XXVII. “RABBI, WHEN CAMEST THOU HITHER?”

John 6:16.—“And when even was now come, his disciples went down into the sea, and entered into a ship, and went over the sea toward Capernaum. And it was now dark, and Jesus was not come to them. And the sea arose by reason of a great wind that blew. So when they had rowed about five-and-twenty or thirty furlongs, they see Jesus walking on the sea, and drawing nigh unto the ship: and they were afraid. But he saith unto them, It is I; be not afraid. Then they willingly received him into the ship: and immediately the ship was at the land whither they went. The day following, when the people which stood on the other side of the sea saw that there was none other boat there, save that one whereinto his disciples were entered, and that Jesus went not with his disciples into the boat, but that his disciples were gone away alone; (howbeit there came other boats from Tiberias nigh unto the place where they did eat bread, after that the Lord had given thanks:) when the people therefore saw that Jesus was not there, neither his disciples, they also took shipping, and came to Capernaum, seeking for Jesus. And when they had found him on the other side of the sea, they said unto him, Rabbi, when camest thou hither?”

Matth. 14:22.—“And straightway Jesus constrained his disciples to get into a ship, and to go before him unto the other side, while he sent the multitudes away. And when he had sent the multitudes away, he went up into a mountain apart to pray: and when the evening was come, he was there alone. But the ship was now in the midst of the sea, tossed with waves: for the wind was contrary.”

It appears from St. John, that the people thought that Jesus was still on the side of the lake where the miracle had been wrought. And this they inferred because there was no other boat on the preceding evening, except that in which the disciples had gone over to Capernaum on the other side, and they had observed that Jesus went not with them. It is added, however, that, “there came other boats from Tiberias” (which was on the same side as Capernaum), nigh unto the place where the Lord had given thanks. Now why might they not have supposed that Jesus had availed himself of one of these return-boats, and so made his escape in the night? St. John gives no reason why they did not make this obvious inference. Let us turn to St. Matthew’s account of the same transaction (which I have placed at the head of this paragraph), and we speedily learn why they could not. In this account we find it recorded, not simply that the disciples were in distress in consequence of the sea arising “by reason of a great wind that blew,” but it is further stated, that “the wind was contrary,” i.e., the wind was blowing from Capernaum and Tiberias, and therefore not only might the ships readily come from Tiberias (the incident mentioned by St. John), a course for which the wind (though violent) was fair, but the multitude might well conclude that with such a wind Jesus could not have used one of those return-boats, and therefore must still be amongst them.

Indeed, nothing can be more probable than that these ships from Tiberias were fishing vessels, which, having been overtaken by the storm, suffered themselves to be driven before the gale, to the opposite coast, where they might find shelter for the night; for what could such a number of boats, as sufficed to convey the people across (v. 24), have been doing at this desert place, neither port, nor town, nor market? so that here again is another instance of undesigned consistency in the narrative; the very fact of a number of boats resorting to this “desert place,” at the close of day, strongly indicating (though most incidentally) that the sea actually was rising (as St. John asserts), “by reason of a great wind that blew.”

I further think this to be the correct view of a passage of some intricacy, from considering, first, the question which the people put to Jesus on finding him at Capernaum the next day. Full as they must have been of the miracle which they had lately witnessed, and anxious to see the repetition of works so wonderful, their first inquiry is, “Rabbi, when camest thou hither?” surely an inquiry not of mere form, but manifestly implying that, under the circumstances, it could only have been by some extraordinary means that he had passed across; and, second, from observing the satisfactory explanation it affords of the parenthesis of St. John, “howbeit there came other boats from Tiberias,” … which no longer seems a piece of purely gratuitous and irrelevant information, but turns out to be equivalent with the expression in St. Matthew, that the “wind was contrary;” though the point is not directly asserted, but only a fact is mentioned from which such an assertion naturally follows.

It might indeed be said, that the circumstance of the ships coming from Tiberias was mentioned for the purpose of explaining how the people could take shipping (as they are stated to have done to go to Capernaum), when it had been before affirmed that there was no other boat there save that into which the disciples were entered. Such caution, however, I do not think at all agreeable to the spirit of the writings of the Evangelists, who are always very careless about consequences, not troubling themselves to obviate or explain the difficulties of their narrative. But, whatever may be judged of this matter, the main argument remains the same; and a minute coincidence between St. John and St. Matthew is made out, of such a nature as precludes all suspicion of collusion, and shows consistency in the two histories without the smallest design.

And here again I will repeat the observation which I have already had occasion more than once to make—that the truth of the general narrative in some degree involves the truth of a miracle. For if we are satisfied by the undesigned coincidence that St. Matthew was certainly speaking truth when he said, the wind was “boisterous,” how shall we presume to assert, that he speaks truth no longer, when he tells us in the same breath that Jesus “walked on the sea,” in the midst of that very storm, and that when “he came into the ship the wind ceased?”

Doubtless, the one fact does not absolutely prove the others; but in all ordinary cases, where one or two particulars in a body of evidence are so corroborated as to be placed above suspicion, the rest, though not admitting of the like corroboration, are nevertheless received without dispute.