Jesus now proceeded to use the miracle that He had just performed as the background for important instruction. John presented Jesus doing this many times in this Gospel. The repetition of this pattern in the epilogue is an evidence that the epilogue was an original part of the Gospel. Jesus focused His teaching on Peter, but clearly He wanted all disciples to view Peter as their representative.
21:15 Education again followed eating, as it had before, for example in the upper room (chs. 13-17). The following conversation may have taken place as Jesus and Peter walked along the shore, with John within earshot close behind (cf. vv. 20-21).
Jesus began by addressing Peter as Simon the son of Jonas. In the Gospels, Jesus addressed Peter this way on only the most important occasions. These were his call to follow Jesus (1:42), his confession of Jesus as the Son of God (Matt. 16:17), and as he slept in Gethsemane (Mark 14:37). When Jesus addressed Peter this way here, Peter probably realized that what Jesus was about to say to him was extremely important.
Jesus used a word for "love"(Gr. agapas) in His question that many scholars have understood to refer to total commitment to another person.670Other equally competent scholars, however, do not believe it had this strong meaning.671Nevertheless most scholars recognize that agapaoexpresses a somewhat stronger love than phileodoes. In his Gospel John did not usually make fine distinctions in meaning on the basis of synonym differences.672Generally he treated synonyms as having essentially the same meaning.673However many expositors have concluded that Jesus was making a distinction between the meanings of the synonyms for love that He used here.674Because of the debate over the meaning of agapaoand its synonyms, it seems wise not to put too much emphasis on this distinction.
"His [Peter's] actions had shown that Peter had not wanted a crucified Lord. But Jesus was crucified. How did Peter's devotion stand in the light of this? Was he ready to love Jesus as he was, and not as Peter wished him to be?"675
Jesus asked Peter if he had more love for Jesus than he had for "these things"(Gr. pleon touton). What did Jesus have in mind? Was it the fishing boats and nets that Peter had returned to, or was it the other disciples? The comparison seems more likely to have been with the love of the other disciples for Jesus since Peter had earlier professed complete devotion to Jesus in the upper room (cf. 13:37; 18:10). Peter had professed that his love for and commitment to Jesus were so strong that even if all the other disciples forsook Him he would not (Matt. 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 22:33). Still Peter had denied that he was one of Jesus' disciples and that he even knew Jesus three times. Thus Jesus' question was reasonable. He wanted Peter to think about just how strong his love for Jesus really was.
Peter replied by professing his love for Jesus, but he used a different word for love than Jesus had used (Gr. philo). Expositors who believe that philoexpresses weaker love than agapaothink that Peter apparently could not bring himself to claim complete devotion to Jesus in view of his denials. Those who view philoand agapaoas essentially synonymous understand Peter as professing that he did indeed love Jesus. Peter wisely appealed for proof of his love to Jesus' knowledge, not to his own former behavior.
Jesus responded graciously by giving Peter a command, not condemnation. He told Peter to tend (Gr. boske, feed) His lambs (Gr. arnia).676Previously Jesus had referred to Himself as the Good Shepherd (10:14). Now he was committing the care of His flock to this disciple who had failed Him miserably in the past. Jesus had formerly called Peter to be a fisher of men, an essentially evangelistic ministry (Matt. 4:19). Now he was broadening this calling to include being a shepherd of sheep, a pastoral ministry.
21:16-17 Jesus proceeded to ask Peter essentially the same question two more times. Peter gave essentially the same answer each time. Peter probably felt grief after Jesus' third question because Jesus asked the same question a third time, which is the reason the text gives. Some commentators suggested that Peter was grieved too because this time Jesus used the word for love that Peter had used (Gr. philo).677
Jesus probably intended that Peter's threefold profession of love would correspond to and in a sense counteract his former threefold denial. Peter had denied his Lord in the presence of witnesses near a charcoal fire three times (18:17, 25, 27). Now he affirmed his love for his Lord in the presence of witnesses near a charcoal fire three times. The Great Physician was healing Peter's wounds.
"There can be little doubt but that the whole scene is meant to show us Peter as completely restored to his position of leadership. . . . It is further worth noting that the one thing about which Jesus questioned Peter prior to commissioning him to tend the flock was love. This is the basic qualification for Christian service. Other qualities may be desirable, but love is completely indispensable (cf. 1 Cor. 13:1-3)."678
Some failures in ministry may bar a believer from serving the Lord in particular ways from then on (cf. 1 Tim. 3:1-13; Titus 1:5-16). Other failures may only require temporary suspension from service until restoration is complete (cf. Acts 15:38; 2 Tim. 4:11). However regardless of one's failures he or she can always serve the Lord in some capacity (cf. 2 Tim. 2:20-21).
Peter had learned not to make rash professions of great love. Therefore he did not compare his love for Jesus to the love of the other disciples as he had done before. He simply appealed to Jesus' knowledge of his heart.
Notice that throughout this interchange Jesus consistently referred to the sheep as His sheep, not Peter's sheep. Moreover Jesus described Peter's ministry in terms of acts, not in terms of an office. Later Peter wrote to elders urging them to apply these same viewpoints to their pastoral ministry (1 Pet. 5:1-4).679
Some Roman Catholic scholars have used this passage to support their view that Peter was the first pope. They do this mainly because in the Old Testament the shepherd was a figure for a kingly ruler (e.g., 2 Sam. 5:2). However other New Testament revelation does not exalt Peter to a place of authoritative rule over other undershepherds (Acts 20:28; 1 Pet. 4:1-4).680
21:18-19 Jesus then gave the last of the many important statements that He introduced with a strong asseveration. It was a prediction of the type of death that Peter would die.
Jesus contrasted the freedom that Peter had enjoyed in his youth with the constraint that he would experience in later life. He was describing crucifixion. The phrase "stretch out your hands"(v. 18) was a euphemistic reference to crucifixion in the Roman world.681This stretching took place when the Roman soldiers fastened the condemned person's arms to the crosspiece of his cross. This often happened before they led him to the place of crucifixion and crucified him.682
Peter had been learning how his self-confidence led to failure and how he needed to depend on Jesus more (i.e., "You know . . ."; vv. 15, 16, 17). Jesus reminded Peter that as time passed he would become increasingly dependent on others even to the point of being unable to escape a martyr's death. Therefore, Jesus implied, Peter should commit his future to God rather than trying to control it himself as he had formerly tried to do.
"The long painful history of the Church is the history of people ever and again tempted to choose power over love, control over the cross, being a leader over being led."683
Peter later wrote that Christians who follow Jesus Christ faithfully to the point of dying for Him bring glory to God by their deaths (1 Pet. 4:14-16). He lived with this prediction hanging over him for three decades (cf. 2 Pet. 1:14). Clement of Rome (c. 96 A.D.) wrote that Peter died by martyrdom (1 Clement 5:4; 6:1).684According to church tradition, Peter asked for crucifixion upside down because he felt unworthy to suffer as Jesus had.685Traditionally he died in Rome about 67 A.D.
Jesus then repeated His former command for Peter to follow Him (cf. Mark 1:17). This is a present imperative in the Greek text meaning "keep on following me."
"Obedience to Jesus' command, Follow Me, is the key issue in every Christian's life. As Jesus followed the Father's will, so His disciples should follow their Lord whether the path leads to a cross or to some other difficult experience."686
Was Jesus saying that the Rapture would not occur before Peter died? Other New Testament writers who wrote before Peter's death wrote as though the Lord could return for the church at any moment (e.g., 1 Thess. 4:16-18; cf. 2 Thess. 2). Probably we should understand references to future events such as Peter's death as being contingent on the larger purposes of God including the Rapture (cf. Acts. 27:24).687
21:20-21 Why did John identify himself as he did in these verses? This description highlights his intimacy with Jesus. That intimacy was evidently a factor in Jesus' plans for John to which He proceeded to refer (vv. 22-24). These plans included his writing this Gospel (v. 24). Therefore by presenting the writer as an intimate of Jesus John was establishing his credentials as a reliable eyewitness of what he reported. A second reason is that this description also reminds the reader of John's intimacy with Peter. This helps us understand Peter's question about Jesus' will for John. Peter evidently wanted to know what would happen to his young friend if he himself was going to suffer crucifixion.
Peter was not the only Christian who wanted to know God's will for another believer's life. Many Christians since him have wanted the same information but not always for as altruistic reasons as Peter apparently had.
21:22 Jesus essentially told Peter that John's future was none of his business. Rather than concerning himself with God's will for other people, even those closest to him, he should concentrate on following Jesus faithfully himself. The "you"in the Greek text is emphatic. Even if it was Jesus' will for John to remain alive until He returned, that was none of Peter's business.
The reference to Jesus' return is probably a reference to the Rapture rather than the Second Coming in view of what Jesus had promised these disciples in 14:1-3.
21:23 Jesus' statement here led to a rumor that John would not die before Jesus returned. This is one of the earliest instances of people setting a date for the Lord's return. All such attempts to identify exactly when Jesus will return go beyond Scriptural revelation.
John clarified what Jesus really did say to squelch the rumor, which was evidently circulating when he wrote this Gospel. The clarification was important because when John died some people might have falsely concluded that Jesus had not been faithful to His promise to return. Others might conclude that John's Gospel was not trustworthy. However, Jesus had spoken of a hypothetical possibility. He had not given a promise.
"In view of the fact that in this Gospel slight variations when statements are repeated are almost universal, it is noteworthy that here the statement is repeated exactly from verse 22. The precise words used are significant, and the writer is at pains to be accurate."688
"The author's explanation of Jesus' announcement may be taken as evidence that the disciple was still living at the time this Gospel was written and that he was the source of its content. Obviously, if he had died early, the rumor would have had no credence."689
It is interesting and significant that the last words of Jesus that John recorded were about His return. This is the great hope of His believing disciples.
