John 6:1,2

“ After these things, Jesus withdrew to the other side of the Sea of Galilee, which is the Sea of Tiberias. 2. And a great multitude followed him, because they saw the miracles which he did on the sick. ”

If the facts related in chap. 5 really occurred at the feast of Purim, those which are reported in chap. 6 took place only a few weeks afterwards (John 6:4), and the indefinite connecting words μετὰ ταῦτα, after these things, are very suitable to this inconsiderable interval. Meyer, pressing the meaning of μετὰ ταῦτα, understands: “immediately after this sojourn in Judea.” The ἀπῆλθεν, went away, would thus signify that He returned from Jerusalem to the country east of the Jordan; and the multitude mentioned in John 6:2 would be that which accompanied Jesus on His return from Judea. But, observes Luthardt, John could not have expressed himself in this way: Jerusalem was not in direct relation to the eastern shore of the Sea of Galilee. And how could these multitudes have accompanied Jesus to a remote distance from Judea at the very time of the Passover which called them to go to Judea. It is obvious that John 6:2 is the description of a general situation, on the basis of which the following scene is separately sketched (precisely as John 2:23-25 in relation to John 3:1-21, or John 3:22-24 to John 3:25-36, or John 4:43-45 to John 4:46-54). This is John's manner of narrating. This character of general picturing appears in the imperfect ἠκολούθει, were following, ἑώρων, were seeing, ἐποίει, was doing, in contrast with the aorist ἀνῆλθε, went up (John 6:3), which ushers in the account of the particular events which the author has in view. John omits therefore the express mention of the return to Galilee which is self-evident from John 6:43-45, and he means to say that Jesus began anew the Galilean work related by the Synoptics, which was marked by daily miracles, and in the course of which He was constantly accompanied by considerable multitudes. It was consequently from some point on the western side of the Sea of Galilee that He thought fit to retire to the opposite side πέραν (beyond). Reuss, placing himself at the opposite extreme to Meyer, says, “All this shows us that we do not here have a strictly chronological narrative, as has been very gratuitously supposed.” The truth is that John, describing the historical development of Jewish unbelief, puts this scene in its true place, but without describing all the details of the events which preceded and followed.

John says nothing of the motives which led Jesus to this step, but the word ἀπῆλθεν went away, seems to indicate a seeking for solitude. And, indeed, according to Mark 6:30, and Luke 9:10, the apostles had just rejoined their Master, after having accomplished their first mission, and Jesus desired to give them some rest and to pass a short time alone with them. Moreover, according to Matthew 14:13, He had just heard of the murder of John the Baptist, and, under the shock of this news, which gave Him a presentiment of the nearness of His own end, He needed to collect His thoughts and to prepare His disciples for that other catastrophe. Thus our four naratives easily harmonize. Luke names Bethsaida as the place near which the multiplication of the loaves occurred. It has been claimed that he understood thereby Bethsaida in the neighborhood of Capernaum, and, consequently, that this event occurred, according to him, on the west shore. But Luke would, thus, put himself in contradiction, not only with the other evangelists, but with himself; for he says that Jesus withdrew with His disciples into a desert place belonging to a city called Bethsaida. Now this purpose of Jesus does not allow us to think of the city of Bethsaida, on the western shore, where He was in the centre of His activity and was always surrounded by crowds. Josephus (Antiqq. 18:2.1 and 4.6) speaks of a city which had the name Bethsaida Julias, situated at the northeastern extremity of the sea of Tiberias; and the expression Bethsaida of Galilee, by which John 12:21 designates the native city of Peter, Andrew and Philip (John 1:45), has no significance unless there really existed a Bethsaida outside of Galilee. It is this one of which Luke means to speak. Bethsaida Julias was in Gaulonitis, in the tetrarchy of Philip, on the left bank of the Jordan, a little way above the place where it falls into the lake of Gennesaret. It was there that Philip died and was magnificently interred. (Furrer, Schenkel's Bibellex., I., p. 429.) If John had written in Galilee, and for Palestinian readers, he would have contented himself with the ordinary expression: sea of Galilee. But as he was writing outside of Palestine, and for Greeks, he adds the explanation: of Tiberias. The city of Tiberias, built by Herod Antipas, and thus named in honor of Tiberius, was well known in foreign countries. Thus the Greek geographer, Pausanias, calls the sea of Galilee.: λίμνη Τιβερίς. Josephus uses indiscriminately the two designations here united by John. The imperfect ἑώρων, they were seeing, depicts the joy which this ever-renewed spectacle afforded them. The reading of the T. R. ἑώρων is supported by the Sinaitic MS. and even by the barbarism, ἐθεώρων, of the Alexandrian. Weiss observes that if the mission of the Twelve took place during the journey of Jesus to the feast of Purim (chap. 5), as Gess has supposed, the narrative of John accords very well with that of Mark, who places the multiplication of the loaves immediately after the return of the Twelve.