Casting Net To The Other Side

[Wm777]

Here’s a question I came up with a few days ago. The question will make sense, and it seems worthy of contemplation, but we will probably only be able to speculate on it at best.

Simply put - when Jesus told Peter to cast his net over the other side - how did he know that there would be fish on the other side?

The story is usually used nowadays as a way of telling a person to keep an open mind about trying new things, but - if it is taken literally - then there must have been some way Jesus knew ahead of time that there would be a catch of fish in the place where he told Peter to put his net out… and that that place was perhaps somewhere Peter hadn’t already tried…

The best I can guess is, it was revealed to Jesus by the father… I thought maybe he created the fish in the net before it was pulled up; or, more simply, maybe he had just been watching the successful bosts or heard some others talking about where the fish were, or maybe some sort of awareness of nature gave him an edge. But the size of the catch seemed too extraordinary for just another day out fishing.

The philosophy section seemed to be the right place for this, as opposed to Sacred Scripture or Moral Theology, since it is a speculative topic that could stem into ideas of how Christ knew things by revelation. Not sure we’ll get it, but - aside from calling it a miracle - do we have any theories that don’t sound like just another a fish story?

There was a point to it, so how do we “get there”? How do we follow Jesus in this sense?

 

[FrancisFan43]

Well Jesus Is God so if anything He just put all of those fish there. The whole point of him telling Peter to go to the other side is to test to see if Peter would be obedient. Because Peter was obedient he was rewarded with the multitude of fish. It’s pretty much just basic teachings of the ancient Israelites.

obey God, good things happen. Disobey God, bad things happen.

It’s also an allusion to Peter’s leadership and papacy. How Jesus will task him to fish for souls.

 

[Wm777]

As we philosophize over the matter, then, let’s wrestle with the angel a bit…

You’re saying something like Jesus created the fish when they cast off shore and reached a certain point… and that this was a sort reward Peter merited for being obedient…

Okay, that’s fine, and maybe it is so…

But in the old Franciscan legends. St Anthony gets frustrated one time trying to preach to the people, and he goes out and preaches to the fish… The fish are said to have gathered around the side of the lake where he was with their heads bobbing out of the water to attend to what he was saying…

In the case of Jesus and Peter, it seems equally possible the fish could have been created naturally, and then Jesus simply summoned them, like St Anthony did…

Why might that be important? Well, if you look at it in an a posteriori sense, would it be reasonable to say that Jesus would reward Peter for obedience? Obedience doesn’t seem to be the point to the narrative. The point to the narrative was to make Peter “a fisher of men”, or - in other words - a preacher of sorts, and so showing Peter how to summon the fish might be more attuned to the work of a “fisher of men”.

The gospels make it clear Jesus didn’t completely identify Peter as the rock upon which the church would be founded until about three years later (just prior to the crucifixion) when Peter called Christ the Messiah. Jesus seems to have known the Apostle who identified him as the Messiah would found the church, but earlier on in the relationship, Peter seems to have been identifiable as"Peter" and an apostle, but not necessarily the first Pope.

I don’t know of any right answer to this question. That’s why I posted it to philosophy. So I am not saying you are right or wrong. But I do think it is interesting to contemplate how Jesus knew things.

That said, I’m not sure if Jesus would have created a bunch of fish to reward Peter for obedience. Maybe. But doesn’t the idea of teaching him to preach by summoning fish seem equally plausible, especially in light of Peter’s future in being a fisher of men?

Are there other ways Jesus could have known?

 

[po18guy]

In order to cast the net out of the other side, Peter had to turn 180º. To turn is the definition of repentance. In that repentance, he became a fisher of men. Shortly thereafter, on the shore of Lake Tiberias, he affirmed his love of Christ X3. This is a fulfillment of Christ’s prophecy:

Luke 22:31-32
“Simon, Simon, pay attention! Satan has demanded to have you all, to sift you like wheat, but I have prayed for you, Simon, that your faith may not fail. When you have turned back, strengthen your brothers.”

 

[poche]

Jesus is God. He knows everything. Also he could create the fish out of nothing.

 

[Wm777]

Jesus is God. He knows everything. Also he could create the fish out of nothing.

But the question isn’t whether he knows things, but - “How does Jesus know things?”

You are right in saying he could create the fish out of nothing… God created the world from nothing…

My question here contemplates and philosophizes over the miracles of Jesus by asking how He did the things He did…

If a miracle is something that cannot be explained scientifically, then maybe that means it simply cannot be replicated again and again, as science would demonstrate something…

However, if faith goes beyond science, and it substantiates revelation… We have a potentially generative source of revelation in faith… So - even if a person is nothing - their prayerwork could conceivably generate something from their nothingness… In the case of Jesus and Peter, the “something” would be a catch of fish, but the catch would have occurred through a sense of shared “nothingness” in faith…

If such were the case, while no specifically predictable result were humanly possible on a scientific level, a sense of trust resulting from evangelization could still summon the fish…

Hmmm… To create something from nothing - perhaps it isn’t contrary to preaching to the fish and summon them to the net? Maybe then the question of where in time the fish found their beginning?

Were they born and swimming around before Peter and Jesus met? Or, when the net was cast into the water, did they suddenly materialize?

 

[Wm777]

Is the story then simple allegory?

 

[Wesrock]

poche:

Jesus is God. He knows everything. Also he could create the fish out of nothing.

But the question isn’t whether he knows things, but - “How does Jesus know things?”

Well, as the fish and the lake and everything else exist and continue to exist by his eternal action, and as he is fully aware of all actions he takes, he would always know where the fish are.

 

[Wm777]

Wm777:

poche:

Jesus is God. He knows everything. Also he could create the fish out of nothing.

But the question isn’t whether he knows things, but - “How does Jesus know things?”

Well, as the fish and the lake and everything else exist and continue to exist by his eternal action, and as he is fully aware of all actions he takes, he would always know where the fish are.

Are or were?

Chances are, they ate the fish…

But I see what you are saying, which is an interesting point of view… and probably the most accurate, “non-creationist” answer I’ve heard… It speaks to the omniscience of Christ…

In telling Peter to cast his net over the other side, Christ would have had an overarching knowledge of the fish, the lake, the boat and Peter himself…

What’s interesting about it, I think, is the eternal (i.e. non-turning) nature of Christ’s thinking, and yet (as po18guy said) the “turning” and conversion of Peter’s thinking as an individual human…

 

[Gorgias]

or, more simply, maybe he had just been watching the successful bosts or heard some others talking about where the fish were, or maybe some sort of awareness of nature gave him an edge.

These really don’t work too well, because they reduce the story to “Peter wasn’t a good fisherman.” After all, he had been at it over there all night, hadn’t he? Wouldn’t he have seen the ‘successful fishermen’? Wouldn’t he have have heard the talk as well? Wouldn’t he have an awareness of nature?

it is a speculative topic that could stem into ideas of how Christ knew things by revelation

Umm… Jesus is God. At this point in the Gospel (John 21), He has literally defeated death and is making appearances to His believers in His glorified body. Are we really going to ask the question “how could the resurrected God Man know where the fish would be?”…?

Chances are, they ate the fish…

Is the phrase “eating allegorical fish” akin to the phrase “I’m on a diet”?

 

[Beryllos]

Several posts speculate about Jesus’ knowledge, creation, or command of the fish. A slightly different view, which perhaps combines all three, is that Jesus is the Lord and Master of all creation. His word is not just a command. His word makes it so. His word is what is.

He woke up, rebuked the wind, and said to the sea, “Quiet! Be still!” The wind ceased and there was great calm.

He said to the paralytic, “I say to you, rise, pick up your mat, and go home." He rose, picked up his mat at once, and went away in the sight of everyone.

“This is my body.”

“Cast the net over the right side of the boat and you will find something.”

So I think there is something deep here. It is probably related to the idea that God did not only create, but also sustains all things at every moment of existence.

 

[po18guy]

Well, it was written, not in parable form, and many if not all of the 12 were alive when the Gospel was written by Saint Luke. AFAIK, no one ever challenged the authenticity or historicity of the event.

 

[PatK63]

The way to impress a fisherman was with a big catch. So Jesus worked a miracle! We don’t know how Jesus did any of His miracles! At the end Peter kneeled down and said “ my Lord and my God” left his boat and followed Jesus! It took a powerful miracle to do that! Jesus is God He knew what He was doing!

 

[poche]

Since Jesus is God, He knows everything and He can do anything.