting the passage¹⁰⁹²⁰ unless perhaps to say that John simply chose a number of recognized importance to represent a large or perfect catch of fish.¹⁰⁹²¹

More likely the number stresses an important feature of the miracle analogous to many other ancient miracle accounts: the abundance of the fish underlines the miraculous character of the provision (cf. 6:13).¹⁰⁹²² In this case, the number could simply stem from an accurate memory of a careful count on the occasion, because fish had to be counted to be divided among fishermen; 153 is too exact for a round number (such as 150).¹⁰⁹²³ As Hunter puts it, the 153 fish may turn out to be «no more symbolical than the hundred yards that Peter swam. It is the remembered number of a "bumper» catch.»¹⁰⁹²⁴ It also underlines the miracle of the net not being torn despite the vast number of fish (even more dramatic if the audience is at all familiar with the tradition in Luke 5:1–11, esp. 5:6).¹⁰⁹²⁵

The narrator's perspective remains with the boat in 21:8–9 instead of following Peter's swimming (21:7,11), though the latter is the center of action; this may support the suggestion that the beloved disciple remains the narrativés source here (21:7).¹⁰⁹²⁶ The boat pulled the net as it approached the shore (21:8–9), but it was Peter, in obedience to the Lord's word (21:10), who pulled the net, suspended from the side of the boat, to Jesus on the land (21:11).¹⁰⁹²⁷ Although it was easier to pull a full net from shallow water to land rather than through deep water, pulling such a large net of fish (21:11) suggests considerable physical strength.¹⁰⁹²⁸ As in 21:7, this was a way that a laborer could express his devotion to his Lord; compare the beloved disciplés speed in 20:4.