Father Augustus Bisping's Commentary on John 13:21-28

 Translated by Qwen

Father Augustus Bisping's Commentary on John 13:21-30

II. Announcement of Judas's Betrayal, Verses 21-30

See Matthew 26:21ff.; Mark 14:18ff.; Luke 22:21ff.

Jn 13:21-22

Already twice previously, in verse 10 and verses 18-19, the Lord had hinted at the betrayer; but in His agitated state of mind, He had repeatedly let the thought drop. Now, however, having just emphasized the lofty dignity of the apostolate, this thought returns to His soul in all its terrible reality and deeply shakes His inner being (ἐταράχθη τῷ πνεύματι — "He was troubled in spirit"). We see how, in the bitter cup appointed for Him by the Father, compassion for sinners was the most bitter drop of all. With solemn earnestness, He now openly declares to His disciples: "Truly, truly, I say to you: One of you will betray Me."

Jn 13:22: This open declaration throws the disciples into confusion. All of them, Judas excepted, know themselves free from such wicked intent against the Lord, whom they love so dearly. Astonished and perplexed (ἀπορούμενοι — "being at a loss"), they look at one another, none daring to suspect such a criminal plan in another.

Jn 13:23-24

Peter, the eager, impetuous disciple, devoted to his Master with such fervent love, cannot long endure this uncertainty. He therefore seeks to get to the bottom of the matter; yet it is so dreadful to him that he does not dare to ask aloud.

Jn 13:23 serves to explain Jn 13:24: "Now there was reclining at table one of His disciples, the one whom Jesus loved, on Jesus' bosom. Simon Peter therefore beckons to this one and says to him, 'Ask who it is of whom He speaks.'"

The phrase ἦν ἀνακείμενος ("was reclining") indicates that this one—John—customarily lay at table on Jesus' bosom. After the Exile, the Jews, following originally Persian custom, reclined at table, usually three to one couch (κλίνη). They reclined on their left side so as to be able to take food with the right hand. Consequently, the second person on the couch lay with the back of his head toward the bosom (κόλπος, literally the fold of the garment at the waist; cf. Luke 6:38) of the first, and similarly the third with his head toward the bosom of the second. John now lay to the Lord's right; he therefore needed only to turn his head slightly to speak quietly with Jesus. Peter probably lay to the Lord's left, so that the Lord had His back turned toward him; Peter could thus beckon to John, who was looking back, without Jesus noticing.

The phrase ὃν ἠγάπα ὁ Ἰησοῦς ("whom Jesus loved") is a formula recurring several times, with which the Evangelist designates himself—perhaps a paraphrase of his Hebrew name יוחנן (Yochanan), i.e., "God-beloved" or "Gotthold." Cf. John 19:26; 21:7, 20. He designates himself thus because it was more valuable to him to be loved by Jesus than to become famous under his own name; and here, at the recollection of this unforgettable, sacred moment, this self-designation breaks through for the first time.

Instead of the received text πυθέσθαι τις ἂν εἴη ("to inquire who it might be"), Lachmann and Tischendorf, following manuscripts B, C, L, X, 33, the Vulgate, and Origen, have rightly adopted: καὶ λέγει αὐτῷ· εἰπὲ τίς ἐστιν ("and says to him: 'Tell who it is'"). The received reading entered the text glossatorially, based on what John does in verse 25. Peter supposes that John, as Jesus' most intimate confidant, would know whom Jesus meant. As the verb νεύει ("beckons") already indicates, λέγει ("says") is to be understood as speaking quietly. Cf. verse 28.

Jn 13:25-26

Regarding the textual reading of these two verses: The received text of verse 25 reads ἐπιπεσὼν δὲ ἐκεῖνος ἐπὶ τὸ στῆθος ("And having fallen forward, that one, upon the breast..."); Tischendorf, however, reads ἀναπεσὼν ἐκεῖνος οὕτως ἐπὶ κ.τ.λ. ("Reclining thus upon..."). But since ἐπιπεσών does not otherwise occur in John, whereas ἀναπεσών presented itself to copyists as the usual designation for reclining at table, the former reading is to be preferred. The word οὕτως ("thus"—for which some manuscripts have οὗτος, "this one") is overwhelmingly attested.

Jn 13:26: The received text reads: ἐγὼ βάψας τὸ ψωμίον ἐπιδώσω. καὶ ἐμβάψας τὸ ψωμίον λαμβάνει... Ἰσκαριώτῃ ("I, having dipped the morsel, will give it. And having dipped the morsel, he takes... to Iscariot"). Tischendorf, however, reads: ᾧ ἐγὼ βάψω τὸ ψωμίον καὶ δώσω αὐτῷ· βάψας οὖν τὸ ψωμίον λαμβάνει... Ἰσκαριώτου ("He to whom I shall dip the morsel and give it to him; having therefore dipped the morsel, he takes... of Iscariot"). Although both readings are sufficiently attested, the one adopted by Tischendorf appears to be the original. However, instead of Ἰσκαριώτου, following preponderant witnesses, Ἰσκαριώτῃ should be read (cf. on John 6:71).

Thus: "That one [John] immediately threw himself upon Jesus' breast and says (quietly) to Him: 'Lord, who is it?' Jesus therefore answers: 'He it is to whom I shall dip the morsel and give it.' Having therefore dipped the morsel, He takes it and gives it to Judas, son of Simon Iscariot."

The phrase ἐπιπεσὼν... οὕτως ("having thrown himself... thus") expresses a certain vehemence; Jesus' word, "One of you will betray Me," must have strongly stirred the disciple of love. οὕτως = "without further ado," "immediately" (cf. on John 4:6).

Jesus answered quietly and chose, to designate the betrayer, an action that had nothing remarkable about it. Perhaps it had simply become Judas' turn for Jesus, as head of the household, to hand him a piece—perhaps of unleavened bread (Vulgate: panem)—dipped in the broth (probably the charoset; cf. on Matthew 26:23). Without doubt, however, by this manner of designation, He also intends to draw attention to the abominableness of the crime. The word of the Psalmist which He had quoted in verse 18—"He who ate bread with Me..."—He here brings to fulfillment.

The ancients, like Orientals still today, had no forks; the distribution of food and the eating itself were done with the fingers. The naming of the betrayer's full name at the conclusion has something tragically solemn about it.

Jn 13:27

"And after the morsel"—that is, after Jesus had given him the morsel—"then Satan entered into him." Whereas in verse 3 above it was said only that Satan had cast a thought into Judas, now a complete possession is spoken of (cf. on Luke 22:3). By τότε ("then"), this tragic moment is especially emphasized.

We may explain the whole sequence somewhat as follows: The preceding conversation between John and the Lord took place quietly, so that the other disciples noticed nothing of it; but Judas, with his guilty conscience, must have feared that the talk was about him. When the Lord now handed him the morsel, John—who knew the sign—without doubt looked with indignation and horror upon the false table-companion. Judas now realized that he was discovered; this increases his bitterness; Satan now gains complete victory in him; the wicked deed is decided. To wickedness is then added hypocritical audacity, and with diabolical mockery, according to Matthew 26:25, he approaches Jesus with the question: "Surely it is not I, Rabbi?" Jesus answered: "You have said it," and then spoke the words we read here: "What you do—that is, intend to do—do more quickly," namely, more quickly than you appear to intend (cf. Winer, p. 217); hasten it. The imperative ποίησον ("do") refers not to the act of betrayal itself, but to τάχιον ("more quickly"). Understood thus, the passage loses the offensiveness that some have wished to find in it, as though the Lord were inciting to betrayal. He does not will the betrayal, but He does desire that the hour may come as soon as possible when He may outwardly offer to His heavenly Father the sacrifice which He has long since offered inwardly. The resigned decisiveness wills no delay.

Augustine: "Non praecepit facinus, sed praedixit, non tam in perniciem perfidi saeviendo quam ad salutem fidelium festinando." ("He did not command the crime, but foretold it, hastening not so much to the destruction of the traitor by severity, as to the salvation of the faithful by speed.")

Jn 13:28-29

"Now no one of those reclining at table understood why He said this to him." Here it says "no one"—not even John, who had indeed recognized the betrayer, but had not yet suspected the imminence of his deed.

Jn 13:29: "For some supposed, because Judas had the money box, that Jesus said to him: 'Buy what we need for the feast,' or that he should give something to the poor." The disciples present, therefore, understood Jesus' command ὃ ποιεῖς ποίησον τάχιον ("What you do, do more quickly") to mean that Judas, in his capacity as treasurer, should hasten some business known to him—either to make purchases for the feast or to give something to the poor.

If the 15th of Nisan did not fall precisely on a Sabbath, it was permitted to make festival purchases during the night from the 14th to the 15th. Cf. Exodus 12:16. Moreover, as stated above in verse 2, for the inhabitants of Jerusalem the Passover feast did not begin until the following evening; all the more, therefore, was it still permissible at this time to buy and sell. The supposition of a distribution to the poor was also plausible, since the poor also had to hold the Passover meal, and on the first day of Passover, if possible, a splendid festal sacrifice was to be eaten by all Israelites. Incidentally, we see here how the Savior, out of His poverty, still gave to the poor.

Jn 13:30

"Therefore, having received the morsel, that one went out immediately; and it was night." The Evangelist adds these last words, perhaps to indicate that the time suitable for betrayal had now arrived. They possess, unforced, something awe-inspiring, and in their simple brevity, something deeply moving (cf. Luke 22:53). In Judas' inner being, too, it had become completely night; he had now completely separated himself from the true Light and surrendered himself to the prince of darkness.

The old disputed question—whether this revelation of the betrayal took place before the reception of the Holy Supper or only after it, and thus whether Judas partook of the Holy Supper or not—cannot be decided from our Gospel, since John does not expressly mention the institution of the Holy Supper. See further details on Matthew 26:21. If Judas, as is most probable, celebrated the Holy Supper with them, then its institution is to be inserted before verse 21, and not, as some suppose, here after verse 30, or after verse 36, or even after verse 38. John does not report the institution of the Holy Eucharist because it was sufficiently known to his readers from the three other Gospels, from oral tradition, and from the daily celebration of this holy mystery.

Perhaps, too, this complete silence is already connected with the disciplina arcani in the earliest Church. The concern about profanation, betrayal, and misunderstanding—which already in the second century forbade speaking of the highest mysteries of Christianity before non-Christians—this delicate, holy concern was perhaps also what, in the composition of this latest-written Gospel, counteracted a new report concerning the holy sacrifice and sacrament of the new covenant (Reischl).

---

§17. Jesus' Farewell Discourses to His Disciples (John 13:31–17:26)

With the departure of the betrayer from the circle of disciples, the death of the Savior is now decided outwardly, just as earlier—through Jesus' complete surrender of His will to the Father's will—it had been decided inwardly (John 12:27). The final hour has now come, the hour which the Lord may still spend in intimate fellowship with His own before His death. All that His love-glowing, agitated heart still has to say to His beloved disciples crowds itself into these few moments. First, He seeks to strengthen and comfort them through the promise of the Holy Spirit and His mighty illumination; then He exhorts and encourages them to the most intimate communion with Him and with one another, to faithful keeping of His commandments, to confession of His name even amid reproach and suffering, and to confident prayer in His name. At first, the discourse still has more the form of intimate conversation; but as it proceeds, it becomes ever more agitated and solemn, until at last it concludes in the sublime high-priestly prayer. This section is without doubt the most sublime and solemn of the entire Gospel.

I. Announcement of His Death and of Peter's Denial, Jn 13:31-38

Jn 13:31-32: Scarcely has the betrayer left the company, and the Savior feels Himself free in the pure circle of His own, when He immediately breaks forth into words of highest triumph: "Now is the Son of Man glorified, and God is glorified in Him!" Prophetically, the Lord beholds His glorification through death on the cross and resurrection, and God's glorification in Him, as already accomplished. In Christ's death on the cross, the love, holiness, and righteousness of God were truly revealed; it was thus a glorification of God in Christ.

Jn 13:32: "If God is glorified in Him, God will also glorify Him in Himself, and will glorify Him immediately." The phrase εἰ ὁ θεὸς ἐδοξάσθη ἐν αὐτῷ ("If God is glorified in Him") is a solemn repetition, in order to attach a further consequence. The omission of these words in some witnesses is easily explained by homoioteleuton. God will immediately glorify the Son by raising Him from the dead, by transfiguring Him; and He will glorify Him "in Himself"—that is, in unity with Himself, through reception into divine glory and world-governance. He will set Him at His right hand, until He lays all enemies as a footstool under His feet—that is, until He has won full victory for His cause on earth.

Jn 13:33: "Little children, yet a little while I am with you; you will seek Me, and as I said to the Jews, 'Where I am going, you cannot come,' so now I say also to you." The address τεκνία ("little children") is spoken with all the tenderness of departing love. Regarding καθὼς εἶπον τοῖς Ἰουδαίοις ("as I said to the Jews"), cf. John 7:34; 8:21, 24. But to the Jews Jesus had spoken these words in a different sense and with different intent. There, the possibility of coming was absolutely denied; here, only relatively, with respect to the present time. There, the Lord spoke these words to judge; here, to move and to make the disciples' hearts receptive to the following commandment. He says this to them "now" because He can no longer spare them this knowledge.

Jn 13:34-35: As a substitute for His visible presence, mutual brotherly love is to serve them; through this love, henceforth unseen in the Holy Spirit, He will dwell among them: "A new commandment I give to you, that you love one another: that, just as I have loved you, you also love one another."

Regarding the grammatical structure: with most interpreters, we take καθὼς... ἀλλήλους as parallel to the preceding ἵνα ἀγαπᾶτε ἀλλήλους ("that you love one another"), whereby καθὼς ἠγάπησα ὑμᾶς ("just as I have loved you") is placed first with emphasis instead of ἵνα, καθὼς ἠγάπησα ὑμᾶς, οὕτως καὶ ὑμεῖς ἀγαπᾶτε ἀλλήλους ("just as I have loved you, so also you love one another"). According to this reading, καθώς retains its usual comparative meaning. Meyer's explanation seems forced; he takes καθώς as stating a ground, in the sense of "inasmuch as," and καθὼς ἠγάπησα ὑμᾶς as the agent of ἀγαπᾶτε ἀλλήλους: "That you may love one another, inasmuch as I have loved you, or in accordance with the fact that I have loved you, so that you also, for your part, etc."

Striking is the word καινήν ("new"). For since it already says in Leviticus 19:18: "You shall love your neighbor as yourself," and since Jesus Himself declared this commandment of neighborly love—next to the commandment to love God above all—as the greatest and most important commandment in the Law (Matthew 22:37ff.), how could He then call His commandment of love "new"? Interpreters have sought various ways out here. Some wish to take καινή in the sense of "excellent," others of "never growing old," as if ἀεὶ καινήν ("always new") stood there; still others in the sense of "a final one." Jansenius and others understand καινὴ ἐντολή as "a renewed commandment," Augustine even as "a commandment that renews mankind"; Maldonat takes καινή as equivalent to καινῶς = novo ("in a new way"). But all these interpretations do violence to the word.

The key to the only correct understanding of ἐντολὴν καινήν ("a new commandment") lies in the phrase καθὼς ἠγάπησα ὑμᾶς ("just as I have loved you"), which is placed first with emphasis for good reason: The commandment of love which Christ gave was new insofar as the norm—and thereby simultaneously also the motive and the measure—of the required love was new. The Old Testament commanded loving one's neighbor as oneself; there, therefore, self-love was determined as the measure and norm of neighborly love. Moreover, the Old Testament commandment of neighborly love was more negative in nature; it demanded, as the context shows, only that duties of justice not be violated. Finally, it was confined within definite limits, referred only to fellow countrymen, and allowed the right of retaliation to remain in force.

Our Savior, however, here determines as the norm of love His own love. And His love for humanity was not merely such as fulfilled duties of justice, but it was a self-emptying love, ready for all sacrifices, even for the giving up of Himself—a love, therefore, that loved the neighbor more than oneself; and it was a universal love, embracing all people, even His enemies. Thus He could with right call His commandment of love a new one. Jesus proceeds here just as in the Sermon on the Mount, when He sets His new commandments over against what was said to the ancients. He had just instituted the Holy Supper, and therein also set "the new covenant in His blood" over against the old covenant, and given an eternally valid pattern of His self-emptying love. Cf. 1 John 2:8; 3:16.

Jn 13:35: Such neighborly love as the Lord here demands had not yet been seen in the world; therefore He could declare it the distinguishing mark of His discipleship: "By this will all men know that you are My disciples, if you have love for one another." The entire First Epistle of John forms, as it were, a commentary on these words of the Lord. That they were fulfilled is attested by the church history of the first centuries. Astonished, according to Tertullian (Apologeticus, ch. 39), the pagans were accustomed to exclaim: "See how the Christians love one another, and how they are ready to die for one another!" And Minucius Felix says of the Christians: "They love one another before they even know one another."

Jn 13:36ff.: Peter's question, "Lord, where are You going?" refers back to the words ὅπου ὑπάγω ἐγώ ("where I am going") in verse 33. Peter has not understood these, and he would gladly know where his Master intends to go, such that he could not follow Him. Jesus does not answer this question directly, but refers him to his own experience in a later future: "Where I am going, you cannot follow Me now; but you shall follow afterward." Peter could not follow his Lord now because, according to God's counsel, his hour had not yet come; he was first to strengthen his brethren and to feed Christ's sheep and lambs. When he has done this, then he will follow Him. With these last words, Jesus hints at the future martyrdom of the disciple; but in this hint for Peter there lies simultaneously a comfort, which afterward, when the bitter sorrow over his grievous fall brought him near to despair, could raise him up again.

Jn 13:37-38: "Peter says to Him: 'Lord, why can I not follow You now? I will lay down my life for You.'" So even now Peter does not yet understand the Lord; but he does perceive that He intends a dangerous journey, and declares himself ready to lay down his life for Him (cf. John 10:11). Once again, on the one hand, Peter's impetuous, hasty temperament emerges, and on the other hand, his enthusiastic, over-confident attachment to the Lord. To dampen the premature fire and to humble the excessive self-confidence, the Lord answers in verse 38 with a doubting question: "Will you lay down your life for Me?" and then, with great emphasis, foretells his imminent fall: "Truly, truly, I say to you: The rooster will not crow until you have denied Me three times"—that is, before morning comes, you will have denied Me three times. Cf. Matthew 26:33; Mark 14:30; Luke 22:34. The third night-watch was called by the Jews ἀλεκτοροφωνία / קריאת הגבר (keriat ha-gever), "the rooster's crowing."

CONTINUE