John 6:21

they willingly received him Rather, they were willing to receive Him. The mistranslation seems to have arisen from a wish to make this account agree with that of S. Matthew and S. Mark, who say that he entered the boat. It is probably due to Beza, who for the Vulgate's voluerunt reciperesubstitutes volente animo receperunt. S. John leaves us in doubt whether He entered the boat or not; he is not correcting the other two accounts: this would require -but before He could enter it the boat was at the land."

immediately We are probably to understand that this was miraculous; not a mere favourable breeze which brought them to land before they had recovered from their surprise: but the point is uncertain and unimportant.

whither they went Better, whither they were going, or intending to go. The imperfect tense helps to bring out the contrast between the difficulty of the first half of the voyage, when they were alone, and the ease of the last half, when He was with them. The word for -going" implies departure, and looks back to the place left.

The Walking on the Sea cannot be used as evidence that the writer held Docetic views about Christ, i.e. believed that His Body was a mere phantom. A Docetist would have made more of the incident, and would hardly have omitted the cry of the disciples -It is a spirit" (Matthew 14:26; comp. Mark 6:49). Docetism is absolutely excluded from this Gospel by John 1:14, and by the general tone of it throughout. Comp. John 19:34-35; John 20:20; John 20:27.