I N D E X
12
`That the world may believe' (pisteuo) (17:21)
EIGHTH SIGN
DRAUGHT OF FISHES (21:1-14)
The Companion Bible, on page 194 of the Appendix, sets out in full detail the internal correspondence of these
eight signs, we give here a shortened version of the first and the last sign.
1. The background of the first sign is Nathanael's diffidence and confession. The background of the eighth sign is
Thomas's doubt and faith. Both confessions have a bearing upon John 20:30,31.
2. The place in each case is Galilee, which is called in Matthew's Gospel `Galilee of the Gentiles'.
3. In both signs there is a want that is miraculously supplied, either wine or a meal.
4. In both cases either the Lord or His disciples, or the disciples themselves are `invited guests'.
Now whoever else may have forgotten the parable of the Marriage of the King's Son, Peter and John would have
it in mind, for the promised Comforter was to bring all things to remembrance, whatsoever the Lord had said unto
them (John 14:26). When, after the eighth sign was finished, the Lord gave Peter his commission `Feed My Sheep'
he, remembering the parable of Matthew 22, would think, `Here is the fulfilment of the second invitation', but who
is the minister of the call that follows the second refusal of `them that were bidden'? His glance fell on John, could
it be he? So Peter said `Lord, and what shall this man do?' (John 21:21).
Now, in Acts 1:6,7 we have another question put, and another similar evasive answer. Had the question in Acts
1:6 been `Will Israel ever be restored?' the answer would have been `Most surely' but the question was `Wilt Thou
AT THIS TIME restore?' and if the Lord had answered `No, for they will refuse the invitation a second time', it would
have made their testimony and suffering foolish and unnecessary. So, although the Lord knew that after the Acts of
the Apostles had run its course, and the city and temple had been destroyed, John would enter into the ministry into
the highways, it could not be revealed to Peter at that moment. Peter's sheep were not Gentiles. He ministered to
the same people that had refused the first invitation. But John was to minister to `other sheep' which were `not of
this fold'.
The word of the Lord `If I will that he tarry till I come, what is that to thee? Follow thou Me' started a rumour
that John would not die, but at the same time it tied up with a fact that John did outlive all the other apostles and
lived to an advanced age. If we are faithful, and abide by the actual teaching found in John's Gospel, we shall be
obliged to believe that in that message the Messiah of Israel was seen to be `the Saviour of the world' (John 4:42).
JOHN THE DOOR.
The writer of this booklet, who is accused of ultra-dispensationalism and assuming that John's Gospel does not
teach the truth of the Mystery, was brought to a saving knowledge of the Son of God upon hearing the words of John
3:36 faithfully preached.
`He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life'.
As time went on he became aware of the great central teaching of Romans 5 to 8, and became in some degree
conformable to that mould of doctrine into which he had been delivered (Rom. 6:7 margin). As further time went on
the distinctive teaching of Ephesians laid hold of heart and mind and he became consciously and experimentally a
member of the body of Christ. This position he did not learn from John or from Romans, but these Scriptures were
nevertheless Divinely appointed steps that led to the realisation of his calling. Inasmuch as membership of the One
Body is a matter of the Father's choice made `before the foundation of the world' he was a member of the One Body
even while unrepentant and in total ignorance - but God alone knew that. Only as faith was manifest and knowledge
was attained could he or those about him be assured of that position. He had heard `earthly things' but had not
stayed there; John's Gospel proved a door through which by grace he passed on to appreciate the `heavenly things' of
Ephesians.
We shall serve no good purpose in continuing this defence, and we refrain from any attempt to analyse our
critic's reason for taking the stand that he has done. We can only hope that the perusal of some of the evidences here
brought forward, may lead others too to see their title deeds to a calling that is indeed `Far above all'.