Jesus Remembered: Christianity in the Making, vol. 1

§18.3 Et Resurrexit
said to him the third time, 'Simon son of John, do you love me?' Peter felt
hurt because he said to him the third time, 'Do you love me?' And he said to
him, 'Lord, you know everything; you know that I love you'. Jesus said to
him, 'Feed my sheep. 18 Truly truly, I tell you, when you were younger, you
used to fasten your own belt and to go wherever you wished. But when you
grow old, you will stretch out your hands, and someone else will fasten a belt
around you and take you where you do not wish to go'. 19(He said this to indicate
the kind of death by which he would glorify God.) After this he said to
him, 'Follow me'. 20 Peter turned and saw the disciple whom Jesus loved following
them; he was the one who had reclined next to Jesus at the supper and
had said, 'Lord, who is it that is going to betray you?' 21When Peter saw him,
he said to Jesus, 'Lord, what about him?' 22Jesus said to him, 'If it is my will
that he remain until I come, what is that to you? Follow me!' 23So the rumour
spread in the community that this disciple would not die. Yet Jesus did not
say to him that he would not die, but, 'If it is my will that he remain until I
come, what is that to you?' 24Xhis is the disciple who is testifying to these
things and has written them, and we know that his testimony is true.
Although set in context of an appearance to seven disciples (21.1-14), the
Johannine account 78 has a very personal, even intimate character. The thrice repeated
'Do you love me?' is obviously framed to echo Peter's threefold denial of
Jesus (18.17-18, 25-27). The note about the beloved disciple (21.20) relates back
into the earlier account of the last supper (13.23-25). And the perspective is
clearly that of the later story-teller (21.19a, 23). But apart from the 'Amen, amen'
of 21.18 the language of the principal exchange (21.15-19) is not particularly
Johannine. 79 And once again we are confronted with a testimony linked to the
beloved disciple, who is then identified as the source of the tradition, including a
saying of the risen Christ which had occasioned a rumour which the final
redactors 80 thought it necessary to quash (21.23-24).
What are we to make of this? Is this the missing appearance to Peter? The
fact that it is located in Galilee cuts across the clear assertion of Luke that the appearance
took place in Jerusalem on the first Sunday (Luke 24.34). On the other
hand, we have already noted Luke's seeming determination to restrict the postresurrection
appearances to Jerusalem. 81 And the parallels between John 21.1-8
78. Or more precisely, the final redactor's account. John 21 is generally regarded as an
addition to a Gospel which concluded with 20.30-31 (see, e.g., Brown, John xxxii-xxxix, 1077-
82).
79. The point would be disputed, not least in relation to the issue whether the author of
John 21 is the same as the Evangelist (details in Brown, John 1080).
80. Or, should we say, 'final final redactors' (see again Brown, John 1124-25)?
81. Luke 24.49; Acts 1.4.
845