January 24, 2016  John 13:26-14:3

Download discussion questions: John 13_26-14_3 New Commandment

This passage includes several examples of repeated words or phrases.  “Morsel,” “glory,” “love,” and “going” (or related forms of the words) are all mentioned four five times in these brief sixteen verses.  That repetition is a good place to start if we want to understand exactly what John wanted to communicate to his readers (like us).  A helpful part of observation in methodical Bible study notices repetition.  A writer often repeats words that are a key part of his thinking or phrases that communicate what is most important to him. 

Our group discussion started with the word “morsel” that seems to play an unexpectedly large part of John’s description.  Some versions called it a “sop” (KJV) or “a piece of bread” (NIV).  Whatever the translation, the question remains:  Why so much attention on that bit of bread?  We have repeatedly discussed John’s skill as a story teller, and good story tellers don’t waste words, (and neither do apostles under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit).

Thinking back to last week’s discussion reminded us that just before this passage, Jesus “became troubled in spirit” (John 13:21).  He had been making mysterious comments about “not all of you are clean” (v. 10) and “I do not speak of all of you” (v. 18).  Then when He had become troubled, He said very directly, “One of you will betray Me.”  The morsel followed almost immediately.  The morsel was the visible action, the affirmation by Jesus that He was indeed going to follow the mission the Father had sent Him on, in spite of His troubled spirit.  The morsel was the action He took, the point of no return on His way to the cross.  Often some simple but visible action marks our decisions to follow a difficult course.  Handing the morsel to Judas was such an action for Jesus.  John focused on the morsel as a clear turning point.  Jesus has repeatedly said He was committed to the work God had sent Him to do.  Now He was putting that commitment into action.  That morsel initiated the terrible events necessary for the Father’s mission.  Satan entered into Judas (v. 27).

Our discussion turned to the disciples.  How were they so oblivious to what was happening?  They didn’t understand why Judas was leaving, although they has some guesses about the financial aspects of the ministry (buying supplies, giving to the poor).  How could they miss the morsel and all it meant after the clear statement of Jesus (v. 26)?  Several ideas were suggested.  Perhaps the Holy Spirit simply obscured their thinking so they didn’t understand.  The question about who the betrayer might be was passed from Peter to John (“the disciple Jesus loved”) and then to the Lord (v. 24-26).  Perhaps the communication was done subtly, in whispers, while the other disciples were noisily questioning (v. 22; cf. Matthew 26:25, Mark 14:19, “Not I Lord” and  Luke 22:23, “discussing among themselves”).  Jesus’ blunt statement caused a small uproar in the room, and perhaps John was the only one who heard exactly what Jesus said.  He may have decided that telling that news to Peter might not be a good idea.  Or it may be simply that Jesus had been handing morsels to several (even all) of the disciples.  They were most likely using a common bowl to dip bread into.  For the host or the most important person present to dip into the bowl and hand a bit to another guest was not unusual and was even considered an honor.[1]  For whatever reason, the disciples did not find anything for immediate concern in the morsel and the sudden departure of one of their fellow believers.

A brief note here about speculation.  None of the Gospels explains exactly why the disciples didn’t recognize the imminent treachery of Judas after what Jesus said.  Is there any benefit (or worse, is there danger) in speculating about such details?  I believe there is.  Narrative passages such as this give us the main actions of the scene.  Other details (why didn’t they understand?  What was Peter thinking when he challenged Jesus about washing his feet?  Why did Jesus become troubled in spirit?) are not always explicit in the text.  However, those details enable us to understand more clearly the human element of the story.  We can better connect with God’s story (here told by John) on more than just an intellectual level, more than just understanding the bare facts recorded.  We can add a personal dimension to the theological significance of the text.  When do I tend to react like Peter, challenging what the Lord may want to do in my life?  How would I have reacted to an announcement about someone I trusted betraying someone I loved?  Speculation about details is indeed very dangerous if we build our theology or our conception of God more on guesses than on the concrete truths in the text.  But speculation is an important part of moving my observations and interpretations of the text into life-transforming application.  So speculate within the bounds of the text.

Back to those repeated words.  Glory is the first theme Jesus speaks to as soon as Judas departs (v. 31-32).  It is not difficult (speculation alert here) to imagine the tone with which Jesus said these words, both somber and exultant.  What troubled His spirit and would trouble Him much more in Gethsemane would have made Him somber.  The immediate fulfillment of His passion to glorify the Father would have filled Him with joy.  The reciprocal glory (a phrase from our discussion group) interchanged between the Father and the Son is a growing theme (cf. John 17 in a few weeks).

And what, exactly, is “glory?”  Like a number of familiar words (sometimes called “Christianese”) we have a general (perhaps too general) idea, and we use the word frequently without always having a clear, precise definition.  Bright lights, shining objects (“the heavens declare the glory of God, Psalm 19:1) come to mind.  One of our group suggested a simple definition.  Glory is what God is like.  When His nature is revealed, glory is what we see (and perhaps feel and hear and sense).  Jesus’ somber exultation was about showing what God is like.  He had been doing that for all of His incarnational ministry.  Now He would show the ultimate display of God’s glory, the glory that He would display through His self-giving love on the cross, the glory of the Father that would be displayed in the actions of the Son, the glory that the Father would reveal back through the Son (perhaps in the resurrection).  That upward spiral of reciprocal glory between the Father and the Son was a cause for exultation.  The knowledge of what it would cost was a cause for seriousness.

The serious exultation about the glory of revealing more about God led naturally to the next theme in the passage.  John reports that Jesus made several statements about love.  A question in our group was about His description of this commandment as “new” (v. 34).  The Jewish Scriptures had plenty to say about love.  When questioned about the greatest commandments of the Law (Luke 10:25), Jesus quoted from Deuteronomy 6:5 and Leviticus 19:18 about loving God and loving neighbors.  Love was not a “new” idea as if the disciples had not thought of it before.  But it was new in the expanded sense Jesus gave it.  (As has happened on numerous previous occasions, the sermon just before our group meeting was in a series entitled “Breath of Heaven” and included remarks about how Jesus frequently expanded the common understanding of the Law.)  When He had quoted the Torah about loving neighbors, the lawyer’s immediate (and self-justifying and very human) response was to look for limits:  “Who is my neighbor?”  How much do I have to obey?  How far do I have to love?  Jesus expanded the understanding of the Law beyond all limits:  “As I have loved you” (v. 34).  When the disciples heard this, they probably thought it was a high standard.  In a few hours they would begin to understand just how high that standard of love was, how far Jesus had expanded the application of the Law.  He extended the standard of love past any boundaries, to laying down one’s life for others.

And once again Peter speaks up.  Most of us have had the experience in a conversation of not exactly listening to the other person.  Something is said that gets our attention, and we think more about that than about what is being said.  Is that what happened with Peter?  Jesus affectionately calls them “little children” (v. 33) and describes the kind of love they should have for one another and the powerful impact that such love will have on the world (v. 35).  Peter doesn’t respond to those direct instructions.  He questions something Jesus said earlier:  “Where are You going?  Why can’t I follow right now?”  This seems reminiscent of Peter’s reaction a few minutes earlier when Jesus approached him to wash his feet.  Once again Peter seems to exhibit the tendency we often have.  We want to follow Jesus, but on our terms.  We want to decide what it means to follow Him.  We want to define our discipleship.  Martin Luther described this attitude as treating Jesus like a wax nose[2] we can bend into any shape we like.  As the Jewish teacher of the Law wanted to shape the Law to fit his limits, we, like Peter, sometimes seem to want to fit Jesus into a form we want.  The Scriptures point to Jesus (as was also mentioned in the sermon).  It is primarily through the Scriptures, the written word, recorded in a Book that we know what He is like.  The written word preserves our knowledge of the Incarnate Word and prevents us from defining Him like a wax nose.  A passion to know Jesus is a passion for the Bible that reveals Him.

[1] Craig S. Keener, ed., The IVP Bible Background Commentary – New Testament (Downers Grove, Illinois:  InterVarsity Press, 1993), 298; This is a very useful resource for background information.

[2] Quoted by John Piper, The Legacy of Sovereign Joy (Wheaton, Illinois:  Crossway Books, 2000), 80.  Also at
http://www.desiringgod.org/messages/martin-luther-lessons-from-his-life-and-labor