Mike Schellman

“More Than These?”

The meaning of “these” in John’s Epilogue

The Big Idea

In the Epilogue of the fourth Gospel, we find Peter and the disciples fishing in the

Sea of Tiberias. Peter’s decision to go fishing (21:3) represents an attempt to return to his

former life.1 He had displayed a great deal of bravado in promising to lay down his life,

and by taking up the sword to defend Jesus (13:37, 18:10); however subsequent to Jesus’

arrest, Peter was ultimately confronted with the fact of his own denial. Despite his grand

promise, and reckless actions, and despite Jesus prediction, Peter still denied him three

times, (18:17-27) just as Jesus had predicted (13:38). Yet, Peter’s love for Jesus did not

diminish, we see him running to the tomb (20:3-7), and jumping into the water to greet

him (21:7). After the meal, Jesus asks Peter three times if he loves him. Each time Jesus

asks, he gives him this command “feed my sheep”. The obvious allusion to Peter’s

threefold denial grieves him, but Jesus concludes by giving a promise and a command.
18
"Truly, truly, I say to you, when you were younger, you used to gird yourself, and walk
wherever you wished; but when you grow old, you will stretch out your hands, and
someone else will gird you, and bring you where you do not wish to {go."} 19Now this He
said, signifying by what kind of death he would glorify God. And when He had spoken
this, He said to him, "Follow me!"
(21:18-19)

Jesus predicts that Peter will ultimately fulfill his promise; he will indeed lay down his

life for his Lord; not by taking up the sword, but on a cross. Peter’s sacrifice would no

longer be a self-glorifying act of bravado, but an act, which would bring glory to God.

1
The assumed reader is expected to know that Peter is a fisherman.
His devotion to the lord is no longer to be a show for others, nor is he to be concerned

about what others will have to sacrifice in comparison.

Structure and Context

John’s Gospel is divided into two parts, what Burge refers to as “The book of

Signs” which encompasses Jesus’ public ministry, and “The Book of Glory” which

encompasses his glorification.2 I am not completely satisfied with Burge’s headings but

the divisions hold true. The pericope examined in this paper occurs in the epilogue of the

fourth gospel. 21:1-21:25; which, along with the introduction, appears to be an

afterthought. The thread of the Peter narrative is so strong however, that it would seem to

imply a common author, only perhaps the story had more than one stage of development,

the earlier stage lacking the pro and epilogues. The macro-structure of the gospel can be

laid out as follows.

Prologue Epilogue

/
{1:1-1:18} --------1:19-12:50----------------- ----------------13:1-20:29-------{21:1-21:25}
The Book of Signs The Book of Glory

The Epilogue of John’s Gospel focuses on Jesus, Peter and the Beloved disciple.

The reader only discovers, in the final two verses, that the Beloved Disciple is in fact the

narrator of the story as well. This line was most likely written by someone other than the

author. An outline of the epilogue is as follows.

2
Burge, Gary M., Interpreting the Gospel of John, p 75-82
I. Epilogue: 21:1-25
A. Jesus and the Great Catch of Fish 21:1-14
B. Peter’s Reinstatement 21:15-23
1. Peter’s Threefold Confession 21:15-17
2. Jesus Predicts Peter’s Death 21:18-19
3. The Beloved Disciple 21:20-23
C. Commendation of the Gospel 21:24-25

Exposition of Peter’s Reinstatement

Some people have seen a great deal of significance in the shifting of terms from αγαπαω

and φιλεω. Jesus asks Peter 3 times if he loves him, and 3 times, Peter answers with the

world φιλεω.

21:15 Jesus: αγαπαω? Peter: φιλεω

21:16 Jesus: αγαπαω? Peter: φιλεω
21:17 Jesus:φιλεω? Peter: φιλεω

Some have suggested that the distinction here is between Love, (αγαπαω,) and

affection, (φιλεω,) is indicated here. However, to make a distinction between the two

words is to imply an unnecessary nuance3 that is more easily explained, as the use of

synonyms for textual variety. It is sometimes suggested that the word αγαπαω was

adopted by Christians to refer to a divine or Godlike love. This is due to its frequency in

the NT and other Christian writings. Instead of indicating that this was Christianity’s

“special word”, it has been convincingly shown that the increasing frequency of αγαπ

3
Burge, Gary M. Interpreting the Gospel of John, p 157.
αω in the Greek language was not limited to the NT. As the language evolved, its

frequency was increasing as other words like φιλεω were on the decline.4

The catching of the fish is more than just incidental to the narrative. Peter is

attempting to return to his old life. It is obvious that his actions are those of remorse,

over his denial. He had more than failed to live up to his profession. He denied the Lord

to save his own neck. Moreover, he did it three times. This clearly seems to be his

motive. In the first place, he experiences grief when reminded of his denial 21:17.

Secondly, we must remember that the disciples do not figure very prominently as

individuals in John’s Gospel. Peter only seems to be introduced, in order to deny Jesus,

and be restored. Just as Thomas is introduced, in order to doubt and believe 20:24-25

and 20:28. Finally, a narrative thread can be traced through the Gospel that connects

Peter’s reinstatement with his initial boast.

Peter said to Him, "Lord, why can I not follow You right now? I will lay down my life for you".
(13:37)

Simon Peter therefore having a sword, drew it, and struck the high priest's slave, and cut off his
right ear; and the slave's name was Malchus.
(18:10)

The slave-girl therefore who kept the door said to Peter, "You are not also {one} of this man's
disciples, are you?" He said, "I am not". (18:17)

Now Simon Peter was standing and warming himself. They said therefore to him, "You are not also
{one} of His disciples, are you?" He denied {it} and said, "I am not." One of the slaves of the high
priest, being a relative of the one whose ear Peter cut off, said, "Did I not see you in the garden
with Him?" Peter therefore denied {it} again; and immediately a cock crowed. (18:25-27)

He said to him the third time, "Simon, {son} of John, do you love me?" Peter was grieved because
He said to him the third time, "Do you love me?" And he said to Him," Lord, you know all things;
you know that I love you. "Jesus said to him," tend My sheep. (21:17)

When Jesus says to Peter after the meal, σιµων ιωαννου αγαπας µε πλεον τουτων ,
4
Carson, D.A., Exegetical Fallacies, p 51-52
Simon son of John, do you love me more than these? By these he is indicating the haul of

fish they had just made, even though the closest antecedent would seem to be µαθηταις

21:14. Because fish figure so prominently in the epilogue, it seems more likely that he is

referring to them than to the disciples.5 Jesus is effectively asking Peter if he loves him

more than his old life. He had initially been very boastful and for all his bravado still

denied Jesus. He said he was willing to die for Jesus but he was not prepared to

willingly, die for him, he was only ready to kill for him. Jesus had a different purpose

18:36, and Peter, at the time, could not accept it.

This passage evokes a number of edifying themes. Peter was foolishly boastful of

his own devotion to Jesus. No doubt, he was trying to love Jesus in these brash moments,

but he made promises larger than he was able to fulfill. Jesus understood this and his

prediction of Peter’s denial functioned as a kind of rebuke. Thus humbled, Peter obtained

a more sober estimate of himself. Still loving Jesus as much as before, yet not as quick to

make wild boasts Peter says κυριε παντα συ οιδας συ γινωσκεις οτι φιλω;

thus indicating, that Jesus knew his heart. The narrative thread of Peter’s falling away

and reinstatement highlights the kind of commitment that discipleship calls for. This kind

of commitment does not seek to impress for the purpose of self glorification, but rather to

serve for the sake of glorifying God. It also speaks of God’s mercy and restorative grace.

5
Wallace states that a demonstrative pronoun need not fall near its antecedant . Wallace, Daniel B., Greek
Grammar Beyond the Basics, p 325-326
 Bibliography

Burge, Gary M., Interpreting the Gospel of John, Michigan, Baker. 1992
Carson, D.A., Exegetical Fallacies, Michigan, Baker. 1996
Wallace, Daniel B., Greek Grammar, Beyond the Basics; Michigan, Zondervan.1996