Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadHeinrich Meyer Commentary - John 21:14 - 21:14
(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)
This Chapter Verse Commentaries:
Joh_21:14. Τοῦτο ἤδη τρίτον ] This time already for the third time. See on 2Co_13:1.
ἤδη presupposes, on the one hand, that, according to John, until now any other appearances before the disciples had not taken place, with the exception of the three related (Joh_20:19 ff., Joh_20:26 ff., Joh_21:1 ff.); but, on the other hand, that at a later date several other appearances occurred. Since he, moreover, refers his τρίτον only to the appearances that were made to the circle of disciples (not to individual persons), a wider scope is thereby given to harmonists; in no case, however, can they succeed in reconciling the three appearances with the statements of Paul, 1Co_15:5 ff., especially as there εἶτα and ἔπειτα (in opposition to Wieseler) denote chronological sequence. The Apostle Paul is charged, on the supposition that his account is to be understood in an internal way, with a great arbitrariness, when it is asserted that the three appearances related by John are comprized in εἶτα τοῖς δώδεκα in Paul (Luthardt, Lange). Not even can ὤφθη Κηφᾷ in Paul be reconciled with John. To John, however, must be accorded the preference over the tradition followed by Paul, so far as the latter does not agree with the former.
NOTE.
To the draught of fishes, to contest the historical truth of which, in a manner which evinced arbitrariness, and in part even malice, the similarity of the earlier history, Luk_5:2 ff., afforded a welcome opportunity (Strauss, Weisse, Schenkel, and several others), a symbolical destination has, since the most ancient times (Chrysostom and his followers, Cyril, Augustine, and many others), been ascribed, and in general justly, since the word of Jesus, Mat_4:19, parall., gives, naturally enough, the psychological solution why He, as the Risen One, performs, precisely in this fashion, a miraculous work in the presence of His disciples. The tradition in which, from the above word, the draught of fishes, Luke 5, took shape (see on Luk_5:1 ff.), has, although pushing forward the later occurrence, nevertheless apprehended with right feeling the idea which it contained. The disciples themselves could not but find in the words of that first call, Matt. loc. cit., the key to the symbolical significance of the miraculous fact, in which that word, which Jesus had spoken at the beginning, was now, on the boundary of their earthly intercourse with Him, and before the restoration (a renewed calling, as it were) of Peter, set forth and sealed as a fact with the highest appropriateness. Only in respect of the interpretation of this symbolism, we have no right to go beyond Mat_4:14, and read more therein than the rich blessing of the apostolical office, of which the men fishers of Jesus were to be the possessors. To go further, and, with Augustine, to expound all the individual features of the history allegorically (so recently, especially Weitzel in the Stud. u. Krit. 1849, p. 618 f., Luthardt, Lange, Hengstenberg), is groundless and arbitrary, and without any definable limits. Especially is an interpretation of the fish meal, which refers it to the heavenly supper,[282] “which the Lord prepares for His own with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob in the kingdom of God” (Olshausen, after Augustine), all the less authorized, since this supper of the kingdom does not concern the apostles as such, and consequently something that is remote would be mixed up with the reference. It is certainly in the present passage only an ἄριστον , a breakfast, which was merely to serve as a handle for the appearance, and for the draught of fishes, as well as for the further scene with Peter. In a manner which serves as a special warning have the allegorical tendencies of the Fathers, in respect of the number of fishes, displayed themselves, as, e.g., Severus, Ammonius, Theophylact (also τινές in Euth. Zigabenus) see depicted in the 100 fishes the Gentiles, in the 50 the Jews, and in the 3 the Trinity; whilst Jerome, who is followed by Köstlin in the Theol. Jahrb. 1851, p. 195, and Hilgenfeld recognises in the 153 fishes, in spite of the fact that they were large ones only, all genera piscium, and thereby the universality of the apostolic activity,[283] which Ruperti derives from the text even by an arithmetical analysis[284] of the number; whilst Hengstenberg, on the other hand (after Grotius), thinks to find the key in the 153,600 strangers, 2Ch_2:17, so that John counts a fish for every thousand (with which the surplus of 600 falls away)!
That John says nothing regarding the symbolical determination of the draught of fishes, is sufficiently explained from the fact that Jesus Himself does not expressly declare it, but allows the thing to speak its silent symbolic language for itself, as He also has not Himself interpreted the symbolism of the withered fig-tree (Mat_21:21).
[282] Even the Lord’s Supper was found by Augustine to be signified, and he went so far as to say: “piscis assus Christus est passus.”
[283] Hilgenfeld in his ZeitsChr. 1868, p. 446: “The copious take …, i.e. the spiritual harvest from the Gentile world, is now added to the provision of fish and bread already lying ready, I think, for the feeding of the Jewish people (comp. Joh_6:12).” The fundamental thought is, he thinks, in Joh_10:16.
[284] Recently enigmatic numeration has been attempted in the case of these fishes, so that according to the Hebrew numerical letters, 118 + 35 = ùîòï éåáä is = Σίμων ʼΙωνᾶ . See Theol. Jahrb. 1854, p. 135; on the other hand: Ewald, Jahrb. vi. p. 161. Volkmar also (Mos. Prophetie, p. 61 f.) gives the enigmatic solution of the number as “Simeon Bar Jona Kepha.”—Calvin already correctly observes: “quantum ad piscium numerum spectat, non est sublime aliquod in eo quaerendum mysterium.”