§ I. The first miraculous draught of fishes. Luke v. 1-11. (Cf. Matt. iv. 18-22; Mark i. 16-20.)

(a) The particulars mentioned by Luke are these. As Jesus was standing by the lake Gennesaret, and a great crowd pressed near him to hear the Word of God, he saw two boats by the lake, the fishers having left them to wash their nets. Entering one of these boats, which belonged to Simon, and asking him to push off a little from the land, he taught the crowds on shore from the boat in which he was seated. Having finished his discourse, he said to Simon: "Push thou out into the deep, and let ye down your nets for a draught." Simon replied: "Master, toiling through the whole night we caught nothing, yet at thy word I will let down the net." This done they enclosed a great multitude of fishes, so that their net was breaking, and they beckoned to their partners in the other ship to come and help them. They came, and the two boats were so filled as to be sinking. Then Simon fell at the feet of Jesus, and said: "Depart from me, for I am a sinful man, O Lord;" for sudden awe seized him and

those with him, as well as James and John, his partners in the other boat. But Jesus replied: "Fear not; henceforth thou shalt catch men." And bringing their boat to the land, the men left all and followed him.

The fishers' work, as it appears in this miracle, is a type of the ministry to which Peter and his associates were called. However slight the prospect of success in any circumstances, they were to cast in the gospel net where the Lord directed, the result of their effort depending on his invisible cooperation. The lesson of the miracle was therefore both humbling and encouraging. If human toil and skill are insufficient to bring a soul out of the depths of sin, the blessed Saviour does yet permit faithful men to have part with him in this sacred work. Without him, they can do nothing; aided by his unseen presence and power, they can do all things. In a very early hymn, ascribed to Clement of Alexandria, Jesus himself is thus addressed:

"Fisher of men, the heirs of salvation,

Catching with sweet life, from the hostile deep,
The sacred fishes in a sea of evil,"

and the miracle under examination justifies in a very important sense this language.

(b) According to Paulus, there is no reason whatever for supposing a miracle in the present case. Jesus promised no success to Peter; he merely advised him to try again; Peter did so, and fortunately made a great haul.1

If Christ, as we admit, did not in so many words promise success, his language was understood to foreshadow this (v. 5); and from the result Simon appears to have inferred, without rebuke, the divine knowledge or power of Christ (v. 8). Hence it is impossible to vindicate the moral purity of Jesus, and yet deny a miracle of knowledge or of control in this instance. To us the latter seems far more probable than the former; and we therefore therefore adopt the language of Trench: "It was not merely that Christ, by his omniscience, knew that now there were fishes in that spot; we may not thus extenuate the miracle; but rather we are to contemplate him as the Lord of nature, who by the secret yet mighty magic of his will, was able to wield and guide even the unconscious creatures to his aims."

But we cannot approve the subsequent remarks of this writer, identifying the power which drew the fish to that spot with that 1 Commentar über das N. T., I. p. 442, sq.

which at all times guides their periodic migrations. The event before us was extraordinary, and it revealed in Christ a sovereign control over the brute creation.

(c) Strauss objects to the historical truth of Luke's narrative on the following grounds. (1.) "Any spiritual action of Jesus on troops of fishes in the depth of the sea, bringing them to the place where Peter cast in his net, is inconceivable; for there is no point of connection between a rational spirit and irrational creatures."1 Indeed! Are we then to believe that God as a spirit can do nothing beyond the limits of our psychological knowledge? Or are we to admit beforehand that no testimony can be true which implies the deity of Christ? (2.) "Jesus could not have known the presence of such a troop of fishes at the place where Peter cast in the net; a miracle of knowledge is incredible; for if he was omniscient he was not a true man,' "1 etc. This again will have no weight with those who believe in the real though incomprehensible union of Deity and humanity in Christ. (3.) "No good reason for a miracle in the present case appears. The disciples did not need one to strengthen their 1 Leben Jesu, Vol. I. p. 598, sq.

faith; indeed such a work is not adapted to produce genuine faith." If we have stated the lesson of the miracle correctly, it taught a great truth, and was fitted to be permanently useful to the disciples. Besides, it may have been just the manifestation of love and power needed by them at that time, and preparing them to hear the call of Jesus. (4.) "Luke's account is inconsistent with that of John referring to the same event."1 When the next miracle is examined, the weakness of this reason will appear.

(d) The call of four apostles, as related by Matt. iv. 18-22, and Mark i. 16-20, is thought by most expositors to have been connected with this miraculous draught of fishes. This is the opinion of Calvin, Meyer, DeWette, Hase, Bleek, Ebrard, Trench, Ellicott, Blunt, Kitto, Robinson, and others. We perceive no insuperable objection to it. According to the several accounts, the place the same, the persons called the same, the form of the call the same, the things forsaken the same, and the promptness of obeying the same. Moreover, if these accounts are referred to synchronous transactions, we escape the

may have been

1 Leben Jesu, Vol. I. p. 598, sq.