John Chapter 21
The Restoration of Peter
A. A Miraculous Catch of Fish
(John 21:1-3)
“After these things Jesus showed Himself again to the disciples at the Sea of Tiberias, and in this way He showed Himself: Simon Peter, Thomas called the Twin, Nathanael of Cana in Galilee, the sons of Zebedee, and two others of His disciples were together. Simon Peter said to them, ‘I am going fishing.’ They said to him, ‘We are going with you also.’ They went out and immediately got into the boat, and that night they caught nothing.”
John now records another appearance of the risen Lord, this time in Galilee at the Sea of Tiberias, also known as the Sea of Galilee. This fulfills the Lord’s earlier promise that He would meet His disciples there after His resurrection (Matthew 28:7, 10). Unlike the Jerusalem appearances, this scene draws the disciples back to the region where much of their earlier ministry with Christ began, reminding them of the first call to follow Him.
Simon Peter again appears at the forefront of the list. Though he had denied the Lord, Peter remained the natural leader among the disciples. His companions included Thomas, Nathanael, James and John (the sons of Zebedee), and two unnamed disciples. The inclusion of the unnamed disciples is likely deliberate. As one commentator notes, they symbolize the vast number of faithful but unnamed followers of Christ throughout history whose quiet service may not be known to men but is recognized by the Lord Himself
When Peter announced, “I am going fishing,” the others followed him. Some interpreters see this as Peter’s failure, a retreat to his former profession rather than pressing on in obedience to Christ’s commission. Others argue that Peter’s action was not sinful, since Jesus had not yet given the Great Commission in its fullness and the disciples still needed to provide for their physical needs. At the very least, the statement shows their uncertainty about what to do next. They had seen the risen Lord, but Pentecost had not yet come, and their mission remained undefined. Their hearts were restless, and their future seemed unclear. As one scholar observes, the fishing expedition reflects the disciples’ uncertainty, a stark contrast to their boldness after the coming of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost.
It is also worth remembering that they were in Galilee because Jesus told them to go there. Matthew 28:7 records the angel’s message to the women, “And go quickly and tell His disciples that He is risen from the dead, and indeed He is going before you into Galilee; there you will see Him. Behold, I have told you.” Again in Matthew 28:10, Jesus Himself instructed them, “Do not be afraid. Go and tell My brethren to go to Galilee, and there they will see Me.” Thus their presence by the lake was not disobedience, but obedience.
Adam Clarke provides a charitable view of their fishing. Before the crucifixion, the disciples’ material needs were met through the generosity of others (Luke 8:3). But now, in the aftermath of the cross, such support may have ceased, and the disciples may have simply been returning to fishing to sustain themselves. If so, their action was an expression of prudence, not rebellion. Still, the spiritual application remains clear: until Christ directs their steps, human effort—even well-intended—remains fruitless.
The text concludes with the haunting line: “That night they caught nothing.” This is not a minor detail. These men were experienced fishermen, skilled in their trade, yet despite their efforts, they failed. The emptiness of their nets mirrored the futility of labor apart from the blessing of Christ. Just as at the beginning of their discipleship (Luke 5:5), their self-reliance ended in failure, preparing the way for the Lord to reveal His power.
One writer paints the scene vividly: all night long they toiled, weary, hungry, and discouraged, whispering among themselves that perhaps the sea had changed, that no fish remained. Such a description reminds us of the futility of human strength apart from divine blessing. Spurgeon adds that this principle applies equally to those who minister in Christ’s name. A preacher may cast his net repeatedly and find nothing but weeds, yet he must not grow weary in well-doing. Faithful labor may be met with many disappointments, but perseverance brings reward in God’s time.
This passage therefore serves as a living parable: human labor without Christ is barren, but when Christ directs and blesses, abundance follows. The stage is now set for the miraculous catch that will restore Peter and prepare the disciples for their mission.
The Restoration of Peter
A. A Miraculous Catch of Fish
(John 21:4-6)
“But when the morning had now come, Jesus stood on the shore; yet the disciples did not know that it was Jesus. Then Jesus said to them, ‘Children, have you any food?’ They answered Him, ‘No.’ And He said to them, ‘Cast the net on the right side of the boat, and you will find some.’ So they cast, and now they were not able to draw it in because of the multitude of fish.”
As the dawn broke over the Sea of Galilee, the disciples’ weary labor of a fruitless night was interrupted by the presence of Christ. The text tells us that “Jesus stood on the shore; yet the disciples did not know that it was Jesus.” This continues the pattern of His post-resurrection appearances, which were often sudden and unrecognized at first. The two disciples on the road to Emmaus did not know Him until the breaking of bread (Luke 24:16, 30–31). Mary Magdalene at the tomb mistook Him for the gardener until He called her name (John 20:14–16). Here again, His disciples were kept from immediately perceiving His identity. Some suggest that the morning mist obscured their vision, others that their preoccupation with disappointment prevented recognition. Whatever the reason, the reality is clear: without divine revelation, men cannot recognize Christ even when He stands before them. Spiritual sight comes only when the Lord opens the eyes of His people (cf. Luke 24:31).
It is significant that Jesus chose to reveal Himself not in the temple or synagogue, but at the place of their ordinary labor. He was interested in the whole of their lives, not merely their religious moments. As G. Campbell Morgan observed, the risen Lord was demonstrating His power and presence in the “commonplaces of life.” This should remind believers today that Christ is Lord of both the sacred and the ordinary, sovereign over worship and work alike.
Jesus addressed them with the tender yet searching question: “Children, have you any food?” The Greek word paidion was a common expression used by workmen, equivalent to “lads.” On one hand, this was a natural greeting, as if He were a passerby inquiring whether the fishermen had anything for sale. Yet His words carried deeper force, compelling them to admit the futility of their labor. Their reply was simple and humiliating: “No.” They had nothing to show for their night’s toil. The Lord often brings His people to the point of failure before revealing His sufficiency. Only when the disciples confessed their emptiness did He direct them to abundance.
Then came His command: “Cast the net on the right side of the boat, and you will find some.” To seasoned fishermen, such advice would appear strange. Fishing in daylight was not customary, and there was no logical reason why one side of the boat should yield results over the other. Yet in obedience, though not knowing it was Christ, they complied. This illustrates a profound principle: God’s guidance often comes in seemingly small or ordinary instructions, and blessing follows obedience even when human logic cannot explain it. As one commentator notes, the issue was not right or left, but whether they labored under divine direction or in their own strength.
The result was overwhelming: “So they cast, and now they were not able to draw it in because of the multitude of fish.” The nets, once empty, were now straining with abundance. The disciples must have immediately recalled a similar miracle at the beginning of their ministry (Luke 5:4–7), when a night of failure gave way to a miraculous catch at the command of Jesus. In that earlier instance, the nets broke and the boats began to sink. Here, however, the net held firm, symbolizing that their future mission, though heavy with the weight of souls, would not be destroyed but sustained by Christ’s power.
This miracle functions as a parable of the disciples’ coming ministry. Their labor as “fishers of men” (Matthew 4:19) would only be fruitful if directed by Christ. Without Him, their nets would remain empty, no matter how hard they worked. With Him, their efforts would yield an abundant harvest. The application is clear: the church must never rely on its own strategies, techniques, or wisdom. Spiritual fruitfulness comes only when our work is aligned with the command and presence of the risen Lord.
Charles Spurgeon powerfully applied this truth: Christ has only to will it, and souls will be converted by the multitudes. The disciples’ nets filled because the Lord commanded the fish to gather. Likewise, no method of evangelism, no effort of preaching, succeeds apart from Christ’s will. Yet when He is present in power, the results will astonish His people. Importantly, the miracle does not bypass means. The fishermen, their nets, and their boats were still used. This shows that in God’s economy of grace, human instruments are employed, yet the power belongs entirely to Him. As Paul later declared, “I planted, Apollos watered, but God gave the increase” (1 Corinthians 3:6).
Moreover, this event underscores the importance of faithful labor. As Spurgeon also observed, if the disciples had not gone out fishing at night, they might not have received this morning blessing. Christ rarely rewards idleness. While His grace is sovereign, He typically bestows it upon those engaged in obedience and service. The same applies to the church today: we must be diligent in casting the net of the gospel, leaving the results to the Lord.
In summary, John 21:4–6 vividly contrasts human failure with divine provision. The empty nets of the night remind us of the futility of labor without Christ. The overflowing nets of the morning demonstrate the abundance that comes when His word is obeyed. The passage points forward to the apostolic mission: their success in gathering men into the kingdom would depend entirely upon following the risen Lord’s direction.
The Restoration of Peter
A. A Miraculous Catch of Fish
(John 21:7-8)
“Therefore that disciple whom Jesus loved said to Peter, ‘It is the Lord!’ Now when Simon Peter heard that it was the Lord, he put on his outer garment (for he had removed it), and plunged into the sea. But the other disciples came in the little boat (for they were not far from land, but about two hundred cubits), dragging the net with fish.”
At the moment of the miraculous catch, recognition dawned upon John, the disciple whom Jesus loved. He was the first to perceive what the extraordinary abundance of fish signified, exclaiming to Peter, “It is the Lord!” This fits John’s consistent pattern throughout the Gospel. He had outrun Peter to the empty tomb (John 20:4), and he had been the first to grasp the truth of the resurrection (John 20:8). Likewise, he was first here to recognize that only Jesus could account for such a miracle. John’s spiritual sensitivity, sharpened by love, allowed him to discern what others had not yet perceived. Anything this marvelous must have come from the risen Christ.
Peter, upon hearing John’s declaration, responded with characteristic zeal. The text records: “Now when Simon Peter heard that it was the Lord, he put on his outer garment (for he had removed it), and plunged into the sea.” John may have been quicker to recognize, but Peter was quicker to act. His impetuous devotion compelled him to leave the boat at once to reach Christ. The slow-moving vessel could not satisfy his eagerness. Perhaps in his haste Peter even remembered the time when he had walked on water toward Jesus (Matthew 14:28–29). This act of plunging into the sea, though reckless by human standards, reflects a heart consumed with love and longing for fellowship with Christ.
The detail about Peter’s clothing is important. The phrase “for he had removed it” means he had been stripped for work. The probability is not that Peter was naked, but that he was wearing only a workman’s undergarment suitable for rowing and hauling nets. To meet his Master, he quickly clothed himself in his epenḗtēs, a fisher’s outer garment, and girded it around his waist. In that culture, no man would approach his teacher or superior in a state of undress. Thus Peter’s action reflects both reverence and urgency: he would not appear before Jesus improperly dressed, yet he would not delay to wait for the boat either.
While Peter plunged into the sea, the other disciples remained in the boat, faithfully dragging the heavy net filled with fish toward shore. They were about two hundred cubits—roughly one hundred yards—from land. Their labor contrasts with Peter’s zeal: while he rushed ahead to Christ, they bore the practical burden of preserving the miraculous catch. This demonstrates the balance within the body of Christ: some may express devotion in passionate acts of love, while others serve quietly and steadily in necessary tasks. Both forms of service are valuable and recognized by the Lord.
Theologically, this moment is rich in meaning. Peter, who had denied Christ three times, now rushes toward Him with eagerness, showing that despite his past failure, his love remained undiminished. His act of plunging into the water symbolizes the restoration of fellowship that will soon be confirmed in Jesus’ threefold question: “Do you love Me?” (John 21:15–17). At the same time, the work of the other disciples dragging the net highlights the communal nature of ministry. The kingdom requires both passionate devotion and patient labor.
A. A Miraculous Catch of Fish
(John 21:9-11)
“Then, as soon as they had come to land, they saw a fire of coals there, and fish laid on it, and bread. Jesus said to them, ‘Bring some of the fish which you have just caught.’ Simon Peter went up and dragged the net to land, full of large fish, one hundred and fifty-three; and although there were so many, the net was not broken.”
When the disciples reached the shore, soaked and exhausted from the great haul, they were greeted by a striking sight: “they saw a fire of coals there, and fish laid on it, and bread.” The resurrected Lord, who had triumphed over sin and death, was still found in the posture of a servant. Just as He had washed their feet on the night of His betrayal (John 13:4–5), here He stooped to prepare a simple meal for His disciples. This underscores that Christ’s glory does not diminish His humility. The risen Savior, possessing all authority in heaven and earth, still delights to serve His people. His lordship and His service are never at odds.
Jesus then commanded them, “Bring some of the fish which you have just caught.” This command is full of significance. The order of events shows that Jesus already had fish and bread prepared before the disciples landed. He had no need of their catch to provide for their breakfast. Yet He graciously included what they had brought, teaching that while He does not depend on human contribution, He invites us to share in His work. This balance between divine sufficiency and human participation is a recurring theme in Scripture. When Jesus fed the five thousand, He multiplied a boy’s small offering of loaves and fish (John 6:9–11). Here, He adds their catch to the meal He had already prepared. In both cases, the lesson is the same: Christ does not require our resources, but He delights to use them.
Simon Peter, ever zealous and physically strong, went up and single-handedly dragged the net to land. The text specifies that the net was “full of large fish, one hundred and fifty-three.” Commentators note that such a haul, plus the weight of a wet net, could easily exceed three hundred pounds. This detail reflects both the perspective of an eyewitness and the memory of seasoned fishermen. Peter’s action is also a quiet tribute to his strength and determination, as he alone pulled in what normally would require the group.
Much speculation has been made about the precise number, one hundred and fifty-three. Augustine suggested that the number is symbolic, pointing to the sum of 1 through 17, with 10 representing the commandments and 7 the gifts of the Spirit. Others noted that 153 is the numerical equivalent of the Greek words for “Peter” and “fish.” Jerome recorded an ancient belief that there were 153 known species of fish in the world, so the number symbolized the universality of the gospel’s reach. Cyril of Alexandria interpreted it as symbolic of 100 representing Gentiles, 50 representing Israel, and 3 representing the Trinity. While these interpretations are imaginative, they remind us of the dangers of over-allegorizing.
The plain meaning is best: John remembered the exact number because he was there. As a fisherman, he and Peter would naturally count their largest catch. “Peter never landed a haul of fish without counting them, and John, fisherman as he was, could never forget the number of his largest takes.” The detail is a mark of authenticity, reinforcing that this is not a legend or myth, but an eyewitness account.
Another important detail is that “although there were so many, the net was not broken.” This contrasts with the earlier miraculous catch in Luke 5:6, where the nets began to break under the weight of fish. The unbroken net here symbolizes the sufficiency and sustaining power of Christ in the mission of the church. The disciples were about to be sent as fishers of men, tasked with drawing souls into the kingdom from every nation. The catch would be vast, but under Christ’s direction the net of the gospel would hold. Not one soul given to the Son by the Father will be lost (John 6:39). The church, though strained, will never break apart under the weight of God’s sovereign harvest.
This simple seaside meal therefore carries profound spiritual lessons. The risen Christ provides, serves, and sustains. He involves His disciples in His work, yet shows them that the strength, the provision, and the results are His alone. The counted fish, the unbroken net, and the prepared meal all testify to His divine sufficiency and His intimate care for His people.
A. A Miraculous Catch of Fish
(John 21:12-14)
“Jesus said to them, ‘Come and eat breakfast.’ Yet none of the disciples dared ask Him, ‘Who are You?’ — knowing that it was the Lord. Jesus then came and took the bread and gave it to them, and likewise the fish. This is now the third time Jesus showed Himself to His disciples after He was raised from the dead.”
After the labor of hauling the miraculous catch to shore, Jesus invited His disciples to share a simple meal with Him: “Come and eat breakfast.” This invitation underscores the enduring servant nature of Christ, even in His resurrection. The Lord, who had triumphed over death and sin, stooped to prepare a meal for His disciples. This act of service demonstrates that His concern for the needs of His followers extends beyond the spiritual into the physical realm, revealing the holistic care of the risen Lord.
This moment reflects a pattern of Christ’s invitations throughout the Gospels, each tailored to the context and needs of His followers. As Boice noted, Jesus’ invitations take multiple forms: “Come and see” (John 1:39), “Come and learn” (Matthew 11:28–29), “Come and rest” (Mark 6:31), “Come and dine” (John 21:12), and “Come and inherit” (Matthew 25:34–36). Here, the act of dining together symbolizes fellowship, restoration, and intimacy. Christ invites His disciples not only to be nourished physically but also to experience His presence and the spiritual sustenance that comes from communion with Him.
Interestingly, “none of the disciples dared ask Him, ‘Who are You?’” This demonstrates that there was something unusual about the resurrected body of Christ. While they recognized Him, there was still a sense of awe and reverence that prevented them from questioning His identity. Bruce observes that whereas in earlier times they might have asked, now they felt they ought to restrain themselves, knowing the one before them was indeed the risen Lord. The Greek verb rendered “ask” (ἐξετάσαι) carries the sense of testing or scrutinizing, implying that not one dared to interrogate or question Him. A new reverence had overtaken them; their previous familiarity was now transformed into awe before His glorified presence.
Jesus then personally “took the bread and gave it to them, and likewise the fish.” Eating with His disciples after His resurrection is a vivid expression of intimate, personal fellowship. It illustrates that Christ is not distant in His victory over death; He shares in the ordinary, mundane, and human aspects of life. Dods remarks that there was a solemn and significant manner in Christ’s actions, intended to impress upon the disciples that He is the ultimate source of all provision and sustenance. The meal was more than nourishment—it was a tangible demonstration of His ongoing care and Lordship.
Spurgeon adds a poignant pastoral reflection: the disciples likely ate in silent humility, mindful of their past failures. Peter would have recalled the fire by which he once warmed himself while denying Christ, Thomas may have stood in awed contemplation, realizing the wonder of being in Christ’s presence after their prior doubt and disobedience. Each disciple, aware of their past failings, experienced the tender authority of the risen Lord, whose grace and mercy were sufficient to restore them fully.
Finally, the text notes that “This is now the third time Jesus showed Himself to His disciples after He was raised from the dead.” Tasker comments that this likely refers to the third appearance that John himself has recorded in his Gospel. The repetition highlights the ongoing, deliberate effort of the risen Lord to re-establish fellowship with His followers, to confirm His resurrection, and to prepare them for the mission ahead. This is a powerful lesson: restoration often requires repeated encounters with Christ, particularly in the context of failure, fear, or doubt.
In summary, John 21:12–14 emphasizes the intimate, restorative, and servant-hearted nature of Christ’s post-resurrection ministry. The Lord not only provides physically but also restores relationally and spiritually, preparing His disciples to continue their mission with renewed confidence, humility, and devotion.
B. The Public Restoration of Peter
1. Jesus Inquires About Peter’s Love
(John 21:15-16)
“So when they had eaten breakfast, Jesus said to Simon Peter, ‘Simon, son of Jonah, do you love Me more than these?’ He said to Him, ‘Yes, Lord; You know that I love You.’ He said to him, ‘Feed My lambs.’ He said to him again a second time, ‘Simon, son of Jonah, do you love Me?’ He said to Him, ‘Yes, Lord; You know that I love You.’ He said to him, ‘Tend My sheep.’”
After the disciples had eaten breakfast, Jesus turned His attention to Peter specifically, speaking to him in a direct and deliberate manner. “Jesus said to Simon Peter” indicates that the restoration of Peter was a personal, relational matter, yet it was conducted in the presence of the other disciples. While Peter had already encountered the risen Lord privately on the day of the resurrection (Luke 24:34, 1 Corinthians 15:5), this public restoration was necessary for his full reconciliation and for the confirmation of his role in leading the early church.
Jesus addressed Peter as “Simon, son of Jonah” rather than simply Peter. This choice of name carries solemnity and significance. By using his original name, Jesus gently reminds Peter of his human frailty and his previous failure to stand faithfully during the crucifixion events. Morris notes the gravity of this form of address, emphasizing the combination of reverence and instruction in the Lord’s manner of speech. It is both a rebuke and an acknowledgment of Peter’s restored position.
The first question Jesus posed was, “Do you love Me more than these?” At first glance, this question may seem to challenge Peter to compare his love for Jesus with that of the other disciples. Earlier, Peter had boldly claimed, “Even if all fall away on account of You, I will never fall away” (Matthew 26:33), suggesting he considered his love superior. Jesus’ question invites self-examination: Peter must now confront his pride and honestly assess the depth of his devotion. Some interpreters also suggest that “these” could refer metaphorically to the fishermen’s nets, the livelihood he had temporarily returned to, but the weight of context favors a comparison with the other disciples’ devotion, recalling Peter’s prior boast. Importantly, Jesus did not need to be informed; He already knew the truth. The question is for Peter’s own reflection and acknowledgment of his heart’s disposition.
Peter responds, “Yes, Lord; You know that I love You.” The Greek word he uses, phileo, denotes a brotherly or affectionate love, contrasted with agapao, which is the selfless, unconditional love Jesus uses in His questions. This distinction is noteworthy. It suggests that Peter, a human and fallible disciple, expresses the best love he can give, grounded in heartfelt affection and loyalty. Boice comments that Peter’s answer demonstrates a genuine heart open to Christ, fully known by the Lord, even if imperfectly expressed. The repetition of Jesus’ question and Peter’s answer emphasizes both examination and confirmation of Peter’s restored devotion. Spurgeon observes that even those who have been successful in ministry and labored mightily—“dragged a full net to shore”—require ongoing examination of the heart to ensure that their service is rooted in love for Christ rather than in pride or accomplishment.
After confirming Peter’s love, Jesus instructed him: “Feed My lambs” and “Tend My sheep.” These imperatives are rich with pastoral significance. Feeding the lambs implies providing for the spiritual nourishment of new believers, teaching them, and leading them to maturity in Christ. Tending the sheep extends beyond feeding; it encompasses oversight, guidance, protection, and care for the flock. Morris emphasizes that the verb for “tend” denotes exercising the office of shepherd, highlighting the broader responsibilities of spiritual leadership. Clarke elaborates that Peter’s understanding of this instruction extended beyond his own ministry, foreshadowing the ongoing pastoral responsibility entrusted to all Christian leaders and their successors. This moment establishes the principle that ministry must be exercised in humility, diligence, and accountability, always under the Lordship of Christ.
This public restoration also demonstrates the Lord’s grace and the pattern for leadership in the church. Peter, who had denied the Lord three times, was reinstated fully, not merely privately, but in the presence of his peers, confirming his authority and responsibility. The repeated questioning mirrors the three denials, showing the completeness of restoration and the sufficiency of Christ’s forgiveness. The focus is not on Peter’s past failure but on the affirmation of his love, his heart’s orientation toward Christ, and the divine calling to shepherd God’s people faithfully.
2. Jesus Asks Peter a Third Time: Do You Love Me?
(John 21:17)
“He said to him the third time, ‘Simon, son of Jonah, 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, ‘Feed My sheep.’”
Following the first two inquiries and Peter’s responses, Jesus posed the question a third time: “He said to him the third time, ‘Simon, son of Jonah, do you love Me?’” The repetition was not accidental; the triadic pattern mirrors Peter’s threefold denial during the trials before the crucifixion (John 18:15–27). The third question was necessary to fully restore Peter, providing an opportunity for him to publicly and personally acknowledge his love and reaffirm his devotion. The deliberate repetition demonstrates Christ’s patient pastoral method: restoration is neither hurried nor superficial; it addresses both the heart and the past failure.
The text notes, “Peter was grieved because He said to him the third time, ‘Do you love Me?’” His grief was both emotional and spiritual, as he immediately recognized the significance of the triple question. This was a direct, loving confrontation with his previous failure. Clarke emphasizes that this was a divine opportunity for Peter to repair the spiritual damage of his threefold denial by a corresponding triple confession, symbolically restoring his fellowship and preparing him for leadership. The grief of Peter was not despair but the weight of recognition and repentance in the presence of Christ’s grace.
The form of the question in this third instance also carries nuance. Jesus slightly adjusted His wording to use phileis, the term for brotherly or friendly love, rather than the unconditional agapas. Alford notes that this shift reflects an adaptation to Peter’s human limitations. Peter’s earlier responses employed phileo, acknowledging his own weaknesses and the personal, affectionate love he was capable of offering. By using this term, Jesus pressed the reality of Peter’s devotion home, demanding honest acknowledgment of his heart rather than abstract or idealized love. The question focused not on perfection but on authenticity.
Peter responded with humility and dependence, saying, “Lord, You know all things; You know that I love You.” Even in this moment of restoration, Peter recognized that his love alone was insufficient to measure or guarantee faithfulness. He relied upon the omniscience of Jesus, acknowledging that the Lord knew the depth and sincerity of his heart. Christ did not ask Peter to promise that he would never fail again, nor did He require a verbal repentance of past actions. Instead, He demanded the heart’s devotion, for genuine love is foundational; obedience, faithfulness, and fruitfulness flow naturally from it. Maclaren observes that Christ’s concern is always for the heart, for it is the inner orientation toward Him that determines all subsequent conduct and ministry.
Finally, Jesus gave the restoration a practical outworking with the command: “Feed My sheep.” Peter’s restoration was not merely personal; it had an immediate vocational application. By confronting Peter with his past failure and demanding a heartfelt response of love, Jesus simultaneously directed him toward the work that lay ahead—shepherding God’s flock. This command emphasizes that ministry is grounded in love: the shepherd tends, protects, nurtures, and guides the sheep, demonstrating devotion to Christ through care for His people. The phrase also reinforces that the sheep belong to the Lord, not to Peter personally, reminding him of the accountability and stewardship inherent in pastoral leadership.
In summary, John 21:17 completes the restoration of Peter, highlighting several key truths: restoration requires confronting failure honestly, Christ desires authentic devotion rather than superficial vows, love for the Lord is the foundation for ministry, and restoration carries with it immediate responsibility for service. The threefold questioning mirrors the threefold denial, showing that God’s grace is sufficient to heal and redirect the failures of His people, preparing them for fruitful service in His kingdom.
C. Jesus’ Call on Peter’s Life
(John 21:18-19)
“Most assuredly, I say to you, when you were younger, you girded yourself and walked where you wished; but when you are old, you will stretch out your hands, and another will gird you and carry you where you do not wish.” This He spoke, signifying by what death he would glorify God. And when He had spoken this, He said to him, ‘Follow Me.’”
Jesus prefaced His words with a solemn and emphatic declaration: “Most assuredly, I say to you.” The repetition of this phrase underscores the certainty and importance of what He was about to say. The words that follow were not mere predictions; they were a divinely inspired revelation concerning Peter’s life and future ministry. The Lord’s assurance demands attentive reflection, as it combines both promise and call.
Jesus began by speaking of Peter’s past: “when you were younger, you girded yourself and walked where you wished.” This recalls Peter’s earlier years, a time when he had relative freedom and self-direction, unencumbered by the full responsibilities of leadership or the burdens of ministry. Many believers can relate to this stage in life, when one’s choices are largely unrestrained and the world appears full of personal opportunities and adventure.
Jesus then turned to Peter’s future: “but when you are old, you will stretch out your hands, and another will gird you and carry you where you do not wish.” The imagery is unmistakable. Peter’s hands would be stretched, a clear reference to crucifixion, and he would be carried against his own will, restrained and unable to direct his fate. Morris notes that this signifies a complete surrender of personal control: Peter would no longer walk at his own direction but would be fully submitted to the sovereign plan of God. The text confirms, “This He spoke, signifying by what death he would glorify God.” The prediction of a martyr’s death would have been chilling yet also encouraging. Having denied Christ to save himself weeks earlier, Peter was now assured that he would ultimately face death in full faithfulness, glorifying God even unto the cross.
Historical accounts provide further insight into Peter’s response to this divine revelation. Ancient writers, including Eusebius, Prudentius, Chrysostom, and Augustine, report that Peter was martyred by crucifixion during Nero’s persecution. Remarkably, Peter requested to be crucified upside down, feeling unworthy to die in the same posture as his Lord. Jerome also affirms this account, noting Peter’s humility and devotion in accepting martyrdom. These historical attestations emphasize the veracity of Christ’s words and the principle that believers can glorify God through faithful endurance, even in death. Justin Martyr likewise testified that the lives and deaths of Christians confirmed the truth of their confession and witness, sealing their faith through their blood.
Jesus concluded this profound revelation with a personal command: “Follow Me.” The words echo the initial call Peter received years earlier (Matthew 4:18-19), yet now they carry far greater weight. Following Christ would no longer be casual or symbolic; it would require total surrender, steadfastness, and readiness to face suffering and martyrdom. The present imperative of the Greek text, literally “Keep on following Me,” signals continuous, lifelong obedience. Tenney highlights that Jesus places Peter in a category with Himself: a life devoted to God, ultimately culminating in self-sacrifice for His glory. Morris notes the present tense as significant, calling Peter to steadfast discipleship in a manner consistent and unwavering, unlike the interrupted or hesitant following of earlier years.
This passage illustrates the intertwining of restoration, calling, and destiny. Peter, once restored through the threefold affirmation of love, now receives the confirmation of God’s sovereign plan for his life. The call to follow Christ is inseparable from the call to glorify God, even in suffering, obedience, and ultimate sacrifice. Here, Jesus sets the pattern for all disciples: restoration must lead to mission, love to service, and devotion to obedience—even unto death.
D. What About John?
1. Peter’s Question and Jesus’ Challenge
(John 21:20-23)
“Then Peter, turning around, saw the disciple whom Jesus loved following, who also had leaned on His breast at the supper, and said, ‘Lord, who is the one who betrays You?’ Peter, seeing him, said to Jesus, ‘But Lord, what about this man?’ Jesus said to him, ‘If I will that he remain till I come, what is that to you? You follow Me.’ Then this saying went out among the brethren that this disciple would not die. Yet Jesus did not say to him that he would not die, but, ‘If I will that he remain till I come, what is that to you?’”
Immediately following the restoration and commissioning of Peter, the focus shifts to John, the disciple whom Jesus loved. Peter, naturally curious, observed John following at a distance and asked a question that reflected both his concern and his human tendency to compare: “But Lord, what about this man?” This response demonstrates a common human inclination: when confronted with a personal challenge, it is easier to deflect attention by focusing on others. Peter had just been given a clear, personal call from Christ—to follow Him and shepherd His flock—but his attention wandered momentarily to John. The same temptation exists for all believers: it is often easier to wonder about the lives, destinies, or callings of others than to engage fully with the responsibilities God has assigned to us.
Jesus responded with a pointed rebuke and a redirection: “If I will that he remain till I come, what is that to you? You follow Me.” The Lord reminds Peter that God’s plans for each individual are sovereign and unique. Just as Peter’s path led him to the cross, John’s path might unfold differently. This admonition emphasizes personal responsibility before God: each disciple must obey the call personally and faithfully, regardless of the paths or destinies assigned to others. Morgan observes the human interest here: the gentle rebuke underscores that the pursuit of knowledge about another person’s calling is secondary to the primary task of following Christ oneself.
The phrase “You follow Me” is a forceful and pointed command, highlighting the personal and immediate responsibility of discipleship. Tenney notes that the second person pronoun makes the command emphatic: Peter is called to follow Christ, independently of others’ destinies. Spurgeon reflects that the wisdom in ministry often begins with this principle: instead of attempting to manage or correct the course of others, the believer must first commit to following the Lord fully, allowing God to orchestrate the lives of others according to His sovereign plan.
This dialogue gave rise to a rumor among the early believers: “Then this saying went out among the brethren that this disciple would not die.” Observing John’s long life and survival amid persecution, some early Christians concluded that Jesus had prophesied he would remain alive until the Lord’s return. Such misunderstandings were common, especially when miraculous or exceptional circumstances were involved. Tasker emphasizes that this statement serves to clarify the record: “Jesus did not say to him that he would not die, but simply used the possibility of that as an example to Peter.” The focus was always on Peter’s obedience, not on speculation about John’s fate.
Theologically, this passage teaches several critical lessons. First, each disciple is accountable to God for their own obedience. Peter’s commission to shepherd the flock is his responsibility, regardless of what Jesus may ordain for John or others. Second, God’s sovereignty in directing the lives of His people is to be trusted, and speculation or comparison is spiritually unhelpful. Third, the message underscores humility and focus: faithful service requires attention to one’s own calling rather than envy, curiosity, or distraction regarding the paths of others.
In summary, John 21:20–23 highlights the Lord’s call to personal responsibility in discipleship. Peter’s natural curiosity about John serves as a lesson for all believers: ministry and obedience are measured by one’s own response to Christ, not by comparing with others or seeking to understand God’s plan for them. The passage concludes with a reaffirmation of Peter’s ongoing calling: to follow Jesus faithfully, shepherd the flock, and remain focused on his personal commission, leaving the destinies of others in the hands of the Lord.
E. The Conclusion to the Gospel of John
(John 21:24-25)
“This is the disciple who testifies of these things, and wrote these things; and we know that his testimony is true. And there are also many other things that Jesus did, which if they were written one by one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that would be written. Amen.”
The Gospel of John concludes with a solemn affirmation of the authenticity and reliability of its testimony. John identifies himself explicitly: “This is the disciple who testifies of these things, and wrote these things; and we know that his testimony is true.” Throughout the narrative, John had remained largely in the background, referred to only as “the disciple whom Jesus loved.” In these closing verses, he reveals his authorship and underscores the credibility of the record. This declaration is not mere humility; it is a formal attestation of truth, assuring readers that the account they have read is eyewitness testimony and can be trusted. It reflects John’s pastoral and theological concern for the church: that believers would have certainty regarding the life, death, resurrection, and ministry of Jesus Christ.
John then reflects on the incompleteness of any written account of Christ: “And there are also many other things that Jesus did, which if they were written one by one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that would be written.” This hyperbolic statement emphasizes the limitless scope of Jesus’ works and teachings. As Morris notes, John is highlighting that what has been recorded represents only a portion of Christ’s deeds and influence; the fullness of Jesus’ life, miracles, and interactions with humanity exceeds what any human could capture in writing. The Gospel presents the essentials needed for faith, especially for the purpose of believing in Jesus as the Christ, the Son of God, and receiving life in His name (John 20:31), but it does not exhaust the entirety of His actions or character.
The phrase also subtly acknowledges the ongoing work of Christ in the world. Even after His ascension, Jesus continues to act in the lives of His disciples and the broader mission of the church. John’s reference to the impossibility of writing every act of Jesus invites the reader to understand that the story of Christ is not confined to history alone—it continues to unfold in the lives of believers today. There is always more to discover, more to experience, and more to participate in as followers of the risen Lord.
Finally, John closes with “Amen,” a word expressing affirmation and certainty. It serves as a theological seal, confirming that the narrative is both trustworthy and divinely guided. The Gospel ends not with a limitation, but with an expansive horizon: Jesus’ life, works, and ongoing ministry extend far beyond what is written, encouraging the reader to trust in Him, believe in His promises, and participate in the continuing story of His kingdom.
In summary, John 21:24–25 provides the Gospel’s final testimony: John was an eyewitness, his record is trustworthy, yet the fullness of Christ’s works is inexhaustible. The conclusion both validates the Gospel’s historical reliability and invites believers into the living, ongoing work of Jesus in the world.
