Near the end of the gospel of John, (in John 21:1-14), we find a story where, some days after Jesus' crucifixion and resurrection, seven of Jesus's disciples have travelled north from Jerusalem to the sea of Galilee. At Peter's suggestion they have all gone out in his boat to fish. They fish all night, but have no luck, and catch nothing. They are fairly close to the shore, and as the early morning light begins to grow they see a man standing by the water. He calls out to them, asking if they have caught anything. When they answer "no", he tells them, "try the other side of the boat". They give it a try. When they do, they catch so many fish that they can't haul the net into the boat; it's too heavy. So they row toward shore, dragging the net full of fish behind them.

As they're drawing closer to shore, they still haven't recognized that the man on the shore is Jesus. He has kindled a small, and is cooking fish. He invites them to have breakfast with Him, and at that point, John realizes that it is Jesus, and tells Peter. Peter grabs his cloak, belts it around himself to cover his nakedness, and jumps into the water to swim to shore.

This story has some interesting details to explore. The earlier stories of events that happened after the Lord's rising took place in or near Jerusalem, but this one is in Galilee. Five of these disciples are named, and at least four of the five were from Galilee, so they are at home. They were fishermen before Jesus called them to be disciples, so to go fishing is in their blood.

The five disciples named in the story are Simon (or Peter), the brothers James and John, Thomas, and Nathaniel. Two more who are not named, to make up the seven, and it would be reasonable to guess that they were Andrew, Peter's brother, and Philip, a friend of Nathaniel's - both of whom were also from Galilee.

The angels that Peter and John had seen at the sepulcher had told them that Jesus would meet them in Galilee on "the mountain". Perhaps these seven, being from Galilee, had hurried on ahead of the others.

Let's look at their names and see what the literal meaning is, and what they represent in a spiritual way.

- Simon was renamed by Jesus as ‘Peter', which in the Greek means a rock. In this case, the name means the firmest and most critical rock, or truth, of Christianity, i.e. that Jesus was from God.

- John means love or charity.

- James, John's brother, means the doing of charity.

- Nathaniel means a gift from God, and being a friend of Philip, I think it might be that the gift from God that he represents is the love of learning things that fill the understanding, our curiosity.

- Thomas, in Greek, means a twin, and since he is named right after Peter perhaps he has a similar representation. Peter believes in the Lord easily because of what he has seen and what the Lord has told him whereas Thomas believes, and believes just as strongly, but only after his doubts have been erased, after he has been shown.

The towns most mentioned in the stories that take place around the "Sea of Galilee" in the gospels are Bethsaida, Capernaum, Cana, and Nazareth. Bethsaida itself means "a place of fishing." The maps I have of the area are small scale and not all exactly the same, but the indication is that it is at the northern end of the lake or even on the upper Jordan river just before it runs into the lake. Capernaum and Magdala are on the northwestern shore and Cana and Nazareth are inland, but only four or five miles west of this corner of the lake. This area was where most of these disciples had been brought up, and fishing was a common occupation.

The name Galilee means "a circuit". The Word teaches us that Jesus taught in the towns all around the lake, so that a reading of all that Jesus taught and did in that country could be thought of as a "circuit" of His teachings.

The next detail of interest is that when the Lord suggests the other side of the boat and the result is a large catch of fish after a long night of nothing. This is reminiscent of the fishing incident given in Luke 5:4-7. Since the disciples are to become "fishers of men" (as in Matthew 4:19) and they are to persuade people into the knowledge and worship of the Lord, the Christ, it is perhaps a lesson that in their ministry they must always be guided by the Lord.

Then John realizes, and whispers to Peter, "it's the Lord" (John 21:7) and Peter quickly puts his cloak on and jumps in to get to shore faster. Why is it John that first realizes? John represents love and affection while Peter represents faith or truth. While truth is the means of acting, as Peter does, love is the means of connecting, which is what John did. And why did Peter need to grab his cloak and put it on? Clothing in the Word represents the truths about spiritual things that all people may have if they look for them. It is the particular truths that form Peter as a disciple, "Thou art the Christ" (Matthew 16:16-18) that he answers to the Lord, and this truth is the rock of the Christian church. Having this truth as part of himself is necessary to meet the Lord.

When they are all on shore, Jesus says to them to bring some of the fish they have caught, so Peter goes to the water and drags the full net up onto the sand and counts out the fish, one hundred and fifty three. Then Jesus invites them all to come and eat.

Now a strange comment is put into the story: "…none of the disciples durst ask him, 'who art thou?', knowing that it was the Lord." (John 21:12). It seems that they should have known. They had been following Him for several years. I wonder if this is a reminder that the Christian church has yet to understand the true reality of the Lord - was He God, or was He man? The Catholic church argued this for more than three hundred years, and the council that was supposed to decide came up with three separate persons, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, all in one Godhead. Some of the Christian churches of today seem to focus on two, the Father, and a Son born from eternity, who apparently both rule together.

The New Christian Church understands that Jesus was born both God and man but that there was a slow but inevitable change going on during His lifetime. He was born with God, Jehovah, as His inmost, and a human heredity and body from Mary as a covering or cloak over this inmost. Mary was, you may recall, of the royal house of David, so her heredity was both strong and inclusive, and thus represented all that was connected to the Jewish form of worship. During Jesus' life (and starting early, though we don't know just how early), He put off things from Mary, and put on what was a corresponding Divine, from His inmost, in its place, until on Easter morning He was wholly divine, with all that came from His mother being dispersed and gone. There is only One God.

Why is it that in this little story the number of fishes that were caught in the net is mentioned, and why does it seem now so important that Peter took the time to count them as everyone waited? Something that has been revealed to the New Christian Church is that all the numbers used in the stories of the Word have a meaning that belongs to that number even outside the literal use in the story. The number 153 can be seen as the combination of 150 and 3, and both of these are strongly meaningful. Starting with the "three", there should be little doubt that it means something since it is used so often. Jesus rose on the third day. Also three is the number of things that, put together, make anything complete, the wish or desire to do it, the knowledge of how to do it, and the actual doing. This is true of any task - from baking a cake right up to the Lord's love, His wisdom, and His act put forth in creating the universe. One hundred and fifty is not so plain. I am aware of only two places it is used in the Word, and we are told that it means a total change, an ending of something and the beginning of something different. It is used here and in the story of the flood, at the end of Genesis 7 and in Genesis 8:3; "And the waters prevailed upon the earth an hundred and fifty days." "… And the waters returned from off the earth continually; and after the end of the one hundred and fifty days the waters were abated." The use here is that it means the end of the Church called "Adam" and the start of the church called "Noah" (See on this website "The Churches", and for the meaning, see Arcana Coelestia 812, 846). In the story we are considering it means the end of the Church called Israel and the start of the Christian church, though that is probably complete a day or two later when the Lord meets with all of His disciples on the mountain and sends them out to preach and heal.

This first part of this story ends with all of the seven disciples on the shore with Jesus, and His giving to them a breakfast of bread and roasted fish. With this giving, perhaps they all fully realized who He was, as with the two disciples at Emmaus. The Gospel comments, "This is now the third time that Jesus showed Himself to his disciples after that He was risen from the dead.

3147. 'And water to wash his feet' means purification there. This is clear from the meaning of 'water to wash' or 'washing with water' as purifying, dealt with below, and from the meaning of 'feet' as natural things, or what amounts to the same, those things that are in the natural man, dealt with in 2162. In the representative Church washing feet with water was a ceremonial act which meant washing away the filth of the natural man. The filth of the natural man is composed of all the things that belong to self-love and love of the world, and when such filth has been washed away goods and truths flow in, for that filth alone is what hinders the influx of good and truth from the Lord.

[2] For good is flowing in constantly from the Lord, but when by way of the internal or spiritual man it reaches the external or natural man it is either perverted there, or turned away, or stifled. But when indeed the things that belong to self-love and love of the world are removed, good is received there, and bears fruit there, since the person now performs the works of charity. This may become clear from many considerations, such as this: When the things that belong to the external or natural man are quiescent - as they are in times of ill-fortune, wretchedness, and sickness - a person instantly starts to become spiritually-minded and to will what is good, and also to perform acts of devotion insofar as he is able. But when that state alters, these things are altered too.

[3] In the Ancient Church 'washings' were signs meaning these things, and in the Jewish Church the same were representations. The reason why in the Ancient Church they were meaningful signs but in the Jewish Church representations was that members of the Ancient Church regarded that custom as some external act of worship. Nor did they believe that they were purified by that kind of washing but by a washing away of the filth of the natural man, which, as has been stated, is composed of the things that belong to self-love and love of the world. But the member of the Jewish Church did believe that he was purified by such washing, for he did not know, and did not wish to know, that the purifying of a person's interior self was meant.

[4] That 'washing' means the washing away of that filth is clear in Isaiah,

Wash yourselves; purify yourselves; remove the evil of your doings from before My eyes; cease to do evil. Isaiah 1:16.

Here it is evident that 'washing themselves' means purifying themselves and removing evils. In the same prophet,

When the Lord will have washed the excrement of the daughters of Zion and washed away the blood of Jerusalem from its midst in a spirit of judgement and in a spirit of purging. Isaiah 4:4.

Here 'washing the excrement of the daughters of Zion and washing away the blood of Jerusalem' stands for purifying from evils and falsities. In Jeremiah,

Wash your heart from wickedness, O Jerusalem, that you may be saved. How long will your iniquitous thoughts lodge within you? Jeremiah 4:14.

[5] In Ezekiel,

I washed you with water, and washed away the blood from upon you, and anointed you with oil. Ezekiel 16:9.

This refers to Jerusalem, which is used here to mean the Ancient Church. 'Washing with water' stands for purifying from falsities, 'washing away the blood' for purging from evils, 'anointing with oil' for filling with good at that time. In David,

Wash me from my iniquity, and cleanse me from my sin. You will purge me with hyssop and I shall be clean; You will wash me, and I shall be whiter than snow. Psalms 51:2, 7.

'Being washed' plainly stands for being purified from evils and derivative falsities.

[6] These were the things that were meant by 'washing' in the Representative Church. For the sake of the representation, when they had been made unclean and needed to be cleansed, people were commanded in that Church to wash the skin, hands, feet, and also their garments. All these meant things that belong to the natural man. Also for the sake of the representation, lavers made of bronze were placed outside the Temple - that is to say, 'the bronze sea and the ten bronze lavers' mentioned in 1 Kings 7:23-29; there was also the bronze laver from which Aaron and his sons were to wash themselves, placed between the Tent of Meeting and the Altar, and so outside the Tent of Meeting, Exodus 30:18-19, 21 - the meaning of which was that only external or natural things needed to be purified. And unless they have been purified, that is, unless things belonging to self-love and love of the world have been removed from them, internal things which belong to love to the Lord and towards the neighbour cannot possibly flow in, as stated above.

[7] To enable these matters to be understood more easily, that is to say, regarding the need for external things to be purified, let good works - or what amounts to the same, the goods of charity, which are at the present day called the fruits of faith, and which, since they are actions, are external - serve to exemplify and illustrate the point: Good works are bad works unless the things belonging to self-love and love of the world are removed. For until these have been removed works, when performed, are good to outward appearance but are inwardly bad. They are inwardly bad because they are done either for the sake of reputation, or for financial gain, or for improvement of one's position, or for reward. They are accordingly either merit-seeking or hypocritical, for the things that belong to self-love and love of the world cause those works to be such. But when indeed these evils are removed, works become good, and are the goods of charity. That is to say, they are done regardless of self, the world, reputation, or reward, and so are not merit-seeking or hypocritical, because in that case celestial love and spiritual love flow from the Lord into those works and cause them to be love and charity in action. And at the same time the Lord also purifies the natural or external man by means of those things and orders it so that that man receives correspondingly the celestial and spiritual things that flow in.

[8] This becomes quite clear from what the Lord taught when He washed the disciples' feet: In John,

He came to Simon Peter, who said to Him, Lord, do You wash my feet? Jesus answered and said to him, What I am doing you do not know now, but you will know afterwards. Peter said to Him, You will never wash my feet. Jesus answered him, If I do not wash you, you have no part with Me. Simon Peter said to Him, Lord, not my feet only, but also my hands and head! Jesus said to him, He who is washed has no need except that his feet be washed, but is clean all over. Now you are clean, but not all of you. John 13:4-17.

'He who is washed has no need except that his feet be washed' means that anyone who has been reformed needs to be cleansed only in regard to natural things, that is, to have evils and falsities removed from them. For when that happens all is ordered by the influx of spiritual things from the Lord. Furthermore 'feet-washing' was an act of charity, meaning that one ought not to dwell on the evils of another person. It was also an act of humility, meaning the cleansing of another from evils, like filth from the body, as also becomes clear from the Lord's words in verses 12-17 of that chapter in John, and also in Luke 7:37-38, 44, 46; John 11:2; 1 Samuel 25:41.

[9] Anyone may see that washing himself does not purify a person from evils and falsities, only from the filth that clings to him. Yet because it belonged among the religious observances commanded in the Church it follows that it embodies some special idea, namely spiritual washing, which is purification from the filth that clings to man inwardly. Members of that Church therefore who knew these things and thought of purification of the heart, that is, the removal of the evils of self-love and love of the world from the natural man, and tried to achieve it with utmost zeal, practiced ritual washing as an external act of worship, as commanded. But among those who did not know and did not wish to know those things but who supposed that the mere ritual act of washing garments, skin, hands, and feet would purify them, and who supposed that provided they performed such rituals they would be allowed to continue leading lives of avarice, hatred, revenge, mercilessness, and cruelty - all of which constitute spiritual filth - the performance of the ritual was idolatrous. Nevertheless by means of that ritual they were still able to represent, and by means of the representation to display, some vestige of a Church, by means of which heaven was in a way joined to mankind prior to the Lord's Coming. But that conjunction was such that heaven had little or no influence at all on the member of that Church.

[10] The Jews and Israelites were such that they did not think at all of the internal man, nor did they wish to know anything about the same. Thus they knew absolutely nothing about the celestial and spiritual things which belong to the life after death. Nevertheless to prevent the end of all communication with heaven and so with the Lord, they were bound to the performance of external observances by which internal things were meant. All their captivities and plagues were in general to the end that external observances might be duly carried out for the sake of the representation. It was for this reason that the following laws were given:

Moses was to wash Aaron and his sons with water at the tent door, to sanctify them. Exodus 29:4; 40:12; Leviticus 8:6.

Aaron and his sons were to wash their hands and feet before entering the Tent of Meeting and approaching the Altar to minister, lest they died. This was to them a statute for ever. Exodus 30:18-21; 40:30-31.

Before putting on his vestments Aaron was to wash his flesh. Leviticus 16:4, 24.

Levites were to be purified by sprinkling the water of expiation over them, passing a razor over their flesh, and washing their clothes - then they were pure. Numbers 8:6-7.

Anyone who ate the carcass of a clean animal, ¹ or that which had been torn to pieces, was to wash his clothes and bathe himself with water, and if he did not wash himself and bathe his flesh he would bear his iniquity. Leviticus 17:15-16.

Anyone who touched the bed of a person who had a discharge, or sat on a vessel on which that person had sat, and anyone who touched that person's flesh was to wash his clothes and to bathe himself with water, and be unclean until the evening. Leviticus 15:5-7, 10-12 and following verses.

The person who sent the goat away to Azazel was to wash his flesh. Leviticus 16:26.

When a leper was to be cleansed he was to wash his clothes, shave off all his hair, wash himself in water, and then he would be clean. Leviticus 14:8-9.

Even vessels themselves which had become unclean through contact with unclean persons were made to go through water and be unclean until the evening. Leviticus 11:32.

From all these laws it may be seen that nobody was made clean or pure internally through ritual washing, but that such a person merely represented him who was pure or spiritually clean, for the reason stated above. The Lord teaches the same quite explicitly in Matthew 15:1-20; Mark 7:1-23.

Notas de rodapé: