Fish
fish
An ancient Christian symbol of Our Saviour. In art it often resembles a dolphin. The Greek word for fish is ichthus, spelt in Greek with five letters only: I-CH-TH-U-S. These form what is called an acrostic, being the initial letters of Iesous CHristos, THeou Uios, Soter (Jesus Christ, Son of God, Saviour). The fish is also a symbol of Christians in general, typified by the miraculous draught of fishes mentioned in Saint John’s Gospel, 9, and is thus emblematic of the vocation of the Apostles , the “fishers of men.” It is also one of the symbols for
Saint Andrew the Apostle because of his profession
Saint Francis of Assisi
Saint Simon the Apostle
New Catholic Dictionary
Fuente: New Catholic Dictionary
Fish
Fish. According to one authority, 45 species of fish are found in the inland waters of Palestine. Many more live in the Mediterranean Sea. But the Bible gives no details on any specific species of fish.
Fish, just like other animals, were divided into clean and unclean categories. Fish with fins and scales were considered clean, and they made a popular Sabbath meal. Unclean fish included catfish, eels, and probably sharks and lampreys, as well as shellfish. The Hebrews also considered whales and porpoises as fish, since they lived in the sea.
Fishing was a major industry among the Jewish people. Jerusalem had a Fish Gate, and presumably a fish market. Fish were caught with nets (Hab 1:15), hooks (Isa 19:8; Mat 17:27), and harpoons and spears (Job 41:7). The catch was preserved by salting and drying or storing in salt water.
The Bible contains many references to fish and fishing. (Hab 1:14-17) compares captive Israel to helpless fish gathered into a dragnet by her enemies. Jesus, on the other hand, called his disciples to become “fishers of men” (Mat 4:19; Mar 1:17). Since the time of the early church, the fish has been a symbol of Christianity. The Greek word for fish– ichthus– is an acrostic for “Jesus Christ, Son of God, Savior.”
Fuente: Plants Animals Of Bible
Fish
(, dag, so called from its great fecundity; Gr. , Gen 9:2; Num 11:22; Jon 2:1; Jon 2:10; Mat 7:10; Mat 14:17; Mat 15:34; Luk 5:6; Joh 21:6; Joh 21:8; Joh 21:11). The Hebrews recognised fish as one of the great divisions of the animal kingdom, and, as such, give them a place in the account of the creation (Genesis i,-21, 28; ‘where, however, they are included under the general terms , she’rets, swarm, and , romneseth, creeping thing, i.e. destitute of legs; and as distinguished from the larger inhabitants of the deep, , tanninim’), as well as in other passages where an exhaustive description of living creatures is intended (Gen 9:2; Exo 20:4; Deu 4:18; 1Ki 4:33). They do not, however, appear to have acquired any intimate knowledge of this branch’ of natural history. Although they were acquainted with some of the names given by the Egyptians to the different species. (for Josephus, War, iii, 10, 8, compares one found, in the Sea of Galilee to the coracinus), they did not adopt a similar method of distinguishing them ; nor was any classification attempted beyond the broad divisions of clean and unclean,. great and small. The former was established by the Mosaic law (Lev 11:9-10), which pronounced unclean such fish as were devoid of fins and scales: these were and are regarded as unwholesome food in Egypt (Wilkinson, Anc. Egypt. iii, 58, 59), so much so that one of the laws of El-Hakim prohibited the sale, or even the capture of them (Lane, Modern Egyptians, i, 136, note; De Sacy, Chrestomathie Arabe, 2d ed. i, 98). This distinction is probably referred to in the terms (esui nona ido.nea, Schleusner’s Lex. s.v.; Trench, On Parables, p. 137) and (Mat 13:48). This law of Moses may have given rise to some casuistry, as many fishes have scales, which, though imperceptible when first caught, are very apparent after the skin is in the least dried. Maimonides, with less reason, sees in the Levitical distinctions of fins and scales among fishes “marks whereby the more noble and excellent species might be distinguished from those that were inferior” (Townley’s sTore Noevochi.in, p. 305). In no ordinance of the laws of Moses do we find fishes prescribed as religious offerings. In this respect, as well as many others, these laws were opposed to the heathen rituals, which appointed fish-offerings to various’ deities. Besides the lepidotus, the oxyrhincus, the phagrus (eel, “fron its unwholesome qualities not eaten by the ancient Egyptians,” Wilkinson, v, 251), latus, and nceotes were held sacred in various parts of ancient Egypt (Clem. Alex., Plutarch, Strabo, Athenaeus, are the authorities referred to by Sir G.Wilkinson, v, 125). In the Ordinances of Menu, ch. v (on Diet, Purification, etc.), sees. 15, 16, “the twice-born man is commanded diligently ‘to abstain from fish; yet the two fishes called pathina (sheat- fish, Silurus pelorius) and rohila (rohi-fish, Cyprinus denwiculatus) imay be eaten by the guests, when offered at a repast. in honor of the gods or manes; and so may the rajiva (a large fish, Cyprinus Niloticus), the sinhatunzda, and the sasalca (probably shrimps and prawns) of every species” (Sir W. Jones’s Laws of JlMenit, by Haughton, p. 146). Similarly in the heathen observances of other nations’; thus Apua [queryj Anchovy] Veneri erat sacra.; Concha [perhaps ‘Pearl’ oyster] Veneri stat; Mullus Diane ; pisces omnes Neptuno; Thunnus Neptunio.” (Beyer, Addit. ad Seldeni Syntag. de Diis Syriis; Ugolini Thesaur. 33:338. ‘Vossius, in Hoffmanni Lexicon, iii, 771, has a much longer list of fourteen fishes, “a veteribus pro Diis habiti.” Consecrated fishes were kept in reservoirs, with-rings of gold, or silver, or brass attached to them. So Sir J.Chardin in Harmer, iii, 58.) It was perhaps as an image of fecundity that the fish was selected as an object of idolatry: the-worship of it was widely spread, from Egypt (Wilkinson, iii, 58) to Assyria (Layard, Nineveh, ii, 467), and even India (Baur, Mythologie, ii, 58). -Among the Philistines, Dagon (=littlefish) was represented by a figure half man and half fish (1Sa 5:4). On this account the worship of fish is expressly prohibited (Deu 4:18). SEE DAGON. The form of a fish (Notius Poseidon) was, from remote ages, a type of protective dominion, which the symbolizing spirit of the ancients caused to pass into Christianity, as appears from Eusebius (Life of Constantine) and St. Augustine (De Civitate Dei). On the walls of the oldest catacombs of Rome the representation of the is frequently discernible, and always interpreted as an emblem of the Saviour.
Taking fishes in the scientific sense of “oviparous, vertebrated, cold- blooded animals, breathing water by means of gills or branchice, and generally provided with fins,” none are mentioned by name throughout the 0. T. and N.T.; but, regarded in the popular and inexact sense of aquatic animals, inhabitants more or less of the water, we meet with eleven instances which require some notice here. –
1. That well-known batrachian reptile, the ‘frog (, tseparde’i), which emerges from a fish-like infancy, breathing by gills instead of lungs, and respiring water instead of air, is often mentioned in Exodus 8 but only in two passages else, Psa 78:45; Psa 105:30. SEE FROG.
2. The annelid horse-leech, whose name occurs only once, Pro 30:15 (, alukah’). “It would appear that the blood-sucking quality of this useful little animal is a direct and exclusive ordination of Providence for man’s advantage. That blood is not the natural food of the animal is probable from the fact that, in the streams and pools which they inhabit, not one in a hundred could, in the common course of things, ever indulge such an appetite; and even when received into the stomach, it does not appear to be digested; for, though it will remain there for weeks without coagulating or becoming putrid, yet the animal usually dies unless the blood be vomited through the mouth” (Gosse’s Zoology, ii, 374). Of course it is the smaller species, the Hirudo medicinalis, that is here referred to. But the larger species, the Hcemopsis satuigsugiqa, or “horse-leech,” has a still greater voracity for blood. Bochart (Sieqroz. ii,.. 796-802) and Schultens (Proverbs in loc.) give another turn to Pro 30:15, by identifying with the Arabic aluk, and maldngfte or destiny, instead of the horse-leech, the insatiable exacter. The ancient versions, however, must be deemed to outweigh their learned speculations; added to which the Arabic alakat, the Syriac aluka, and the Chaldee and Talmudic: or , -all designate the leech, which is as abundant in the East as it ever was in our Western countries. The blood-appetite of this animal made it suitable to point a proverb: Horace says, Non missura cutecm, nisi plena cruoris, hirudo (De Arte Poet. 476). With this comp. Plautus, Epidicus, ii, 2, 4, 5; and Cicero, ad Atticum, lib. i, epist. 13. SEE HORSELEECH.
3. The testaceous mollusk (Ostrea marina, Gesenius, Thes. p. 1263), called by the Hebrews , argamann’; by Avicenna, Alargiawan; by Galen, , is the Murex trunculus of, zoology, ‘from which the renowned Tyrian dye used to be obtained. This shell-fish (and not the “purple” extracted from it) is with good reason supposed by Gesenius to be referred to in Son 7:5 : The tresses of thine head are like the wreathed shell of the purple-fish ; reminding us of the ancient head-dresses of the Athenians, described by Thucydides, i, 6, 3 (comp. the conical head-tuft of the Roman Tutulus [Varro, De .ing. latin. 7:3, 90], and Virgil’s Crines nodantur in aurum). A second reference to this shell-fish probably occurs in Eze 27:7.. The Tyrians seem to have imported some ,murices from the Peloponnesus (the same as “Elishah” according to Heeren, Researches, Asiatic Nations [Oxford. trans.], i, 361); and Gesenius supposes that these,, the material’ out of which the celebrated dye was procured, arc referred to by the prophet in his enumeration of the Tyrian merchandise.’ That these fishes were supplied from the coast of Greece we learn from Horace, Od. ii’ 18, 7 (Laconics puspurce) from Pausanias, iii, 21, 6; and from Pliny, ix,.36. SEE PURPLE.
4. The other word used by Ezekiel in this passage, , teke’leth, in described by Gesenius, Thes. 1503, as ”a species of shellfish (Conchylium, Helix ianthinae [conches-]), found’ cleaving to the rocks in the “Mediterranean Sea, covered with a violet shell (Forskal, Descript. animal. p. 127), from which was procured a dark-blue dye.” In the many other passages where these two words occur, they undoubtedly designate either the colors or the material dyed in them. The phrase “treasures hid in the sand” (Deu 32:19) is supposed to refer to the abundance of the rich dyes afforded by the and other testaceous animals found in the sand, on the Phoenician coast, assigned to. Zebulon and Issachar (Targum of Jonathan b. Uziel, Walton, 4:387, and Gesenius, Thes. p. 1503). SEE BLUE.
5. The -tannin (plur. or ) must be carefully distinguished from tannin’, the plural of thee-unused word , a jackel, according to Gesenius, Thesaur. p. 1138. “The seamonsters,” which are described by Jeremiah (Lament. 4:3). as “suckling their young,” used to he regarded as the mammiferous whales or other large cetacea (Calbnet by Taylor, ” Fragments” on Natural History, No. 26). ‘ They are by Gesenius(1. c.) supposed to be rather , jackals; this is the reading of some of the MSS. (Kaennicott, ii, 546), sand Gesenius accepts the Masoretic text as an Aramaic form of it. In Eze 29:3; Eze 32:2, the textual reading , which is represented usually as an anomalous singular noun, should -no doubt be the regular singular, which may well bear (what the other word could not) the ‘suitable’ sense of crocodile; thee MS. authority in favor of the latter word is overwhelming (Kennicott ii, 212). For a description of the , SEE WHALE.
6. , Behemoth’ (q.v.).
7. Leviathan. SEE CROCODILE.
8. “The great. fish,” of Jon 1:17 ( in 2:1), was probably some species of shark, such as the Zygaene malleus, or the Carcharias vulgaris (the white shark), therefore -strictly a fish. Of the same kind of huge fish, , does Amos speak is prophecy, Amo 9:3, “I will command the serpent from a the bottom of the sea, and he shall bite them” (Bochart, Hieroz. i, c. 40, 1. 40). The difficulty that in the Sept. of Jonah, and in the Greek Testament (Mat 12:40), is the word by which the fish is designated, is removed by the fact, that, this Greek term does not specifically indicate whales only as the objection supposes, but any of the larger inhabitants of the deep. (Wesseling’s Herodot. Fragm. de Incrementos Nili, p. 789, as quoted in Valpy’s Stephani Thes. s.v. ; here “Pisces,” as well as “be/s-ceu ‘qcehi bet ingenae-s, veluti crocodilus et hippopotamus.” are included.) Accordingly stands in the Sept., passim, for , ‘as well as for (see Schleusner, Lex. V. T. s.v. ). Admiral Smyth, in the chapter on Ichthyology, in his Mediterranean, p. 196, says the white shark has been called “‘Jonce piscis’ from its transcendent claim “to have been the great fish that swallowed the prophet, since lie can readily engulf a man whole.” For more on the subject of this fish, see Kitto, Bibl. Illustr. 6:399-404, and SEE JONAH.
9. Of Tobit’s fish,. O.T. Fritzsche, in his commentary on the passage (Tobit 6 :passim) enumerates nine or ten speculations by different writers. According to Bochart and Helvigius, the Silurus has the best claim. This the former describes as “being very large, of great strength and boldness, and ever ready to attack other animals, even men, an inhabitant of the rivers Euphrates and Tigris.” C. H. Smith, in the first edition of Kitto’s Cyclopedia. combats Bochart’s conclusions, and suggests the Sicsar of the Indus, a, crocodile, probably of the genus Gavial, which grows to a great size, is, eaten, and has a gall bladder, still used to cure obstinate wounds and defluctions Glaire suggests the sturgeon, but this is more suitable to Northern rivers. Pennant mentions. the capture of one in the Esk weighing 464: pounds (British Zoology, iii, 127). See more in Bochart, Hieroz. v, 14; Glaire,’ Introduction de lAncien. et du N.T. ii, 91 [ed. 3], Paris, 1862, and TOBIT.
10. If Dr. French and Mr. Skinner, in their Translation of the Psalms, are right in rendering Psa 104:26, “There swimmeth the nautilus and the whale” etc. (as if the sacred writer meant to indicate, a small, though conspicuous, as well as a large aquatic animal, as. equally the object of God’s care), we have, in the , aniyoth’, A. V. ‘s-ships, “an unexpected addition to our Scripture nomenclature of fishes, in what lord Byron calls
“The tender Nautiltis who steels his prow, The sea-born sailor of his shell canoe, The ocean Mab, the fairy of the sea.–The Island,
In their note the translators say, “The Nautilus. This little creature floats at pleasure upon the surface of the sea. Its shell resembles the hull of a ship, whence it has its name.” Mr. Thrupp accepts the new rendering as having much apparent probability” (Introduction to the Psalms the Psalms, ii, 178).’ Another recent expositor of the Psalms, J. Olshausen (Exeg. Handb. p. 402), remarks that “the introduction of ships amongst the living creatures of the sea has always presented an ‘obstacle’ to the understanding of the sentence. The paper nautilus (Argonauta) frequents the Mediterranean. The verb , proceed, walk, very well describes the stately progress of the nautilus as it floats upon the wave. We may add that it gives greater fitness to the 27th verse, which at present is hardly compatible with the 25th and 26th, owing, to the intrusion of the clause, there go the ships. Replace this by the nastilus, and the coherence of the 27th verse with the two preceding is complete in all its terms.
11. Our last specific fish is rather suggested than named in Eze 29:4, where the prophet twice mentions “the fish of the rivers which cleave to the scales” [of the crocodile]. This description seems to identify this fish with the Echeveis remora, so remarkable for the adhesive or sucking disc which covers the upper part of the head, and enables it to adhere to the body of another fish or to the bottom of a vessel. (Its fabulous powers of being able even to arrest a vessel in her course are recorded by Pliny, Hist. Nat. 32:1; it is mentioned by Aristotle, Hist. Assinm. ii, 14, . It is also mentioned by Fonakal as seen at Gidda, and by Hassebquist at Alexandria). The lump-sucker (Cyclopterus lumpus) is furnished with ventral fins which unite beneath the body and form a concave disc, by which the fish can with ease adhere to stones or other bodies. Either in the remora, with its adhesive apparatus above, or in the lump-sucker with-a similar appendage below, or in both, we have in all probability the prophet’s fishes which cleave to the monster of the Nile. The species of fishes known to the Hebrews, or at least to those who dwelt on the coast, were probably very numerous, because the usual current of the Mediterranean sets in, with a great depth of water, at the Straits. of Gibraltar, and passes eastward on the African side until the shoals of the delta of the -Nile begin to turn it towards the north; it continues in that direction belong the Syrian shores, and falls into a broken course, only when turning westward on the Cyprian and Cretan coasts. Every spring, with the sun’s return towards the north, innumerable, troops of littoral species, having passed the winter in the offings of Western Africa, return northward for spawning, or are impelled in that direction by other unknown laws. A small part only ascend along the Atlantic coast of Spain and Portugal towards the British Channel, while the main bodies pass into the Mediterranean, follow the general current, and do not break into more scattered families until they heave swept round the shores of Palestine. Lists of species of the fish frequenting various parts of the Mediterranean may be found in Risso (Ich/ thyol. de Nice), who describes 315 species he had observed at Nice; and in Adm. Smytth’s Mediterranean, where in the chapter on Ichthyology hue gives a list of about 300 fishes haunting the waters of Sicily, besides 240 crustacea, testacea, and mollusks. Admiral Smyth remarks generally of the Mediterranean fish, that, “though mostly handsomer than British fishes, they are, for the most part, not to be compared with them in flavor” (p. 192-209). Professor E. Forbes (in his Report on Lgean Inveslebrala) divides that part of the East Mediterranean, in which for many years he conducted his inquiries, into eight regions of depth, each characterized by its peculiar fauna. “Certain species,” he says, “in each are found in no other; several are found in one region which do not range into the next- above, whilst they extend to that below, or vice versa. Certain species have their maximum of development in each zone, being most prolific in individuals at that zone in which is their maximum, and of which they may be regarded as especially characteristic. Mingled with these true natives are stragglers, owing their presence to the secondary influences which modify distribution.” The Syrian waters are probably not less prolific. The coasts of Tyre and Sidon would produce at least as great a number. The name of the latter place, indeed, is derived from the Phoenician word fish (see Gesenius, s.v. , Sidon: the modern name has the same meaning, Saida; Abulfar. Syria, p. 93. SEE SIDON), and it is the oldest fishing establishment for commercial purposes known in history. The Hebrews had a less perfect acquaintance with the species found in the Red Sea, whither, to a certain extent, the majority of fishes. found in the Indian Ocean resort. Besides these, in Egypt they had anciently eaten those of the Nile (for the fish of the Nile, sea. Rawlinson’s Herodotus, ii, 119-121, and, more fully, Wilkinson’s Ancient Egyptians, iii, 58; v, 248-254); subsequently, those of the lake of Tiberias and of the rivers falling into the Jordan (Von Raumer, Palistina, p. 105, after Hasselquist, mentions the Sparus Gallilcus, a sort of bream the silurus and mugil; and Reuchlin, in Herzog after Dr. Barthe, adds the Labrus Nicloticusas inhabiting this lake, which Stanley, Sinai and Palestine, p. 375, represents as abounding in fish of all kinds [comp. Joh 21:11, with Mat 14:17; Mat 15:34]. From the earliest times-so said the Rabbinical legends-this lake had-been so renowned in this respect [see Reland, p. 260, who quotes the Baba Bethra of the Babylonian Gemara], that one of the ten fundamental laws laid down by Joshua was, that any one might fish with a hook in the Sea of Galilee [see Lightfoot, Talm. Exercit. on Mat 4:8]. Two of the villages on the banks derived their name from their fisheries, the west and the east Bethsaida, “house of fish” [compare the modern name of Sidon just mentioned]. The numerous streams which flow into the Jordan are also described by Stanley as full of fish, especially the Jabbok, p. 323); and they may have been acquainted with species of other lakes, of the Orontes, and even of the Euphrates. The supply, however, of this article of food, which the Jewish people appear to have consumed largely, came chiefly from the Mediterranean. From Neh 13:16, we learn that the Phoenicians of Tyre actually resided in Jerusalem as dealers in fish, which must have led to an exchange of that commodity for corn and cattle. ‘They must. have previously salted it (in which form it is termed in the Talmud; Lightfoot on Mat 14:17): the existence of a regular fish-market is implied in the notice of the fish-gate, which was probably contiguous to it (2Ch 23:14; Neh 3:3; Neh 12:39; Zep 1:10). In addition to these sources, the reservoirs formed in the neighborhood of towns may have been stocked with fish (2Sa 2:13; 2Sa 4:12; Isa 7:3; Isa 22:9; Isa 22:11; Son 7:4, where, however, ” fish” is interpolated in the A. V.). SEE FOOD.
The most nutritious and common of the fishes which must have filled the Jewish markets were genera of Percadem (perch tribes); Scicenids (much resembling the perches); and particularly the great tribe of the Scomberidce (mackerel), with its numerous genera and still more abundant species, frequenting the Mediterranean in prodigious numbers, and mostly excellent for the table; but being often without perceptible scales, they may have been of questionable use to the Hebrews. All the species resort to the deep seas, and foremost of them is the genus Thynnus, our tunny, a fish often- mentioned with honor by the ancients, from Aristotle downward; a specimen taken near Greenock in 1831 was nine feet in length. Its flesh is highly prized, and from its great solidity it partakes much of the character of meat. Although repeatedly taken on the English coast, it is really a native of the Mediterranean, where it abounds, not only in Sicilian waters but, in three or four species, in the Levant. The following complete the catalogue the Mugilidae family (the sea mullets, mugiles, being valuable in every part of the Mediterranean), the Labridce (or Wrasse of Pennant), and Cyprinidce (carps, particularly abundant in the fresh waters of Asia); after these may be ranged the genus Mormyrus, of which the’ species, amounting to six or seven, are almost exclusively tenants of the Nile and the lake of Tiberias, and held among the most palatable fish which the fresh waters produce. Cat or sheat-fish (Si-slude) are a family of numerous genera, all of which, except the Loricarice, are destitute of a scaly covering, and. were consequently unclean to the- Hebrews; though several -of them were held by the ancient Gentile nations and by some of the modern in high estimation, such as the blackfish, probably the shilbeh (Silurus Shilbe’ Niloticus) of the Nile, and others. Of salmons (Salmonidsce), the Myletes denstex or Hasselquist belongs to the most edible fishes of the Egyptian river; there were also Clupeidae.(herrings) and the Gadidae (or cod), these last being present about Tymre; Pleuronectes (or flatfish) are found off the Egyptian coasts, and eel-shaped genera are bred abundantly in the lakes of the Delta. A comparison of this list with the enumeration of the ancient Egyptian fish given by Strabo (xvii, 823), or by Sir G. Wilkinson in his Ancient Egyptians (iii, 58), will show us that some of the fish which have to the present day preserved their excellent character as wholesome food (such as some species of the Percadce [e.g. the “gisher”], and the Labridae [e.g. the ” bultit”], and the Cyprinidt [e.g. thee “benni;” ” the carpe is a dayntous fisshe,” wrote old Leonard Maschal in 1514, when he introduced the fish into England]), were the identical diet which the children of Israel ” remembered” so invidiously at Taberah, when they ungratefully loathed the manna (Num 11:5). Finally, there are the cartilaginous orders, where we find the file-fish (genus Balistes), having a species (B. vetusa) in the waters of the Nile; and true chondropterygians, containing the sharks, numerous in genera and species, both in the Mediterranean and Red Sea. We notice only Carcharus Lamia, the white or raging shark, often -found of enormous size off Alexandria, and always attended by several pilot-fish (Naucrates), and the saw-fish (Pristis antiquorum), most dreaded by the pearl-fishers in the Persian Gulf, and which has been seen in the Red Sea pursuing its prey even into the surf, with such force and velocity that, on one occasion, half of a fish cut asunder by the saw flew on shore at the feet of an officer while employed in the surveying service. On rays we shall only add that most of the genera are represented by species in either sea, and in particular the sting rays (Trigon) and electric rays (Torpedo), with which we close our general review of the class, although many interesting remarks might be subjoined, all tending to clear up existing misconceptions respecting fishes in general-such as that cetaceans, or the whale tribe, belong to them; and the misapplication of the term when tortoises and oysters are denominated fish; for the error is general, and the Arabs ven include lizards in the appellation. SEE ZOOLOGY.
The extreme value of fish as an article of food [when cooked, or otherwise prepared as a relish, , lit. sauce] (our Lord seems to recognise this as sharing with bread the claim to be considered as a prime necessary of life, see Mat 7:9-10) imparted to the destruction (fish the character of a divine judgment (see Isaiah 1, 2; Hos 4:3; Zep 1:3; compare with Exo 7:18; Exo 7:21; Psa 105:29; and Isa 19:8). This would especially be the case in Egypt, where the abundance of fish in the Nile, and the lakes and canals (Strabo, 17:p. 823; Diod. i, 36, 43, 52; Herod. ii, 13, 149), rendered it one of the staple commodities of food (Num 11:5; comp. Wilkinson, iii, 62). How fish is destroyed, largely in the way of God’s judgment, is stated by Dr. E. Pococke on Hos 4:3, where he collects many conjectures of the learned, to which may be added the more obvious cause of death by disease, such as the case mentioned by Welsted (Travels in Arabia, i, 310) of the destruction of vast quantities of the fish of Oman by an epidemic, which recurred nearly every five years. St. John (Travels in Valley of the Nile, ii, 246) describes a vast destruction offish from cold. Aristotle (Hist. Anim. 8:19) mentions certain symptoms of disease among fish as known to skilful fishermen; but he denies that epidemics such as affect men and cattle fall upon them. In the next section he mentions the mullein plant (verbascum, ) as poisonous to fresh-water and other fish. Certain waters are well known to be fatal to life. The instance of the Dead Sea, the very contrast of the other Jordan lakes so full of life, is well described by Schwarz (Descripire Geography of Palestine, p. 41-45), and by Stanley (Sinai and Palestine, p. 290-294), and more fully by De Saulcy (Dead Sea, passim). Contrast the present condition of this Sea of Death with the vitality which is predicted of it in the vision of Ezekiel (Eze 47:9-10). Its healed waters and renovated fish “exceeding many,” and “the fishers which shall stand on it from Engedi even unto Eneglaim,” and “the places on its coast to spread forth nets”-all these features are in vivid opposition to the present condition of ” the Asphaltic lake.” Of like remarkable import is 2 Esdr. v, 7, where the writer, among the signs of the times to come, predicts, “The Sodomitish sea shall cast out fish.” For ancient testimonies of the death which reigns over this lake, see St. Jerome on Ezekiel, lib. xiv., Tacitus, Hist. v, 6; Did. Sic. ii, 48, and 19:98; and the Nubian Geographer, iii, .5, as quoted by Bochart, Hieroz. i, 40. But there are other waters equally fatal to fish life, though less known, such as the lake called Canoudan .(Avicenna, i. q. , without life.), in Armenia, .and that which AElian (Hist. Animal. iii, 38) mentions ). This epithet is applied to the Dead Sea itself by Josephus, War, v, 4 (see Bochart, Hieroz. i, 40). SEE DEAD SEA.
Fuente: Cyclopedia of Biblical, Theological and Ecclesiastical Literature
Fish
called _dag_ by the Hebrews, a word denoting great fecundity (Gen. 9:2; Num. 11:22; Jonah 2:1, 10). No fish is mentioned by name either in the Old or in the New Testament. Fish abounded in the Mediterranean and in the lakes of the Jordan, so that the Hebrews were no doubt acquainted with many species. Two of the villages on the shores of the Sea of Galilee derived their names from their fisheries, Bethsaida (the “house of fish”) on the east and on the west. There is probably no other sheet of water in the world of equal dimensions that contains such a variety and profusion of fish. About thirty-seven different kinds have been found. Some of the fishes are of a European type, such as the roach, the barbel, and the blenny; others are markedly African and tropical, such as the eel-like silurus. There was a regular fish-market apparently in Jerusalem (2 Chr. 33:14; Neh. 3:3; 12:39; Zeph. 1:10), as there was a fish-gate which was probably contiguous to it.
Sidon is the oldest fishing establishment known in history.
Fuente: Easton’s Bible Dictionary
Fish
dag, implying “increase” or “fecundity”. Fish without fins or scales were “unclean” (Lev 11:9-10); aquatic mammalia, amphibia, and reptiles were hereby prohibited. This was the distinction between the good and the bad fish in Mat 13:48. The “great fish” of Jonah (Jon 1:17) was, according to different views, the dogfish, the shark, whose cartilaginous skeleton adapts it for swallowing large animals, or the whale, in the cavity of whose throat there would be room for a man. The slaying of their fish was a heavy blow from Jehovah on the Egyptians, whose river, canals, and lakes so abounded in fish, and who lived so much on it (Exo 7:18-21; Psa 105:29; Num 11:5; Isa 19:8). The fish was worshipped as the emblem of fecundity; Dagon, among the Philistines, half man half fish; also in Assyria. Hence the worship is forbidden (Deu 4:18). The “fishgate” at Jerusalem implies an adjoining fish market, supplied chiefly through Tyrian traders who imported it (Neh 13:16; Neh 3:3; Neh 12:39; 2Ch 33:14).
The fish of the Lake of Galilee are mainly identical with those especially found in the Nile. The casting net or the larger drag net was the chief instrument used for catching fish (Hab 1:15); the line and hook, and the “barbed iron” or spear, were also used (Amo 4:2; Mat 17:27; Job 41:7). Fishing is the image for taking souls in the gospel net, not to be destroyed but to be saved alive (Eze 47:10; Mat 4:19; Luk 5:5-10). Night was thought the best time for net fishing. Fishing symbolizes also sudden destruction by invading enemies (Jer 16:16; Amo 4:2; Hab 1:16; Ecc 9:12; Eze 29:3-5).
In Job 41:2, “canst thou put an hook (or ‘agmon, “rope of rushes”) into leviathan’s nose, or bore his jaw through with a thorn?” or hook by which fish were secured, when thrown into the water, to keep them alive. In Joh 21:11 the 153 fish taken were all “great fish,” whereas in the corresponding earlier miracle (Luk 5:6) this is not said; the net broke in the earlier, not so in the miracle after the resurrection, the latter typifying the eternal safety of the finally elect, all accounted “great” before God. Christ’s sermon and parables (Matthew 13) were delivered from a fishing boat; so Luk 5:3. He fed the multitudes with fish as well as bread (Mat 14:19; Mat 15:36). He paid the tribute with a stateer (“piece of money”) from a fish taken with a hook (Mat 17:27). He ate broiled fish after His resurrection (Luk 24:42-43; again, Joh 21:9-13).
Fuente: Fausset’s Bible Dictionary
FISH
Fish were plentiful in the Mediterranean Sea and in the Sea of Galilee, but there were none in the Dead Sea, as the water was too salty (Neh 13:16; Mat 4:18; Luk 5:1-7). According to the food laws set out by Moses, Israelites were allowed to eat fish (Deu 14:9-10; Luk 24:42-43; Joh 6:11; Joh 21:9) and several of Jesus apostles were fishermen (Mat 4:18; Mat 4:21; Joh 21:1-3). The Bible records one story of a fish so large that it swallowed a man whole (Jon 1:17; Jon 2:1; Mat 12:40).
People used various methods to catch fish. Some fished with a hook (Isa 19:8; Hab 1:15; Mat 17:27) but commercial fishermen usually used a drag-net. This was a net that they threw into the sea and dragged towards either the shore or the boat from which they were fishing (Hab 1:15; Mat 13:47-48; Luk 5:4-7; Joh 21:6-8). Most commercial fishing of this sort was done at night (Luk 5:5; Joh 21:3). Another kind of net was the smaller cast-net, which the fishermen, standing on the shore or in shallow water, cast around him and then drew in (Isa 19:8; Mat 4:18-20).
After bringing their fish to land, the fishermen sorted them, putting the larger ones into baskets for sale and throwing the useless ones away (Mat 13:47-48). When the men were finished with their nets, they washed them (Luk 5:2), dried them (Eze 26:5) and sometimes mended them (Mat 4:21). The Fish Gate was an entrance in Jerusalems city wall that fishermen and traders used when bringing their fish into the city to sell (Neh 13:16; Zep 1:10-11).
Jesus used illustrations from fishing in his preaching. As fishermen go looking for fish, so Jesus disciples are to go looking for people to bring into his kingdom (Mat 4:19). As a fishing net contains both good and bad fish, so among those who claim to be in Gods kingdom there are the true and the false. And as the good fish are separated from the bad, so the true and the false will be separated in the day of final judgment (Mat 13:47-50).
Fuente: Bridgeway Bible Dictionary
Fish
FISH would appear to have always been a favourite article of diet among the Hebrews (Num 11:5 and references in the Gospels), as it is to-day. Fish are found in enormous numbers in all the inland waters of Palestine, and especially in the Lake of Galilee, Lake Huleh, and the meadow lakes of Damascus. The extraordinary feature of these fish is the number of species peculiar to the Jordan valley. Out of a total of 43 species found in the region, no fewer than 14 are peculiar to this district. Many of these are quite small. The chief edible fish are members of the Chromides and of the Cyprinid (carps). The cat-fish, Clarias macracanthus, not being a scaly fish, cannot be eaten by the Jews (Deu 14:9), though considered a delicacy by the Christians of Damascus. It is thought by some to be the bad fish of Mat 13:47-48. In NT times fish-curing was extensively carried on at Tariche on the Lake of Tiberias. Some of the native fish is still salted to-day. The fish-pools of Son 7:4 and the ponds for fish in Isa 19:10 are both mistranslations. See also Food, 6.
E. W. G. Masterman.
Fuente: Hastings’ Dictionary of the Bible
Fish
The Hebrews had no particular names, or very few, for the distinguishing of the several species of fish. It is more probable, that as the law prohibited all that had no fins and scales, they were not very anxious to search the rivers in pursuit of them. (See Lev 11:9-12) Our adorable Redeemer, when coming to deliver his people from a yoke that neither we nor our fathers were able to bear, both by his precept and example, taught, that what he had cleansed became no longer unclean. (Mat 17:27; Joh 21:9; Luk 24:42)
Fuente: The Poor Mans Concordance and Dictionary to the Sacred Scriptures
Fish
(, dagh, , daghah, , da’gh; , ichthus, , ichthudion, , opsarion):
1. Natural History
Fishes abound in the inland waters of Palestine as well as the Mediterranean. They are often mentioned or indirectly referred to both in the Old Testament and in the New Testament, but it is remarkable that no particular kind is distinguished by name. In Lev 11:9-12 and Deu 14:9 f, whatsoever hath fins and scales in the waters is declared clean, while all that have not fins and scales are forbidden. This excluded not only reptiles and amphibians, but also, among fishes, siluroids and eels, sharks, rays and lampreys. For our knowledge of the inland fishes of Palestine we are mainly indebted to Tristram, NHB and Fauna and Flora of Palestine; Lortet, Poissons et reptiles du Lac de Tibriade; and Russegger, Reisen in Europa, Asien, Afrika, 1835-1841. The most remarkable feature of the fish fauna of the Jordan valley is its relationship to that of the Nile and of East Central Africa. Two Nile fishes, Chromis nilotica Hasselquist, and Clarias macracanthus Gunth., are found in the Jordan valley, and a number of other species found only in the Jordan valley belong to genera (Chromis and Hemichromis) which are otherwise exclusively African. This seems to indicate that at some time, probably in the early Tertiary, there was some connection between the Palestinian and African river systems. No fish can live in the Dead Sea, and many perish through being carried down by the swift currents of the Jordan and other streams. There are, however, several kinds of small fish which live in salt springs on the borders of the Dead Sea, springs which are as salt as the Dead Sea but which, according to Lortet, lack the magnesium chloride which is a constituent of the Dead Sea water and is fatal to the fish. Capota damascina Cuv. and Val., one of the commonest fishes of Syria and Palestine, has been taken by the writer in large numbers in the Arnon and other streams flowing into the Dead Sea. This is surprising in view of the fact that the Dead Sea seems to form an effective barrier between the fishes of the different streams flowing into it. The indiscriminate mention of fishes without reference to the different kinds is well illustrated by the numerous passages in which the fishes of the sea, the birds of the heavens, and the beasts of the field, or some equivalent expression, is used to denote all living creatures, e.g. Gen 1:26; Gen 9:2; Num 11:22; Deu 4:18; 1Ki 4:33; Job 12:8; Psa 8:8; Eze 38:20; Hos 4:3; Zep 1:3; 1Co 15:39.
2. Jonah’s Fish
An unusually large shark might fulfill the conditions of Jonah’s fish (dagh, daghah; but Mat 12:40, , ketos, whale or sea monster). The whale that is found in the Mediterranean (Balaena australis) has a narrow throat and could not swallow a man. No natural explanation is possible of Jonah’s remaining alive and conscious for three days in the creature’s belly. Those who consider the book historical must regard the whole event as miraculous. For those who consider it to be a story with a purpose, no explanation is required.
3. Fishing
The present inhabitants of Moab and Edom make no use of the fish that swarm in the Arnon, the Hisa and other streams, but fishing is an important industry in Galilee and Western Palestine. Now, as formerly, spear hooks and nets are employed. The fish-spear (Job 41:7) is little used. Most of the Old Testament references to nets have to do with the taking of birds and beasts and not of fishes, and, while in Hab 1:15 herem is rendered net and mikhmereth drag, it is hot clear that these and the other words rendered net refer to particular kinds of nets. In the New Testament, however, , sagene (Mat 13:47), is clearly the dragnet, and , amphblestron (Mat 4:18), is clearly the casting net. The word most often used is , dktuon. Though this word is from diken, to throw, or to cast, the context in several places (e.g. Luk 5:4; Joh 21:11) suggests that a dragnet is meant. The dragnet may be several hundred feet long. The upper edge is buoyed and the lower edge is weighted. It is let down from a boat in a line parallel to the shore and is then pulled in by ropes attached to the two ends, several men and boys usually pulling at each end. The use of the casting net requires much skill. It forms a circle of from 10 to 20 feet in diameter with numerous small leaden weights at the circumference. It is lifted by the center and carefully gathered over the right arm. When well thrown it goes to some distance, at the same time spreading out into a wide circle. A cord may be attached to the center, but this is not always the case. When lifted again by the center, the leads come together, dragging over the bottom, and sometimes a large number of fish may be enclosed. The novice has only to try, to realize the dexterity of the practiced fishermen.
Figurative: The fact that so many of our Lord’s disciples were fishermen lends a profound interest to their profession. Christ tells Simon and Andrew (Mat 4:19; Mar 1:17) that He will make them fishers of men. The Kingdom of Heaven (Mat 13:47) is likened unto a net that was cast into the sea, and gathered of every kind; which, when it was filled, they drew up on the beach; and they sat down and gathered the good into vessels, but the bad they cast away. Tristram (NHB) says that he has seen the fishermen go through their net and throw out into the sea those that were too small for the market or were considered unclean. In Jer 16:16, we read: Behold, I will send for many fishers, saith Yahweh, and they shall fish them up; and afterward I will send for many hunters, and they shall hunt them from every mountain, and from every hill, and out of the clefts of the rocks. In the vision of Ezekiel (Eze 47:9 f), the multitude of fish and the nets spread from En-gedi to En-eglaim are marks of the marvelous change wrought in the Dead Sea by the stream issuing from the temple. The same sign, i.e. of the spreading of nets (Eze 26:5, Eze 26:14), marks the desolation of Tyre. It is a piece of broiled fish that the risen Lord eats with the Eleven in Jerusalem (Luk 24:42), and by the Sea of Galilee (Joh 21:13) He gives the disciples bread and fish.
Fuente: International Standard Bible Encyclopedia
Fish
Fish (Gen 9:2; Num 11:22; Jon 2:1; Jon 2:10; Mat 7:10; Mat 14:17; Mat 15:34; Luk 5:6; Joh 21:6; Joh 21:8; Joh 21:11). Fishes, strictly so called, that is, oviparous, vertebrated, cold-blooded animals, breathing water by means of gills or branchiae, and generally provided with fins, are not infrequently mentioned in the Bible, but never specifically. In the Mosaic law (Lev 11:9-12), the species proper for food are distinguished by having scales and fins, while those without scales are held to be unclean, and therefore rejected. The law may have given rise to some casuistry, as many fishes have scales, which, though imperceptible when first caught, are very apparent after the skin is in the least dried. The species which were known to the Hebrews, or at least to those who dwelt on the coast, may have been very numerous, because the usual current of the Mediterranean sets in, with a great depth of water, at the Straits of Gibraltar, and passes eastward on the African side until the shoals of the Delta of the Nile begin to turn it towards the north; it continues in that direction along the Syrian shores, and falls into a broken course only when turning westward on the Cyprian and Cretan coasts. Every spring, with the sun’s return towards the north, innumerable troops of littoral species, having passed the winter in the offings of Western Africa, return northward for spawning, or are impelled in that direction by other unknown laws. A small part only ascends along the Atlantic coast of Spain and Portugal toward the British Channel, while the main bodies pass chiefly into the Mediterranean, follow the general current, and do not break into more scattered families until they have swept round the shores of Palestine. The Pelagian, or truly deep sea fishes, in common with the indigenous species, remain the whole year, or come about midsummer, and follow an uncertain course more in the center and towards the deepest waters. Off Nice alone Risso found and described 315 species; and there is every reason to believe that the coasts of Tyre and Sidon would produce at least as great a number. The name of the latter place, indeed, is derived from the Phoenician word fish, and it is the oldest fishing establishment for commercial purposes known in history. Industry and security alone are wanting to make the same locality again a flourishing place in this respect. The Hebrews had a more imperfect acquaintance with the species found in the Red Sea, whither, to a certain extent, the majority of fishes found in the Indian Ocean resort. Beside these, in Egypt they had anciently eaten those of the Nile; subsequently those of the lake of Tiberias and of the rivers falling into the Jordan; and they may have been acquainted with species of other lakes, of the Orontes, and even of the Euphrates. The supply, however, of this article of food, which the Jewish people appear to have consumed largely, came chiefly from the Mediterranean; and we have the authority of Neh 13:16, for the fact, that Phoenicians of Tyre actually resided in Jerusalem as dealers in fish, which must have led to an exchange of that commodity for corn and cattle. Those which might be eaten, because they had scales and fins, were among the most nutritious and common, probably such as still abound on the coast. It is difficult to select the most interesting of these, and to point them out with other names than are absolutely scientific, because many are unknown on our coasts, and others have names indeed, but nearly all repetitions of such as occur in England, without being of the same species.
Though the Egyptian priesthood abstained from their use, all the other castes dwelling in the valley of the Nile chiefly subsisted on the fish of the river, while they capriciously abhorred those of the sea. There was a caste of fishermen: and allusion to the artificial reservoirs and fishponds of Egypt occurs in the Prophets (Isa 19:8-10).
But the Hebrews could draw only a small supply from the lake of Tiberias and the affluents of the Jordan. On the coast the great sea-fisheries were in the slack waters, within the dominion of the Phoenicians, who must have sent the supply into the interior in a cured or salted state; although the fact involves the question how far in that condition, coming out of pagan hands, consumption by a Hebrew was strictly lawful: perhaps it may be presumed that national wants had sufficient influence to modify the law. The art of curing fish was well understood in Egypt, and unquestionably in Phoenicia, since that industrious nation had early establishments for the purpose at the Golden Horn or Byzantium, at Portus Symbolorurn in Tauric Chersonesus, and even at Calpe (Bisepharat?), in the present bay of Gibraltar. With regard to the controversy respecting the prophet Jonah having been swallowed by a huge sea-monster [WHALE], it may be observed that great cetaceans occur in the Mediterranean, as well as great sharks, and that, in a case where the miraculous intervention of Almighty power is manifest, learned trifling about the presence of a mysticete, or the dimensions of its gullet, is out of place.
Fuente: Popular Cyclopedia Biblical Literature
Fish
Creation of
Gen 1:20-22
Appointed for food
Gen 9:2-3
Clean and unclean
Lev 11:9-12; Deu 14:9-10
Taken with:
– Nets
Ecc 9:12; Hab 1:14-17; Mat 4:21; Luk 5:2-6; Joh 21:6-8
– Hooks
Isa 19:8; Amo 4:2; Mat 17:27
– Spears
Job 41:7
Ponds for:
– In Heshbon
Son 7:4
– In Egypt
Isa 19:10
Traffic in
Neh 13:16; Joh 21:13
Broiled
Joh 21:9-13; Luk 24:42
Miracles connected with:
– Jonah swallowed by
Jon 1:17; Jon 2:1-10; Mat 12:40
– Of the loaves and fishes
Mat 14:19; Mat 15:36; Luk 5:6; Luk 9:3-17
– Coin obtained from mouth of
Mat 17:27
– Great draught of
Luk 5:4-7; Joh 21:6
– Furnished to the disciples by Jesus after His resurrection
Luk 24:42; Joh 21:9-13
Figurative
Eze 47:9-10
Fuente: Nave’s Topical Bible
Fish
Fish. The Hebrews recognized fish as one of the great divisions of the animal kingdom, and, as such, gave them a place in the account of the creation, Gen 1:21; Gen 1:28, as well as in other passages where an exhaustive description of living creatures is intended. Gen 9:2; Exo 20:4; Deu 4:18; 1Ki 4:33.
The Mosaic law, Lev 11:9-10, pronounced as unclean, such fish as were devoid of fins and scales; these were and are regarded as unwholesome in Egypt. Among the Philistines, Dagon was represented by a figure half man and half fish. 1Sa 5:4. On this account, the worship of fish is expressly prohibited. Deu 4:18.
In Palestine, the Sea of Galilee was and still is remarkable well stored with fish. (Tristram speaks of fourteen species found there, and thinks the number inhabiting it at least three times as great). Jerusalem derived its supply chiefly from the Mediterranean. Compare Eze 47:10. The existence of a regular fish-market is implied in the notice of the fish-gate, which was probably contiguous to it. 2Ch 33:14; Neh 3:3; Neh 12:39; Zep 1:10.
The Orientals are exceedingly fond of fish as an article of diet. Numerous allusions to the art of fishing occur in the Bible. The most usual method of catching fish was by the use of the net, either the casting net, Eze 26:5; Eze 26:14; Eze 47:10; Hab 1:15, probably resembling the one used in Egypt, as shown in Wilkinson (iii. 55), or the draw or drag net, Isa 19:8; Hab 1:15, which was larger, and required the use of a boat. The latter was probably most used on the Sea of Galilee, as the number of boats kept on it was very considerable.
Fuente: Smith’s Bible Dictionary
FISH
(1) General References to
Gen 1:21; Lev 11:9; Psa 8:8; Joh 21:6
(2) Miraculous Draughts of
Mat 17:27; Luk 5:6; Joh 21:6
Fuente: Thompson Chain-Reference Bible
Fish
denotes “a fish,” Mat 7:10; Mar 6:38, etc.; apart from the Gospels, only in 1Co 15:39.
is a diminutive of No. 1, “a little fish,” Mat 15:34; Mar 8:7.
is a diminutive of opson, “cooked meat,” or “a relish, a dainty dish, especially of fish;” it denotes “a little fish,” Joh 6:9, Joh 6:11; Joh 21:9-10, Joh 21:13.
Fuente: Vine’s Dictionary of New Testament Words
Fish
, , Mat 7:10; Mat 17:27; Luk 5:6; Joh 21:6; Joh 21:8; Joh 21:11, occurs very frequently. This appears to be the general name in Scripture of aquatic animals. Boothroyd, in the note upon Num 11:4, says, I am inclined to think that the word , here rendered flesh, denotes only the flesh of fish, as it certainly does in Lev 11:11; and indeed the next verse seems to support this explication: We remember how freely we ate fish.’ It was then, particularly, the flesh of fish, for which they longed, which was more relishing than either the beef or mutton of those regions, which, unless when young, is dry and unpalatable. Of the great abundance and deliciousness of the fish of Egypt, all authors, ancient and modern, are agreed. We have few Hebrew names, if any, for particular fishes. Moses says in general, Lev 11:9-12, that all sorts of river, lake, and sea fish, might be eaten, if they had scales and fins; others were unclean. St. Barnabas, in his epistle, cites, as from ancient authority, You shall not eat of the lamprey, the many-feet, [polypes,] nor the cuttle fish. Though fish was the common food of the Egyptians, yet we learn from Herodotus and Chaeremon, as quoted by Porphyry, that their priests abstained from fish of all sorts. Hence we may see how distressing to the Egyptians was the infliction which turned the waters of the river into blood, and occasioned the death of the fish, Exo 7:18-21. Their sacred stream became so polluted as to be unfit for drink, for bathing, and for other uses of water to which they were superstitiously devoted, and themselves obliged to nauseate what was the usual food of the common people, and held sacred by the priests, Exo 2:5; Exo 7:15; Exo 8:20.
In Eze 29:4, the king of Egypt is compared to the crocodile; I am against thee, the great dragon that lieth in the midst of his rivers in Egypt. I will put hooks in thy jaws, and I will cause the fish of thy rivers to stick to thy scales, and I will bring thee out of the midst of thy rivers, and all the fish of thy rivers shall stick to thy scales. If the remora is as troublesome to the crocodile as it is to some other tenants of the water, it may here be referred to. Forskal mentions the echeneis neucrates [remora] at Gidda, there called kaml el kersh, the louse of the shark, because it often adheres very strongly to this fish; and Hasselquist says that it is found at Alexandria. The term, , a fish, was, at an early period of the Christian era, adopted as a symbolical word. It was formed from the initial letters of the Greek words, , , , , Jesus Christ, the Son of God, our Saviour. From the use of symbolical terms, the transition was easy to the adoption of symbolical representations, and it therefore soon became common for the Christians to have the letters of the word , or the figures of fishes, sculptured on their monuments for the dead, struck on their medals, engraved on their rings and seals, and even formed on the articles of domestic use.
Fuente: Biblical and Theological Dictionary
Fish
Num 11:5 (c) This is a symbol of the good things offered by this world to attract and entice GOD’s people away from GOD’s path of separation. They all leave a bad odor and have little food value.
Eze 29:4 (b) The king and his people are compared to fish. They will adhere to their king in his disobedience to GOD; all of them together will be destroyed.
Eze 47:9 (b) By this is indicated that where the Spirit of GOD has His own way, many souls will be saved. The fish represent the unsaved who are caught by the Gospel and thereby are brought to the Lord.
Jon 1:17 (c) This is a type of the Gentile nations who have absorbed, but have not digested, the Jewish people.
Hab 1:14 (a) By this is described men and women who are caught by the sophistries of wicked leaders and are thus deceived and led away from GOD.
Mat 7:10 (b) This figure represents something which, in our estimation, seems to be very good and profitable for us to possess, but which GOD sees would be injurious and harmful to us. (See also Luk 11:11). The child saw a snake and thought it to be an eel and good to eat.
Joh 21:6 (c) Some say that these fish represent the miracles performed by our Lord JESUS CHRIST while He was on the earth. Others think that the giving of the number of the fish indicates the care with which GOD looks after each deed that we do for Him. Still others think that these fish, and the number of them, represent GOD’s abundant care for His own. There were far more fish than the seven men could possibly eat for themselves. This of course is true of GOD’s provisions for us.