What is the true measure of success? It depends. While we often think in terms of popularity, financial prosperity, status, and achievements, God has a totally different measurement. Have we been obedient to what God has asked each of us to do according to the where He has placed us, and the gifts He has entrusted to us?
Often the doorway to success is entered through the hallway of failure. Our sins are a forcible reminder of our need for God’s grace; our weaknesses make us appreciate God’s strength. An understanding of our frailty is the basis for a dynamic relationship with God.[i]
An overly self-confident Peter, who boasted that though all others might fail Jesus in the Lord’s darkest hours, Peter would not. Unfortunately, Peter denied knowing Jesus not once, but three times and was ultimately shattered by that failure. How could God ever entrust to Peter the responsibility of being a key leader in the early church? The question we need to ask ourselves is simply, how can we move forward after a time of failure in our own lives?
In John 21, we see the restoration of Peter as Jesus manifests Himself to seven of His disciples in a powerful reminder of their initial calling and discover that God had a plan for them to implement despite their past failures. To move forward in our lives, we need to address what is undermining our lives, discover and then deploy our unique gifts and temperament. Here in John 21, we see two distinct movements or steps that brings home these truths not only to those early followers of Jesus, but equally true for us.
THE FIRST STEP IN MOVING FORWARD AFTER FAILURE IS HAVING A REVELATION AND ENCOUNTER WITH THE RESURRECTED LORD
Real failure generally comes when we are trusting everything but God. We can only come to that realization when we see the absolute necessity of trusting in God above all. Jesus had invested so much into these early disciples, and they had all failed Him in the garden of Gethsemane, but now a greater test was looming before them. Jesus was about to leave the work of bringing the gospel to others. What would it take to restore them and commission them for future ministry? The same holds true for our lives. We are too often seduced by the lures of worldly success but fail to see the cost and losses involved. It usually takes disappointment, failure, and shattered dreams to realize that we have chased the wrong vision of what life is truly all about. Like these early followers, we need an encounter with Jesus at that point of pain in our lives to set us on a new and healthier course.
Here in John’s gospel, Jesus now appears a third time to the disciples. This time it is at the Sea of Galilee, where they are fishing. This moment is eerily familiar to them, as it was upon this very lake that Jesus called them to become ‘fishers of men.’ What happened at that early point in their relationship with Jesus was a miraculous haul of fish after toiling all night without success. Now Jesus comes to them in a similar manner.
Afterward Jesus appeared again to his disciples, by the Sea of Galilee. It happened this way: Simon Peter, Thomas (also known as Didymus), Nathanael from Cana in Galilee, the sons of Zebedee, and two other disciples were together. ‘I’m going out to fish,’ Simon Peter told them, and they said, ‘We’ll go with you.’ So they went out and got into the boat, but that night they caught nothing. Early in the morning, Jesus stood on the shore, but the disciples did not realize that it was Jesus.[ii]
Was it the distance, the weather, or the lack of expectation, that Jesus would be nearby? Jesus calls out to His disciples in an informal manner.
He called out to them, ‘Friends, haven’t you any fish? ‘No,’ they answered. He said, ‘Throw your net on the right side of the boat and you will find some.’ When they did, they were unable to haul the net in because of the large number of fish.[iii]
The word that the NIV translated as friends is often translated as children, but this is not the idea here, rather, in our contemporary terms, it would sound casual-like, “Hey guys, catch anything?” There is a sense that Jesus knows that they have come up empty handed. Once they answer, Jesus tells them, as He did in the earlier miracle catch, to cast on the other side. Why would they respond to this idea? They still did not know that it was Jesus. However, like modern fisherman, suggestions are often made to try another approach. They now experience a great haul of fish and from this John has the insight to realize that the person on shore is Jesus.
Then the disciple whom Jesus loved said to Peter, ‘It is the Lord!’ As soon as Simon Peter heard him say, ‘It is the Lord,’ he wrapped his outer garment around him (for he had taken it off) and jumped into the water.[iv]
Here we see a contrast between John and Peter. John, the reflective thinker who has insight in contrast to Peter, the man of action. God creates each of us differently, to accomplish different things in our lives. Peter, the impulsive personality jumps out of the boat to get to Jesus. We can see that Peter is not reticent to be with Jesus. We know from Mark’s gospel that Jesus has already reached out to Peter after his failure in the garden, through the angelic message to the women.
But go, tell his disciples and Peter, ‘He is going ahead of you into Galilee. There you will see him, just as he told you.[v]
We know that Jesus had appeared to Peter because of Paul’s chronology of Jesus’ post resurrection appearances found in his letter to the Corinthians.
That he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, and that he appeared to Cephas [Peter], and then to the Twelve.[vi]
This meeting then in Galilee was not to restore Peter to fellowship but to ministry.
The other disciples followed in the boat, towing the net full of fish, for they were not far from shore, about a hundred yards. When they landed, they saw a fire of burning coals there with fish on it, and some bread. Jesus said to them, ‘Bring some of the fish you have just caught.’ So Simon Peter climbed back into the boat and dragged the net ashore. It was full of large fish, 153, but even with so many the net was not torn. Jesus said to them, ‘Come and have breakfast.’ None of the disciples dared ask him, ‘Who are you?’ They knew it was the Lord. Jesus came, took the bread and gave it to them, and did the same with the fish. This was now the third time Jesus appeared to his disciples in John’s gospel after he was raised from the dead.[vii]
F. F. Bruce sees in this provision a sign or parable of something more significant than just providing a breakfast meal.
The disciples’ haul of fish is a parable of their missionary activity in the time that lies ahead. But this activity, with its pastoral sequel, will be attended by success only as they follow the directions of their risen Lord.[viii]
This significant catch of fish had happened earlier in Jesus’ ministry and in which Peter saw his own sinfulness. Was this an opportunity for Peter not only to be reminded that he as a sinner needed to see his incredible need for Christ to have a future effective ministry? Peter saw himself earlier in the first haul of fish as both needy and sinful.
Simon answered, ‘Master, we’ve worked hard all night and haven’t caught anything. But because you say so, I will let down the nets. When they had done so, they caught such a large number of fish that their nets began to break. When Simon Peter saw this, he fell at Jesus’ knees and said, ‘Go away from me, Lord; I am a sinful man!’[ix]
Another amazing catch, a fire with burning coals, all reminders of significant moments in the life of Peter. It was around a fire that Peter denied Jesus. It was that earlier catch of fish, that Peter saw Jesus as Lord and himself a sinner in need of God’s grace. Jesus’ dialogue with Peter now awakens in Peter his personal failure and allows for a renewed confession of love and willingness to serve Jesus wholeheartedly.
Roland Tasker explains how Jesus’ words are challenging Peter’s past self confidence in himself and the failure that resulted from looking to himself rather than learning to fully trust Jesus.
By three times addressing Peter as Simon, son of Jonas Jesus would seem to be deliberately avoiding the name which he Himself had said would one day be his [Peter]. Not yet had Peter proved himself worthy of the designated ‘the man of rock’.[x]
Before we can move forward, we need to acknowledge our absolute need for Jesus not only to forgive us, but to empower us to become all that He designed us to be.
THE SECOND STEP IN MOVING FORWARD AFTER FAILURE IS THE RESTORATION AND COMMISSIONING OF PETER AND THE DISCIPLES
In this interchange between Jesus and Peter, overheard by John and probably repeated by Peter to the others, we learn something of the need to actually address past failure to ensure future success.
A. The restoration and commissioning of repentant believers.
There are a number of Greek synonyms or interchangeable words in the Greek, which have often caused a measure of interesting ideas being forwarded as to what Jesus was trying to convey in this passage. However, F. F. Bruce explains that though some interpreters make major distinctions, thereby forcing ideas into the text that are not there, the significant idea is more plainly seen.
Stylistically, this interchange between the Lord and his disciple is interesting because of the use of synonyms [words that mean the same or are similar in meaning]. Two words for ‘love’ are used (agapao and phileo), two words for tending the flock (bosko and poimanino), two for the flock itself (arnia and probatia) and two for ‘know’ (oida and ginosko). This interplay of the synonyms is a feature of the writer’s Greek…[xi]
One of the ideas some suggest is that agapao is a Divine loftier love than phileo, or a brotherly one, and this is the point that Jesus is driving at here in our text.
The verb agapao in itself does not necessarily imply a loftier love; it does so when the context make this clear (On the other hand, in 2 Tim. 4:10 Demas’s regrettable love for ‘the present age’ is expressed by agapao).[xii]
Louw and Nida, in their Greek English Lexicon affirms that what is transpiring in the conversation between Jesus and Peter is allowing Peter to come to terms with his recent denials and allowing Jesus to renew Peter’s commission and affirmation of his future role in the church.
For example, the usage in Jn 21:15–17 seems to reflect simply a rhetorical alternation designed to avoid undue repetition. There is, however, one significant clue to possible meaningful differences in at least some contexts, namely, the fact that people are never commanded to love one another with φιλέω [phileo] or φιλία [philia], but only with ἀγαπάω [agapao] and ἀγάπη [agape].[xiii]
When they had finished eating, Jesus said to Simon Peter, ‘Simon son of John, do you love me more than these?’ ‘Yes, Lord,’ he said, ‘you know that I love you.’ Jesus said, ‘Feed my lambs.’[xiv]
What is meant by the statement, “Do you love me more than these?” Who are the “these?” It would seem to me that he is asking Peter, if he still thinks he loves Jesus more than the other disciples.
Peter had made such rash claims in the Upper Room that though all would fail him, Jesus could count on Peter. But as we know, Peter’s courage failed him in the courtyard of Annas, the father-in-law of Caiaphas, the High Priest.
Do you love me more than these other disciples do?’ (which of course assumes they are still present). This makes sense. Peter has always been able to advance the strongest personal boast. On the night Jesus was betrayed, while others were growing quiet, Peter could insist, ‘I will lay down my life for you [not “We” and “our”!] (13:37). It was Peter who slashed at Malchus (18:10). Cf. Matthew 26:33. But physical courage was not enough that night, and it was Peter also, spirit willing but flesh weak, who publicly disowned the Lord. Whatever potential for future service he had therefore depended not only on forgiveness from Jesus, but also on reinstatement amongst the disciples.[xv]
How true this is in restoring a fallen believer. Though we can be assured that when a person repents, God forgives, but often it is more of a struggle for other believers to be as gracious. Yet, there is one more thing at stake. Is this a genuine repentance leading to real change? Gerald Borchert explains what is at stake.
It is almost as though the evangelist is affirming the well-known concept that for a person to become right with God and gain a sense of release from the past sense of rebellion that that person should face the reality of where the deviation or sin occurred.
The issue of denying the Lord became a significant problem in the early church during times of persecution, and processes of reinstatement were debated. Hardliners were often not willing to accept those who denied their Lord while others may have tended to accept such deviants too easily. This pericope of the questioning of Peter must have served as a model of a median position willing to reestablish deviants but not without testing their commitment.[xvi]
During the Donatist controversy in the North African Church in the 4th Century, this caused a split in the church. The position taken by those who had been deemed to betray the church during the Diocletian persecution was to be denounced. The Donatists saw themselves as the pure alternative to the compromised ‘Catholic’ church. It was through the leadership of Augustine that this schism came to an end, as he argued that the church is one, though it may include some less than holy people. The sacraments were effective not because of the priest’s own righteousness, but because of God’s grace (see Christian History Magazine, Issue 28, Vol. 1X, no. 4, 14).
This was now a critical juncture in the launching of the church. If Peter was to lead the church in its early beginnings, two things were essential; a genuine recognition of his own sinfulness and deep dependency on God, and the acceptance of the other disciples to see that Jesus was addressing the issue and reinstating or reaffirming Peter’s leadership role in the church.
Again Jesus said, ‘Simon son of John, do you love me?’ He answered, ‘Yes, Lord, you know that I love you.’ Jesus said, ‘Take care of my sheep.’ The third time he said to him, ‘Simon son of John, do you love me?’ Peter was hurt because Jesus asked him the third time, ‘Do you love me?’ He said, ‘Lord, you know all things; you know that I love you.’ Jesus said, ‘Feed my sheep.’[xvii]
So, why was Peter hurt by Jesus’ comment? It is a reminder of his three denials, and here he has been challenged to confess his love for Jesus, three times.
Gerald Borchert explains this wounding of Peter to establish him.
Why, then, was Peter “grieved” elupēthē, the NIV “hurt” just does not catch the pathos of this statement)? It was hardly because of the change in the Greek verbs. Besides, that argument would hardly be viable if the original conversation would have been in Aramaic. A mere glance at the text tells the reader the reason. Peter experienced a major “undoing” (cf. Isa 6:5, KJV) of his self-assertiveness because Jesus asked him “the third time” (21:17) about his love. The third time did it. Imagine again the scene as the evangelist framed it: a charcoal fire and three questions about Peter’s relationship to Jesus. It hardly takes a genius to relate this event to that of the denial. Facing up to oneself is a traumatic experience.
Did Peter learn from this experience? Well, maybe not immediately, as the following verses seem to indicate. But ultimately? If the first letter of Peter is any indication, there seems to be little doubt that this experience seared itself into the consciousness of this well-meaning disciple because in that letter there is an instructive message for the leaders of his missionary churches. In the three responses of Jesus to Peter’s assertions of love Jesus said, “Feed [“tend,” boske] my sheep [“lambs,” arnia]” in 21:15; “Pasture [“tend,” poimaine] my sheep [probata]” in 21:16; and “feed [“tend,” boske] my sheep [probata]” again in 21:17. Then in his epistle Peter in turn told the leaders of the churches to “pasture [“tend,” poimanate] the flock [poimnion] of God” appropriately (1 Pet 5:2). Leadership in the Christian church should not be a matter of obligation or oughtness but of a willing desire. It should likewise not be from a goal of achieving personal gain but from a sense of calling to serve others. And it should not be because one wishes to dominate others but because one is willing to model the way of Christ in serving God’s flock (cf. 1 Pet 5:3). Seeking power and personal aggrandizement should not be any part of the goals among Jesus’ disciples.[xviii]
B. The necessity of our love for God in lasting fruitfulness in our lives.
Roland Tasker explains the necessity of love as the key motivation in serving.
For Christian love must express itself in service even for the least of Christ’s brethren, but without love for Christ that service can never be rendered. Such love alone enables the disciple to keep Christ’s commandments and to remain loyal to Him, even though, as will be the case with Peter, he may discover as life goes on, that love does not make life easy, but that duties become more exacting and personal freedom more restricted with advancing years; and even though his discipleship may lead him, as it led Simon Peter, to imprisonment and death. In the case of Peter, ‘following Jesus would mean a life of continuous care for Christ’s sheep, culminating in a martyrdom which would redound to God’s glory.[xix]
‘Very truly I tell you, when you were younger you dressed yourself and went where you wanted; but when you are old you will stretch out your hands, and someone else will dress you and lead you where you do not want to go.’ Jesus said this to indicate the kind of death by which Peter would glorify God. Then he said to him, ‘Follow me!’[xx]
Here we have a description of the kind of death that Peter would suffer. He also, like Jesus would be crucified.
C. The different paths that God calls each of us toward.
Peter turned and saw that the disciple whom Jesus loved was following them. (This was the one who had leaned back against Jesus at the supper and had said, ‘Lord, who is going to betray you?’) When Peter saw him, he asked, ‘Lord, what about him?’ Jesus answered, ‘If I want him to remain alive until I return, what is that to you? You must follow me.’ Because of this, the rumor spread among the believers that this disciple would not die. But Jesus did not say that he would not die; he only said, ‘If I want him to remain alive until I return, what is that to you?’[xxi]
Two different paths and outcomes are seen in following Jesus between Peter and John. I think we can see that Peter and John were very different in their temperaments and gifts. God creates variety in people so that we contribute differently, and it leads to different outcomes in our lives. Peter was designed by God with a forceful, action-oriented manner, that caused people to follow him. This leadership capacity was needed to gather and care for the fledgling early church. John, on the other hand, was a more reflective, insightful person. His ministry can be seen here as he is a gifted teacher, championing truth in the decades following the gospel events where error was always a threat to diminish the truth and its power to set people free.
For the beloved disciple, on the other hand, ‘following’ Jesus will mean something different. His service will be less dramatic and not so obviously heroic.[xxii]
This is the disciple who testifies to these things and who wrote them down. We know that his testimony is true. Jesus did many other things as well. If every one of them were written down, I suppose that even the whole world would not have room for the books that would be written.[xxiii]
Jesus desires to restore our lives and commission us to service. Every believer is designed by God and given a role to play. What we learned from this encounter with Peter is that we can minimize our failures and be fully restored. Yet many believers who have failed are still fishing aimlessly through life, whereas Jesus wants to address our past failures, brokenness, and shame. He wants us to seriously repent, and then acknowledge our need for God so we can move forward with God’s plan for our lives.
https://cdn.pixabay.com/photo/2017/11/28/13/08/fishermen-2983615_640.jpg
[i] Erwin Lutzer, Failure the Back Door to Success, (Chicago, IL: Moody Press, 1975), 29.
[ii] John 21:1-4, The New International Version of the Bible, Zondervan, 2011.
[iii] John 21:5-6.
[iv] John 21:7.
[v] Mark 16:7.
[vi] 1 Corinthians 15:4-5.
[vii] John 21:8-14.
[viii] F. F. Bruce, The Gospel of John, (Grand Rapids, Mi: William Eerdman’s Publishing Company, 1983), 402.
[ix] Luke 5:5-6, 8.
[x] R.V. Tasker, John, TNTC, (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdman’s Publishing Co, 1960), 232.
[xi] F. F. Bruce, The Gospel of John, 404.
[xii] Ibid, 405.
[xiii] Louw, J. P., & Nida, E. A. In Greek English lexicon of the New Testament: based on semantic domains (United Bible Societies, electronic ed. of the 2nd edition., Vol. 1, 1996), 293).
[xiv] John 21:15.
[xv] D. A. Carson, The Gospel According to John, The Pillar New Testament Commentary, (Grand Rapids, Mi: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1991), 675-76.
[xvi] Gerald Borchert, John 1–11 Vol. 25B, (Nashville, TN: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1996), 333-34.
[xvii] John 21:16-17.
[xviii] Gerald Borchert, John 1–11 Vol. 25B, 335-36.
[xix] Tasker, John, 230.
[xx] John 21:18-19.
[xxi] John 21:20-23.
[xxii] R.V. Tasker, John, 231.
[xxiii] John 21:24-25.
