CHAPTER XIV.

Ch. 14:1-31. THE HEART OF CHRISTIANITY--THE DIVINE IMMANENCE.--THE

PROMISE OF THE COMFORTER: INVISIBLE, INDWELLING, ABIDING.--THE

CONDITION OF THE PROMISE: THE OBEDIENCE OF LOVE.--THE RESULT: A

FRUITFUL, SPIRITUAL LIFE, COMFORT, INSTRUCTION, PEACE, JOY, LOVE.

PRELIMINARY NOTE.--The 14th, 15th, 16th and 17th chapters of John are

the Holy of Holies of the Bible. Christ is about to depart from his

disciples; the cloud of the coming trouble casts its shadow on their

hearts; he sees clearly, they feel vaguely the impending tragedy. They

are to behold their Master spit upon, abused, execrated; they are to

see him suffering the tortures of a lingering death upon the cross;

they are to be utterly unable to interfere for his succor or even for

his relief; they are to see all the hopes which they had built on him

extinguished in his death. It is that he may prepare them for this

experience, that he may prepare his disciples throughout all time (ch.

17:20) for similar experiences of world-sorrow (ch. 16:33), and that

he may point out to them and to the church universal the source of

their hope, their peace, their joy, and their life--moral and

spiritual--that he speaks to the twelve, and through them to his

discipleship in all ages, in these chapters, and finally offers for

them and for us that prayer which we may well accept as the disclosure

of his eternal intercession for his followers. The discourse is

sympathetic, not philosophical or critical; it is addressed to

sympathetic friends, not to a cold or critical audience; and it is to

be interpreted rather by the sympathies and the spiritual experience

than by a philosophical analysis. It sets forth the source of all

comfort, strength, guidance and spiritual well-being in the truth of

the direct personal presence of a seemingly absent but really present,

a seemingly slain but really living, a seemingly defeated but really

victorious Lord and Master. This truth appears and reappears in

various forms in these chapters, like the theme in a sublime symphony.

Now it is plainly stated, “I will come to you” (ch. 14:18); now it

is interpreted by a metaphor, “Ye are the vine, I am the branches”

(ch. 15:5); now it is a promise of the Spirit’s presence, now of

Christ’s, now of the Father’s (ch. 14:16, 18, 21, 23); now the

disciples are bid to turn their thoughts toward this spiritual

presence, this Divine Immanence, for their own sake (ch. 16:7), now

they are appealed to by the love they bear the Master (ch. 14:28). The

conditions of this personal experience of the unseen spiritual

presence of their God and Saviour is declared to be obedience in the

daily life to the law of love (ch. 14:21, 23; 15:10); the result is

declared to be a constant growth in the knowledge of divine truth (ch.

14:26; 16:12, 13); a sacred peace and joy (ch. 14:27; 15:11); a

supernatural strength in sorrow (16:20-22). These truths are not

logically arranged; the structure of the discourse is not that of a

sermon, but that of a confidential conversation, in which in different

forms the same essential truth is repeated and re-repeated, because

the heart is so full that a single utterance does not suffice, and the

truth is so transcendent that no logical statement is adequate. After

the conversation is closed and the disciples rise to depart, Christ

recurs to the theme in a new form, and continues the discourse, while

the disciples wait standing for a new signal to go out (ch. 14:31; ch.

15, Prel. Note); and, finally, when for a second time he draws his

discourse to a close, he re-embodies the same consolatory and

inspiring truth in a prayer, breathing the aspiration that the reward

and secret and source of his own power may be given to his disciples,

sent into the world to complete the mission which he has but

inaugurated (ch. 17:18). Thus these chapters of John contain a

disclosure of the very heart of Christianity, the personal knowledge

of a living God by direct communion with him, as a teacher, a

comforter, an inspirer, the one and only true source of faith, hope,

love. The commentator must point out the connection of the verses and

the meaning of the words; his work must be in a measure critical and

cold; but only the devout heart, which knows by experience that love

of Christ which passes the knowledge of the intellect, can interpret

the spiritual meaning of the truth, since the condition of

understanding it is not a critical knowledge of words or an

intellectual apprehension of theology, but a love for Christ that

keeps Christ’s words, that recognizes Christ’s mission to be also the

mission of the Christian, and that abides in Christ in the spirit

that it may follow Christ in the life. Without this spirit the student

in vain addresses himself to the study of this “wisdom of God in a

mystery,” hidden except to the soul to whom God hath revealed it by

his Spirit (1 Cor. 2:7-10).

1 Let[542] not your heart be troubled: ye believe in God,

believe[543] also in me.

[542] verse 27; Isa. 43:1, 2; 2 Thess. 2:2.

[543] Isa. 12:2, 3; Ephes. 1:12, 13; 1 Pet. 1:21.

2 In my Father’s house are many mansions: if _it were_ not

_so_, I would have told you. I go[544] to prepare a place

for you.

[544] Heb. 6:20; 9:8, 24; Rev. 21:2.

3 And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will[545] come

again, and receive you unto myself: that[546] where I am,

_there_ ye may be also.

[545] Heb. 9:28.

[546] ch. 12:26; 17:24; 1 Thess. 4:17.

=1-3. Let not your heart be troubled.= In this hour of unparalleled

sorrow, with Gethsemane, the betrayal, the denial, the mock trials and

the crucifixion full in view, Christ thinks not of himself, but of his

disciples. He does not seek comfort, but imparts it. We may well

imagine a momentary silence after the prophecy of the preceding

verses. The disappointment of the Judaic expectation of temporal and

political deliverance, the prophecy of treason, the sudden and

unexpected departure of Judas, the prophecy of Peter’s denial, and of

the abandonment of their Lord by the other disciples, have all tended

to sober and sadden them.--=Ye have faith in God, have faith also in

me.= The forms of the indicative and the imperative are the same

(πιστεύετε). Some critics read both verbs indicative, _Ye have faith

in God, ye have faith also in me_; some both imperative; treating both

as an exhortation, _Have faith in God; have faith also in me_; and

some, as our English version, which makes the statement of the first

clause the ground of the exhortation of the second clause, _Ye have

faith in God, have faith also in me_. Either rendering is

grammatically legitimate; the latter seems to me preferable. As Jews

they had faith in the one only true and living God; a faith which, in

the experience of patriarchs and prophets, trial and trouble had not

been able to shake (Hab. 3:17, 18). Christ urges them to a like faith

in him, a faith strong enough to survive the brief though terrible

separation of death. Theism is the foundation of Christianity; faith

in one only living and true God precedes and prepares the way for

faith in Christ his Son, the living and true way to the Father. To

believe in him is not to believe anything about him, nor merely to

trust in him, but to have such a spiritual apprehension of his

character, that when he is crucified the disciples shall not lose

their confidence in him as the Messiah. He warns them against that

doubt which augmented and intensified their distress when they saw him

whom they had trusted should have redeemed Israel put to an open shame

and a cruel death (Luke 24:21). They were trusting in themselves.

Peter’s declaration, “I will lay down my life for thy sake,”

expressed the common confidence of all (Mark 14:31). Christ first

demolished this false confidence, then seeks to build up a new and

better confidence in himself.--=In my Father’s house are many

dwelling-places.= The phrase “my Father’s house” is generally regarded

as a circumlocution for heaven; Christ’s declaration as tantamount to

the general statement that in heaven there is room enough for them all

(_Alford_, _Meyer_, etc.); and in support of this view such O. T.

passages as Ps. 23:13, 14; Isaiah 63:15, are quoted, which refer to

the heavens as God’s habitation. I would rather regard the universe as

God’s house according to the spirit of Isaiah 66:1, “Heaven is my

throne, and earth is my footstool,” and the declaration that in it are

many dwelling-places, as a new light thrown upon the abode of the dead

who die in Christ Jesus. The ancients regarded Hades, or the abode of

the dead, a deep and dark abode in the under-world, fastened with

gates and bars, a ghostly abode, a prison-house of the disembodied

(Job 10:21, 22; 11:8; Ps. 88:6; 89:48; Eccles. 9:4; Isa. 5:14;

14:9-20, 38:10; Ezek. 31:17; 32:21). The O. T. thought of death and

the abode of the dead was hardly more hopeful than that of the ancient

Greeks and Romans. Homer makes the dead Achilles declare:

“I would be

A laborer on earth and serve for hire

Some man of mean estate, who makes scant cheer,

Rather than reign over all who have gone down

To death.”

Parallel to this, in some respects more gloomy, were the ancient

Hebrews’ thoughts of Hades. Dying was bidding farewell to God. “Wilt

thou show wonders to the dead? Shall the dead arise and praise thee?

* * * Shall thy righteousness be known in the land of forgetfulness?”

(Ps. 88:10-12). “In death there is no remembrance of thee” (Ps. 6:5).

Comp. Isaiah, ch. 38, and Job, ch. 14. The hope of better things is

but an occasional gleam in a night of great darkness and almost

despair. See Job 10:21, 22; Ps. 89:45-49; Eccles. 9:4; Isaiah 5:14,

15; 14:9-20; Ezek. 31:16, 17; and especially Isaiah, ch. 38, and Job,

ch. 14. In contrast with this gloomy view of death is that of the N.

T., the germ of which is afforded by Christ’s declaration here, which

may be paraphrased thus: “The earth is not the only abode of God’s

children; in my Father’s house (the universe) are many dwelling-places

for them; and I, in leaving you, am not going to the dark abode of the

voiceless dead, but to prepare for you a place, and to return again to

take you to myself, that you may witness and share the glory which I

have with the Father.” Out of this declaration grows, as a fruitful

tree out of a seed, the whole of the discourse contained in this and

the two following chapters. Out of it grows, too, the Christian’s

conception of and experience in death. See for example 2 Cor. 5:1-4.

It should be added that the word _house_ (οἰκία) is never used in the

N. T. as a designation of heaven, but with the analogous word (οἷκος)

_household_, is used of the world (John 8:35), the temple (John 2:16),

and the whole kingdom of God (Heb. 3:2-6); so that N. T. usage

confirms the interpretation here given. The word rendered _mansions_

(μονή) occurs nowhere else in the N. T., but is derived from a verb

(μένω) signifying to _abide_, and here unquestionably indicates not a

_mansion_, but simply a permanent dwelling-place. This was indeed the

original meaning of the English word mansion (Fr. _maison_).--=If not,

would I have told you that I go to prepare a place for you?= The

reference is to some previous statement not preserved in our Gospels.

The argument is this: I could not have assured you, as I have done,

that I am going to prepare a place for you, if the place of the dead

were the dark abode which you have imagined it to be. This, which is

the interpretation of the French translation, seems to me,

notwithstanding the objection of the modern writers (_Meyer_, _Godet_,

_Tholuck_, etc.), better than the construction of our English version,

though either is grammatically admissible. If we take the other

construction, the connection is as Godet gives it: “If our separation

was to be an eternal one, I would have forewarned you; I would not

have waited for this last moment to declare it unto you.”--=And if I

go and prepare a place for you.= The implication of this entire

passage is not merely “heaven large enough for all,” but a heaven with

various provisions for various natures. In the Father’s house is not

merely a large mansion, but _many_ mansions; and there is prepared a

place not merely for all but for _you_, a personal preparation in

glory _for_ each child as by grace _in_ each child; a room, a house

for each nature adapted to its needs. But how does Christ _prepare_ a

place for us? To that question revelation makes no answer. We can only

say that redemption did not end with Christ’s death, that he is still

carrying on his work of redeeming love for us as well as in us. In

every death of a friend he lays up treasure in heaven for us; those

that have gone before and entered into their rest, and await our

coming, are a part of this divine preparation. The sorrow here is a

part of the preparation of unmeasured joy hereafter.--=I will come

again and receive you unto myself.= In order to understand this, we

must bear in mind what Stier well calls the perspective of prophecy.

“The coming again of the Lord is not one single act--as his

resurrection, or the descent of the Spirit, or his second personal

advent, or the final coming in judgment--but the combination of all

these, the result of which shall be his taking his people to himself

to be where he is. This coming is begun (ver. 18) in his resurrection;

carried on (ver. 23) in the spiritual life (see also ch. 16:22, etc.),

the making them ready for the place prepared; further advanced

when each by death is fetched away to be with him (Phil. 1:23);

fully completed at His coming in glory when they shall be

forever with Him (1 Thess. 4:17) in the perfected resurrection

state.”--(_Alford._)--=That.= _In order that_ (ἵνα). The going,

the preparing, the returning are all for the sake of them, his

disciples.--=Where I am there ye may be also.= Death is no longer

“farewell to God;” it is going home to be forever with the Lord (ch.

17:24; Phil. 1:23; 1 Thess. 4:17).

4 And whither I go ye know, and the way ye know.

5 Thomas saith unto him, Lord, we know not whither thou

goest; and how can we know the way?

=4, 5. And whither I go= (ye know and) =the way ye know=. There is

some doubt as to the reading; most critics (_Meyer_, _Alford_,

_Tischendorf_, _Lachmann_) either omit or doubt the words I put in

brackets. But their omission obscures without changing the sense; the

meaning is undoubtedly that conveyed by our Received Version. While in

form a statement, it is in fact an inquiry; its object is to provoke

questioning, as it does from Thomas. Whither he goes is to the Father

(ch. 20:17); the way he goes is the way of death and resurrection,

already foretold them (Matt. 16:21; 17:22, 23; 20:17-19).--=Thomas

saith unto him, We know not=, etc. On the character of Thomas, see ch.

20:26. The few indications of his character afforded by the Gospels

(John 11:16; 20:24-29) show him to have possessed an affectionate but

unimaginative nature, desiring much, hoping little, and easily given

to despair. Such a nature takes nothing for granted; it wants every

statement explained, nothing left to the imagination, nothing to the

interpretation of the future. “The heavenly _whither_, however

distinctly Jesus had already designated it, Thomas did not yet know

clearly how to combine with his circle of Messianic ideas; but he

desired to arrive at clearness.”--(_Meyer._)

6 Jesus saith unto him, I am the[547] way, and the

truth,[548] and the life:[549] no[550] man cometh unto the

Father, but by me.

[547] ch. 10:9; Isa. 35:8, 9; Heb. 10:19, 20.

[548] ch. 1:17; 15:1.

[549] ch. 1:4; 11:25.

[550] Acts 4:12.

7 If ye had known me, ye should have known my Father also:

and from henceforth ye know him, and have seen him.

=6, 7. Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life.=

This is not directly responsive to the implied question of Thomas.

That is theoretical; this is practical. The disciples desire to

understand the way by which Christ is to depart, and the place to

which he is going; Christ’s answer points out the way in and by which

the disciple can follow his Lord and be with him where he is. There is

here, therefore, not merely a play upon the word “way,” though

Christ uses it in one sense in ver. 4 and in a different sense in ver.

6; but the same word is used to turn the thoughts of the inquirer from

a purely theoretical question about Christ to a practical truth

concerning himself. It was always the habit of Christ to answer

questions in theoretical theology by directions helpful to the

spiritual life (see ver. 22-24; ch. 3:4-6; 4:19-24). The phrase, _I am

the way, the truth, and the life_, may be interpreted, according to

Lightfoot, as a Hebraism equivalent to the true and living way; but it

is better to take the two latter phrases as explanations of the

former. Christ is the way unto the Father, not because he points out

the way, but because he is the truth concerning the Father, and

possesses in himself the divine life, and has power to impart it to

us. He does not merely reveal the truth; he _is_ the truth; the truth

incarnated in a living form; the truth of God, whom he manifests to

the world (Matt. 11:27; John 1:1, 2, 14; 10:30; Phil. 2:6; Col. 2:9;

Heb. 1:13), and the truth of life, which he illustrates more forcibly

by his example than by his words, so that all his precepts are summed

up in the one command, “Follow me.” He is the life, having life in

himself (ch. 5:26), imparting it to others (ch. 10:10), and so giving

them power to become sons of God (ch. 1:12) by the possession of that

divine life without which no man can ever see God (ch. 3:3; Heb.

12:14). To come to the Father by Christ as the way is not, then,

merely to accept him as an inspired teacher respecting the Father, nor

merely as an atoning sacrifice, whose blood cleanses away the sins

which intervene between the soul and the Father (Heb. 10:20); it is to

be conformed to him as to the truth, and to be made partaker of his

life (Phil. 3:8-14).--=No one cometh to the Father but by me.= He now

says “to the Father,” not to the Father’s house, because, as Godet

well says, “It is not in heaven that we are to find God, but in God

that we are to find heaven.” By _me_ is equivalent to, by me as the

way, the truth, and the life. This does not necessarily require a

knowledge of, still less a correct theological opinion concerning

Christ. The conception of God’s character may be really derived from

Christ’s teaching, the life may be conformed to Christ’s example, and

the soul may be partaker of his spirit, and yet the individual may be

unconscious of the source from which he has derived his knowledge of

God, his ideal of life, and his inspiration. This declaration is

inclusive rather than exclusive; it is equivalent to that of ch. 1:9

(see note there), “That was the true Light which lighteth every man

that cometh into the world.” All spiritual life comes through Christ,

but not necessarily through a clear and correct knowledge about

Christ.--=If ye had known me ye should have known my Father also.=

Comp. ch. 8:19. The practical lesson for us clearly is that the way to

come to a true spiritual knowledge of the Father is by a study of the

life and character of Christ, and above all by a sympathetic and

personal spiritual acquaintance with him. His disciples had not known

Christ. They had up to this time believed in him as a temporal

Messiah. Of a Messiah crucified, the power of God and the wisdom of

God unto salvation to Gentile as well as Jew (1 Cor. 1:24), they had

known nothing, and hence of God as their Father and their Friend they

knew nothing.--=From henceforth ye have known him and have seen him.=

From this time. He refers to what he has already disclosed of the

divine nature, in the washing of the disciples’ feet, in the prophecy

of his own betrayal and death, and in what he is about to tell them of

the spiritual presence of himself and the Father, through the Holy

Spirit, in their hearts. From the time of this disclosure it will

indeed be their own fault if they fail to comprehend, at least in some

measure, “the breadth and length and depth and height, and to know the

love of Christ (and so the love of the Father revealed in and through

Christ), which passeth knowledge” (Ephes 3:18, 19).

8 Philip saith unto him, Lord, shew us the Father and it

sufficeth us.

9 Jesus saith unto him. Have I been so long time with you,

and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he[551] that hath

seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou _then_,

Shew us the Father?

[551] Col. 1:15.

=8, 9. Philip saith unto him, Shew us the Father and it sufficeth us.=

On Philip’s life and character, see Vol. I, p. 149. Compare the

request of Moses (Exod. 33:18). Philip has in mind the O. T.

appearances of God; he wants such a manifestation of the Deity, _a

seeing_ of God. “One such sight of God would set at rest all these

fears, and give him perfect confidence.”--(_Alford._) He wants to walk

by sight, and not by faith. He expresses the universal longing of

humanity for a vision of the unknown. This request furnishes the text

on which the following discourse is founded. Christ replies that the

unknown Father is manifested to the world in his Son (ver. 9-11), and

in the spiritual life, the inward experience, of those that love him

and keep his commandments (ver. 15-21); he points out the way to

secure this inward experience, namely, by loving the Son and keeping

his commandments (ver. 22-26); he declares that this indwelling of the

Father in the soul of the believer brings abundant peace (ver.

27-31); it is more than a vision, it is an abiding, by which the life

of God flows into the soul of man, making it partaker of the divine

nature and fruitful in works of divine love (ch. 15:1-8); this love,

patterned after and imbibed from Christ, extends to the world that

hates both the Lord and his disciples (ch. 15:9-27); this love, born

and kept alive by the indwelling of the unseen Father, is the

illuminator, the instructor, and the inspirer of him who possesses it,

and gives him assurance of the divine love and intimacy of spiritual

communion with the divine Being (ch. 16). See, further, Prel. Note.

There is a real connection in this discourse, though not that of an

oration; the unity is spiritual rather than intellectual; but it all

circles about a single central truth, the provision which divine love

has made for satisfying the soul-hunger for a vision of the unseen and

invisible God. In a sense Philip is right, though the _sight_, if the

sight of a spirit was possible, would not satisfy; but we see God only

as we become like him, and we shall be satisfied when we awake in his

likeness and so see him as he is (Ps. 17:15; 1 John 1:2).--=Have I

been so much time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip?=

Not merely the length of time is indicated; it had been but about

three years, probably a little less; but during that three years he

had been constantly with his disciples; they had eaten, slept,

journeyed, lived together; the companionship was most intimate, the

opportunity for familiar acquaintance perfect.--=He that hath seen me

hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Show us the Father?=

There is a physical and there is a spiritual sight. The disciples had

known Jesus after the flesh; but Christ according to the spirit they

did not know till after the descent of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost.

To admire the Son of man is one thing; to receive the Spirit of God

manifested in and through him is quite different. He that has a

spiritual discernment of Christ will recognize the spiritual character

of the unknown Father, the truth, mercy, love of God, shining in and

through the Son. There is and can be no physical vision of God; he is

a spirit, and is to be spiritually known, to be worshipped in spirit

as well as in truth (ch. 4:24). The language of Christ here, and

indeed throughout this whole discourse, is utterly inconsistent with

the conception of him as a mere human or superhuman _ambassador_ of

God. He represents not merely the divine government, but the divine

Being. The Father is so in him that whoever looks within the

tabernacle beholds the glory as of the only begotten of the Father

(ch. 1:14). He is the manifestation in the flesh, not of the divine

government, but of God (1 Tim. 3:16). It is impossible to refer this

answer to the mere union in sympathy and purpose of Jesus with God.

“No Christian, even if perfected, could say, ‘He that has seen me has

seen Christ.’ How much less, then, could a Jew, though perfect, have

said, ‘He that hath seen me hath seen the Father.’”--(_Godet._)

10 Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the

Father in me? the words that I speak unto you I speak not

of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the

works.

11 Believe me that I _am_ in the Father, and the Father in

me: or else believe me for the very works’ sake.

=10, 11. Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in

me?= God is in everything which he has made; the All and in All (Jer.

23:24; 1 Cor. 15:28). We also are intended to be temples in which he

is to dwell (Ps. 91:1; Rom. 8:11; 1 Cor. 3:16; 2 Tim. 1:14). But sin,

which has been admitted to dwell in us (Rom. 7:17), has driven out the

Spirit of God, so that the temple is destroyed by defilement (1 Cor.

3:17, marg.); it ceases to be the temple of God. He dwells no longer

in it. In Christ Jesus there was no sin; in Christ Jesus, therefore,

dwells all the fullness of the Godhead bodily (Col. 2:9); and it is by

union with him, and a new life received in and by and from him, that

the fullness of the divine indwelling is to be at length restored to

all that are his (ch. 17:21-23; Ephes. 3:17).--=The words that I speak

to you I speak not of myself.= _From myself_ (ἀπ’ ἐμαυτοῦ). _From_

signifies the fountain or source; the source of Christ’s authority is

not in himself, but in the Father, who dwells in and speaks through

him. See ch. 5:19, note.--=But the Father, he who abides in me, he

doeth the works.= Some read, _doeth his own works_. So Tischendorf and

Meyer. The Received reading is preferable, but the meaning is much the

same. Whether we read, He that dwelleth in me doeth his own works

(ποιεῖ τὰ ἔργα ἀυτοῦ), or, He that dwelleth in me, he it is who doeth

the works (αὐτὸς ποιεῖ τὰ ἔργα), the emphasis is equally put upon the

Father as the One who, abiding in the Son, does all things through

him. The _works_ are here, not merely the miracles, but the whole

range of beneficent action of the Son, including certainly the

miracles, but those only as a part of the whole service of love. This

word _work_ (ἔργον) is rarely, I think never, used in the N. T. as

equivalent to _miracle_ (σημεῖον).--=Have faith in me, that I am in

the Father.= Beware of understanding this as equivalent to, Believe

me, on my mere personal assurance; this is apparently the

interpretation of our English version, and is sustained by even so

eminent an authority as Meyer. It is grammatically possible; but it

neither accords with Jesus’ use of the word _believe_ (πιστεύω), which

he habitually uses to signify a spiritual apprehension, not merely an

intellectual opinion; nor with the spirit of this discourse, which,

beginning with ver. 1, is throughout addressed, not to the formation

of correct opinions, but to the building up of a right spiritual

apprehension of Christ, and through him of the eternal Father. The

meaning is, _Have faith in me that I am in the Father, and the Father

in me_; _i. e._, Look beneath the surface, the flesh; behold in the

inward grace, manifesting itself in the outward speech and action, the

lineaments of the divine character; so have faith in me as one in whom

the Father dwells, and through whom the Father is made manifest. But

if this spiritual sense is lacking, then--=Through= (_by reason of_,

διά) =the works themselves believe=. Μοι is omitted by Godet, Meyer,

Lachmann, and Tischendorf, on the authority of the Sinaitic,

Cambridge, and Vatican manuscripts. Christ places his own character in

the front rank, as the principal evidence of the divine origin and

authority of Christianity. He is his own best witness. But, for those

who cannot discern the divinity of his life and character, he appeals

to the works wrought by him and by the religion of which he is the

founder, and which was more powerful after his death than during his

life. The evidence from the miracles, and from the whole miraculous

history of Christianity, is secondary to the evidence from the

character and person of Christ himself.

12 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He[552] that believeth on

me, the works that I do shall he do also; and greater

_works_ than these shall he do; because I go unto my Father.

[552] Matt. 21:21.

=12. Verily, verily, I say unto you, * * * greater works than these

shall he do; because I go to my Father.= If by _works_ was

meant merely miracles, this declaration would be difficult of

interpretation; for none of Christ’s disciples have ever wrought

greater miracles than the Master, nor is it easy to conceive of a

greater miracle than the resurrection of the dead. But if by _works_

was meant Christ’s whole life of beneficent activity, then this

promise has been abundantly fulfilled. For Christ worked in a very

narrow sphere, both of time and place; for three years, in a province

no larger than the State of Vermont. More souls were converted at

Peter’s preaching on the day of Pentecost than during the whole of

Christ’s personal ministry. At Christ’s death the whole number of

Christian converts does not seem to have exceeded five hundred, and

Christianity was utterly unknown outside of Palestine. At John

Wesley’s death Methodism had spread over Great Britain, the Continent

of Europe, the United States, and the West Indies, and its communion

embraced over eighty thousand members. Whitefield, Wesley, Spurgeon,

Moody preached during their lives to immensely greater numbers than

Christ ever personally taught; and probably many Christian physicians

have healed more sick than Christ ever healed. Thus in _extent_ the

disciples have already done greater works than their Master. And this

for the reason here assigned, namely, because he has gone to the

Father; and because of that going the Comforter has come to bless the

labors of the disciples with a wider and more powerful divine

influence than could, in the nature of the case, proceed from God

incarnate in a single human life (ch. 16:7). But we have no right to

say that this promise does not await even further fulfillment. When

the fullness of time shall have come, and God dwells in all his

children in the fullness foreseen in ch. 17:21, there may be in them a

power over nature of which modern science gives possibly a

foreshadowing, and which will be, in its effects, much greater than

that which Christ exercised over it, because they that exercise it

will have the whole earth as their inheritance. Only thus can I

understand such promises as that here and in Mark 11:23, etc.

13 And[553] whatsoever ye shall ask in my name, that will I

do, that the Father may be glorified in the Son.

[553] 1 John 5:14.

14 If ye shall ask anything in my name, I will do _it_.

=13, 14. And whatsoever ye shall ask in my name, that will I do.= For

analogous promises of answers to prayer, see Exod. 22:27; Deut. 4:29;

Ps. 34:15; 37:4, 5; Jer. 29:12, 13; Joel 2:32; Matt. 7:7, 8; Mark

11:24; John 15:16; 16:23; James 1:5; 1 John 3:22; 5:14, 15. A

comparison of these passages shows clearly that God does not give an

unconditional promise of affirmative answer to every prayer. This

would be to place omnipotence at the command of ignorance and

selfishness; it would be a curse, not a blessing. The condition here

is embodied in the words, _In my name_; the promise is only to those

petitions asked in the name of _Jesus Christ_. To ask in the name of

Christ is not to introduce his name into the petition, as in the

familiar phrase, For Christ’s sake; nor is it merely to approach the

Father through the mediatorship of Jesus; this, but much more than

this, is included. “In the name” of any one, as used in the N. T.,

generally, if not always, signifies representing him, standing in his

stead, fulfilling his purposes, manifesting his will, and imbued with

and showing forth his life and glory. With John it always has this

signification. Thus, “The works that I do in my Father’s name” (ch.

10:25) is equivalent to, The works that I do in my Father’s stead, for

him and by his power and authority; “Blessed is the King of Israel

that cometh in the name of the Lord” (ch. 12:13) is equivalent to,

That cometh as the representative and manifestation of the Lord; “The

Holy Ghost whom the Father will send in my name” (ch. 14:26) is

equivalent to, The Holy Ghost who comes to represent me, and teach the

truths concerning me, and implant and keep alive my life in the souls

of my disciples; “I kept them in thy name” is equivalent to, I, as one

with thee (ch. 10:29, 30), have kept them within the circle of thine

influence, because within mine own, which is thine. Comp. Acts 3:6;

4:7; Phil. 2:10; Col. 3:17, and notes. Here, then, the declaration is

that whatsoever we ask, speaking for Christ, seeking his will,

representing him and his interests, and his kingdom, not merely our

own special and personal interests (Phil. 2:21), will be granted. So

in Matt. 6:9 (see note there) the Lord makes the petition, “Hallowed

be thy name,” the portico to every prayer--so teaching us that in

every prayer the desire for the glory of God should be supreme. So

again in Rom. 8:26 the apostle represents us taught both how and for

what to pray by the Spirit of Christ within us. But every prayer thus

offered in the name of Christ and with a supreme allegiance to him,

representing his kingdom and imbued by his spirit, will be in

character, like his prayer at Gethsemane. It will carry with it the

petition, “Not my will but thine be done,” and thus, as Meyer says,

“The _denial_ of the petition is the _fulfillment_ of the prayer, only

in another way.” See 2 Cor. 12:8, 9.--=That the Father may be

glorified in the Son.= When the church is a true representative of

Christ, filled with his spirit, manifesting his character and life, so

that it prays in his name, in his name casts out devils (Luke 10:17),

and in his name suffers, filling up what is behind of the Lord’s

affliction (Col. 1:24), and doing all in his stead, as his

representative, and because imbued with his spirit, then the Father is

glorified in the Son, because he is glorified in humanity, whom he

hath redeemed; for then the glorified and redeemed church is the body

of Christ (Ephes. 1:23), the visible manifestation of his invisible

presence, his perpetual incarnation.--=If ye shall ask anything in my

name, I will do it.= The promise is specific; a promise not merely to

provide generally for the wants of the disciples, but to hear and

answer their specific requests. Comp. Matt. 7:9, 10. Observe, too, the

language, _I will do it_, and compare the phraseology here with that

of the analogous promise in ch. 16:23, “Whatsoever ye shall ask the

Father in my name, _he_ will give it you.” What inspired prophet or

angelic messenger could make such a promise? “This _I_ already

indicates the glory” (_Bengel_), the glory of him who is _one_ with

the Father.

15 If[554] ye love me, keep my commandments.

[554] ver. 21, 23; ch. 15:10, 14; 1 John 5:3.

16 And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you

another Comforter,[555] that he may abide with you for ever;

[555] ch. 15:26.

17 _Even_ the Spirit of truth; whom[556] the world cannot

receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but

ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and[557] shall be in

you.

[556] 1 Cor. 2:14.

[557] Rom. 8:9; 1 John 2:27.

=15-17. If ye love me keep my commandments.= The object of the Gospel

is the inspiration of love, not mere obedience; but obedience is the

test because the manifestation of love. The N. T. recognizes no other

test of love to Christ than compliance in the daily life with his

will. See for striking illustration of this, ch. 21:15-17.--=And I

will pray the Father.= The poverty of the English language has

prevented our translators from producing in the English Bible the

distinction between three Greek verbs, which bear different

significations, but are all indiscriminately translated by the word

_pray_. These are _to request_ (προσεύχομαι), _to ask_ (ἐρωτάω), and

_to entreat_ (αἰτέω). Christ is said in the N. T. _to request_ the

Father (Matt. 14:23; 26:36; Mark 1:35, etc.), and _to ask_ of the

Father (ch. 16:26; 17:9; 15:20), but never _to entreat_ the Father.

Here the second of these words is used. “Our Lord never uses _entreat_

(_aitein_, _aitesthai_, αἰτεῖν or αἰτεῖσθαι) of Himself in respect of

that which he seeks on behalf of his disciples from God; for his is

not the _petition_ of the creature to the Creator, but the request of

the Son to the Father. The consciousness of his equal dignity, of his

potent and prevailing intercession, speaks out in this, that as often

as he asks or declares that he will ask, anything of the Father, it is

always _requesting_ or _inquiring_ (_erotas_, _erotaso_, ἐρωτάω,

ἐρωτήσω), that is, as upon equal terms, never _entreating_ (_aiteo_,

_aiteso_, αἰτέω or αἰτήσω).”--(_Trench._) See further ch. 16:23, 24,

note.--=And he shall give you another Paraclete.= The original word,

inadequately rendered in our English version by the word _Comforter_,

is simply untranslateable. It is composed of two Greek words (παρά

καλέω), _to call to one’s side_, and signifies one who is called to

aid another. And this etymological signification of the word indicates

the office of the Holy Spirit in his relations to us; he is our

present help in every time of need, the one with whom we walk, our

Consoler, our Strength, our Guide, our Peace-giver, our ever present

God. The word _Comforter_ must then be taken in its etymological and

old English sense, as one who gives not mere consolation, but strength

(_con fortis_). He is here called another Comforter; yet a little

below, Christ seemingly identifies him both with the Father and with

himself, in the declaration “I will manifest myself to him (ver. 21),

and we” (_i. e._, the Father and I,) “will make our abode with him”

(ver. 23). In the Comforter Christ himself is ever present with his

church (Matt. 28:20), for the Comforter is one with Christ as both are

one with the Father, so that the presence of one is the presence of

all (Rom. 8:9, 10; Gal. 2:20; 4:6). We know too little of the interior

nature of the Deity to be able to draw any clear distinction between

the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost. We only know that as God in

the Father is manifested to us as providing for us, and in the Son as

making atonement for us, so in the Spirit he is manifested by being

spiritually ever present with us. The mystery of their diversity in

unity defies philosophical analysis. But Christ is speaking to the

experience, not to the intellect; and to the spiritual experience the

father, the Son and the Holy Ghost, the Provider, the Atoning Saviour

and the Indwelling Spirit, God in nature, in the flesh, and in our own

souls, are one.--=That he may abide with you forever.= In contrast

with the Son, who came but for a time, and because he was God

_manifest in the flesh_, could abide only with a few and only for a

limited period. To long for the laws of the O. T., or even for the

visible presence of the limited and earthly manifestation of God

afforded by the N. T., is to desire to go back from the broader,

deeper, fuller manifestation, to one narrower and more limited. To be

governed by precedents or rules of the past is to ignore the

perpetually abiding presence of the Comforter, the promised guide into

all truth. Of his office Christ speaks more fully in ver. 26 and ch.

16:7-15.--=The Spirit of Truth.= So called, (1) because it is by

giving a spiritual knowledge of the truth that he ministers to those

that receive him. The Comforter strengthens, guides, liberates,

Sanctifies by the truth (ch. 8:32; 16:13; 17:17, 19; 1 Cor. 2:4; 1

Thess. 1:5). (2) Because his ministry is perfectly true without any

admixture of error. All teaching that is ministered through human

language, even that of Christ and the apostles, is subject to the

errors and the misapprehensions of the human medium through which it

passes. The instruction of the Spirit, ministered directly to our

spirits, though still liable to be misapprehended and perverted by us,

is not subject to error in the interpretation. It is perfect truth;

all other teaching is truth with alloy, from which we must separate

it, as best we may.--=Whom the world cannot receive.= To be literally

understood. _Cannot_ is not here equivalent to _will not_. He that is

of the world, living unto it, making it his end, cannot receive

spiritual truth or spiritual influences. His mind is blinded by the

god of this world (Isa. 6:9, 10; 2 Cor. 4:4). The declaration here is

analogous to that of Christ in John 3:3, “Except a man be born again

he cannot _see_ the kingdom of God,” and to that of Paul in 1 Cor.

2:14, “The natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God;

for they are foolishness unto him; neither can he know them; because

they are spiritually discerned.”--=Because it seeth him not, neither

knoweth him.= There is no visible manifestation of the Comforter; he

is not and cannot be discerned by the senses as Christ could be and

during his life was, by the manifestation of his miraculous power; and

the unspiritual has no inward consciousness of his presence, no

spiritual experience of his comfort, strength, or guidance. Hence,

since the Comforter is not discernible by the outward sense, and the

unspiritual have never had developed within them the inward sense of

faith, they cannot receive him. In contrast with the world in this

respect is the disciple of Christ, in whom the spiritual life has been

awakened in the new birth.--=But ye know him because he abides with

you, and shall be in you.= There is no hint here that the disciples

can _see_ the Comforter any more than the world. This should have

prevented Godet’s misapprehension of this passage, that “before

receiving they must have _seen_ and known the Spirit.” To see (θεωρέω)

is to recognize with the senses, or to recognize intellectually by

deductions from what is perceived by the senses. Neither by sight, nor

by deduction from sight can the Comforter be known. He is known only

by those with and in whom, as a conscious Presence, he abides. Some

texts read _is in you_ instead of _shall be in you_. The future is the

preferable reading, and the antithesis between the first and last

clauses of the verse indicates a progressive development in the

spiritual life. The Comforter was even then _with_ the disciples,

though they were not yet ready to receive him; he was _in_ them,

inspiring and moulding their life and character, after the day of

Pentecost. So he is ever with the church and the individual Christian;

but he is _in_ the church and _in_ the Christian only when they wait

and watch for his appearing, as the apostles waited and watched before

the day of Pentecost.

18 I will not leave you comfortless: I[558] will come to

you.

[558] ver. 3:28.

19 Yet a little while, and the world seeth me no more: but

ye see me: because[559] I live, ye shall live also.

[559] Heb. 7:25.

20 At that day ye shall know that I _am_ in my Father, and

ye in me, and I in you.

=18-20. I will not leave you orphans.= This, which is the marginal

reading, exactly renders the original. Our English version, _I will

not leave you comfortless_, though made sacred by many an association,

deprives the promise of the singular significance involved in the

original. An orphan is not a person without parents, but one who is

separated from his parents by death; memory looks back to them, hope

looks forward to them, but they are not personally present. Christ

declares that he will not thus leave his disciples. Their Saviour

shall be more than a memory, more than a hope; he will be their

personal present God.--=I will come to you.= He refers here not to his

reappearance in the resurrection, for that was followed by his

disappearance in the ascension, so that if on this the disciples alone

depended they were left more than ever before in orphanage. Nor did he

then make his abode with the disciples; he vouchsafed them only brief

and transient appearances of himself. He does not refer to his second

coming; for the world, as well as his own disciples, will then see him

(Rev. 1:7; 6:15-17). He refers to that spiritual manifestation which

he makes of himself, and of the Father through him, by the gift and

indwelling of the Holy Spirit, whom the Father sends in his name. This

is clear from vers. 19, 20, 23, 26, etc.--=Yet a little while and the

world seeth me no more; but ye see me, because I am living and ye

shall live also.= According to the punctuation of our English version

there is here a double promise, first that the disciples shall again

see their Lord, secondly that they shall share his life. According to

the punctuation which I have adopted, the second promise is implied

rather than asserted, and is made the basis of the first. Either is

grammatically possible; the second rendering is preferable, because

the whole of Christ’s teaching here refers not to the life of the

disciple, but to the manifestation to him of his Lord, and because

thus the two clauses of the sentence are brought into close

connection. The soul’s perception of the personal presence of Christ

is then dependent upon sharing his spiritual life; and this is

abundantly taught, both here and elsewhere. We are changed into the

image of Christ by beholding him (2 Cor. 3:18), and we behold him by

conforming to his image (2 Pet. 1:5-9). The promise is one of

spiritual sight, dependent upon spiritual life. Since the world does

not and cannot see him (ver. 17), arguments based on visible phenomena

to prove the reality of that which is a spiritual experience are

always in vain. Hence the futility of the ordinary methods of arguing

with skeptics. They are endeavors to prove to the blind; whereas the

blind must first _see_, then learn.--=At that day ye shall know that I

am in the Father, and ye in me and I in you.= _That day_ was in the

history of the church the day of Pentecost, when the Spirit was first

revealed with power to the entire body of believers. But each

believing soul has also its Pentecost, when it first learns the

meaning of Christ’s promises in this chapter. This is to it _that

day_, the one great day of its existence. It is not said that the

disciple will understand _how_ the Father, the Son, and the disciples

are in one another, but he will know it _as a fact_; the unity of the

Father and the Son, and the indwelling of both in the believer, will

become a part of his experience. This experience, promised here, is

expressed as a realized fact by Paul in Gal. 2:20: “I am crucified

with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me:

and the life which I now live in the flesh, I live by the faith of the

Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me.”

21 He[560] that hath my commandments, and keepeth them, he

it is that loveth me: and he that loveth me shall be loved

of my Father, and I will love him, and will manifest myself

to him.

[560] ver. 15, 23.

=21.= Having given expression to the mystical truth of the spiritual

manifestation of their Lord to the believers, Christ next states the

conditions under which it is realized. These are not _external_; this

spiritual revelation is not made dependent upon retiring from the

world and living a life of asceticism and artificial self-denial. They

are not _intellectual_; this revelation and indwelling of Christ is

not made dependent upon the creed of the disciple. They are _moral_;

practical obedience to the words of Christ assures spiritual enjoyment

of his presence and companionship.--=He that hath my commandments and

keepeth them.= These clauses are not to be read as repetitions of

the same idea, made for the sake of emphasis. To _have_ is not the

same as to _keep_. He hath Christ’s commandments _not_ who has a

knowledge of them, so that the promise is conditional upon a certain

degree of Christian education, but who has a _spiritual apprehension

of them_, who appreciates their spirit. Since all of Christ’s commands

are comprised in the one direction “Follow me,” the first condition of

receiving this spiritual manifestation of Christ as a real and living

Presence in the daily life, is a spiritual appreciation of his life

and character as they are disclosed in the N. T., and therewith a like

appreciation of the precepts, principles, and spirit of the life which

he has inculcated. He _keeps_ Christ’s commandments who carefully

guards them in his daily life, regarding them as a possession which he

is in danger of losing. See Matt. 19:17, note.--=That one is he that

loveth me.= The evidence of love which Christ recognizes is not

profession, or ceremonial, or emotional experience, or intellectual

opinion, but spiritual appreciation of his precepts and practical

obedience to them. The good Samaritan is a more acceptable lover than

the priest or the Levite.--=He that loveth me shall be loved of my

Father, and I will love him.= Every disciple may thus become a

“beloved disciple.” For the love here spoken of is not that love of

compassion which the Father and the Son have for the whole world (ch.

3:16), even while it was dead in trespasses and sins (Ephes. 2:4, 5),

but the love of spiritual fellowship and personal friendship (ch.

15:14, 15; Gal. 4:7). “There is between these two feelings the same

difference as between a man’s compassion for his guilty and unhappy

neighbors and the affection of a father for his child or of a husband

for his wife.”--(_Godet._) Christ is here speaking not of the

condition on which men may become his disciples; he is instructing his

disciples, is pointing out the condition on which each one of them may

come into a higher spiritual experience of their Master’s love and

spiritual presence. This is indicated not only by the context and

general character of the discourse, but also by the peculiar language

here, _That one it is who loveth me_. _That one_ (ἐκεῖνος) indicates

an exceptional individual, one among many, who, by his course, becomes

the special friend of Jesus.

22 Judas[561] saith unto him, not Iscariot, Lord, how is it

that thou wilt manifest thyself unto us, and not unto the

world?

[561] Luke 6:16.

23 Jesus answered and said unto him, If a man love me,

he will keep my words: and my Father will love him,

and[562] we will come unto him, and make our abode with him.

[562] 1 John 2:24; Rev. 3:20.

=22, 23. Judas saith unto him, not Iscariot.= The same person called

Lebbeus in Matt. 10:3 and Thaddeus in Mark 3:18. In Luke 6:16, etc.,

and Acts 1:13, he is called “Judas (the brother) of James.” See Note

on Twelve Apostles, Vol. I, p. 149.--=Lord, and what has happened that

thou wilt manifest thyself to us, but not at all= (οὐχὶ) =to the

world?= His question is not, as represented by our English version,

the expression of a mere curiosity, In what way wilt thou make this

manifestation of thyself? it is the expression of amazement and

perplexity. All the disciples were anticipating that Christ would

manifest his Messiahship in some unexpected manner, striking terror

into the hearts of all his opponents, and becoming, by some miraculous

forth-putting of power, King of kings and Lord of lords. Judas,

hastily concluding that there is to be no other manifestation than

that of which Christ is now speaking, expresses his amazement and

perplexity. What has happened to lead to the abandonment of a world

manifestation of the Messiah? is the meaning of his question. But

Christ has not said that he will not at all be manifested to the

world; only that the world cannot see that manifestation of him of

which he is now speaking.--=Jesus answered and said unto him.= He does

not reply to the question of Judas; enters into no explanation; simply

reiterates that the condition of receiving the spiritual manifestation

of Christ as a personal Presence is obedience to his directions.

Christ never suffers himself to be turned aside from practical

instruction by inquiries in theoretical theology.--=If any one loves

me, he will keep my word.= _Word_, not _words_; singular, not plural.

His command is but one word: love.--=My Father will love him, and we

will come unto him and make our abode with him.= This promise is more

than the preceding one (ver. 21). There Christ promises simply that

the obedient disciple shall see his Lord; here that he shall become a

temple in which his Lord will constantly dwell; there that Christ

shall manifest himself to the soul; here that the Father and the Son

shall dwell in the soul. “They shall come like wanderers from their

home and lodge with him; will be daily his guests, yea, house and

table companions.”--(_Meyer._) Thus Christ by his commandments knocks

at the door of the heart; he that hath those commandments hears the

voice; he that keeps them opens the door (Rev. 3:20). Thus, too, the

Christian’s experience on earth is a foretaste of his experience in

heaven. “Here below it is God who dwells with the believer; above, it

will be the believer who will dwell with God.”--(_Godet._) By his

language here, _We will come unto him_, Christ identifies himself as

the companion of the Father in the spiritual experience of the

disciple. See ver. 15-17, note.

24 He that loveth me not keepeth not my sayings: and the

word which ye hear is not mine, but the Father’s which sent

me.

=24.= In contrast with the disciple who _has_ and _keeps_ the word of

Christ, our Lord portrays the opposite character. He loves not Christ;

he makes no attempt to treasure and guard his instruction; and in

rejecting the word and its Bearer he rejects the Father whom the

Bearer represents and by whom the word is given. Beware of reading the

negative, “The word is not mine,” as equivalent to The word is not

merely mine. Christ here, as in many other passages, disavows the

paternity of his own instructions. They are not his; they are the

Father’s who dwells in him, and inspires the words and performs the

works. See ch. 12:49, note.

25 These things have I spoken unto you, being _yet_ present

with you.

26 But[563] the Comforter, _which is_ the Holy Ghost,

whom the Father will send in my name, he[564] shall teach

you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance,

whatsoever I have said unto you.

[563] verse 16.

[564] ch. 16:13; 1 John 2:20, 27.

=25, 26. These things have I spoken unto you, being yet present with

you.= That is, As far as this I am able to carry my instructions, but

no farther; the Spirit shall complete them. Christ has already

contrasted the work of the Spirit with his own: his own dwelling with

his disciples is temporary, the abiding of the Spirit is forever; he

speaks _to_ his disciples, the Spirit speaks _in_ them (ver. 16, 17).

He now indicates a further point in the contrast. His own teaching was

partial; for he had many things to say which they could not bear (John

16:12), and much which he did say they could not understand till their

experience, developed by the indwelling of the Spirit of God, had

prepared them to comprehend it. But the promised Spirit shall, as the

Christian is able to bear the truth, teach all things.--=But the

Comforter.= See above on ver. 16.--=The Holy Spirit.= That is, the

Spirit of holiness. As he is the Spirit of truth, because all

experience of the higher spiritual truth comes in and through him, so

he is the Spirit of holiness, because all holiness of life and

character is wrought out by the soul only as the Holy Spirit works in

and with us the good pleasure of God (Phil. 2:12, 13; Heb. 13:20,

21).--=Whom the Father will send in my name.= As the disciple is to

pray in Christ’s name (see ver. 13, note), so the Father will answer

him in Christ’s name. That name is Jesus, _i. e._, Saviour, because he

saves his people from their sins (Matt. 1:21), and Christ, _i. e._,

The Anointed One, because he is the High Priest who makes atonement

for the sins of his people, and reconciles them unto God. See Vol. I,

p. 57, Note, etc., on Names of Jesus. The Holy Spirit is, then, sent

in his name, not because he is sent in his stead; he is not; the work

of the Spirit and of the Son are not the one in lieu of the other; nor

because he is sent in answer to the intercessory prayer of the Son;

the love of the Father is the cause of the dispensation of the Spirit,

as of the incarnation and the atonement of the Son; but because he is

sent to complete the work of the Son, to perfect that salvation

which is represented by the name Jesus, and that atonement and

reconciliation which is represented by the word Christ (John 3:5, 6;

7:39; Rom. 8:14-16, 26; 14:17; Gal. 5:16, 17; Ephes. 2:18, etc.).--=He

shall teach you all things.= That is, all things respecting the divine

life.--=And bring to your remembrance all things whatsoever I have

said unto you.= “He will teach new truths by recalling the old, and

will recall the old by teaching the new.”--(_Godet._) In its

application to the apostles, this is a promise of inspiration and a

guarantee of substantial accuracy, both in their reports of events and

of the instructions of Jesus Christ, and in their interpretation of

the laws and principles of the spiritual life. “It is in the

fulfillment of this promise to the apostles that their sufficiency as

witnesses of all that the Lord did and taught, and consequently the

authenticity of the Gospel narrative, is grounded.”--(_Alford._) But

there is no reason to limit this promise to the twelve to whom it was

immediately spoken. It occurs in the middle of a discourse which by

universal consent belongs to the church universal. There is no

consistency in claiming the promise of the manifestation of Christ in

ver. 21, the indwelling of the Father and the Son in ver. 23, and the

peace of God in ver. 27, and rejecting the promise of inspired

instruction in ver. 26. This promise, then, like that of Matt. 28:20,

is made to the church for all time; it is a promise of a continually

progressive instruction in the spiritual life, adapted to varying

needs and exigencies, both of the community and of the individual,

carrying on to its consummation the necessarily incomplete instruction

of the N. T., as well as making clear to the spiritual apprehension

that which preceding generations either imperfectly understood, wholly

failed to understand, or only partially comprehended. The spiritual

guide of the church is not an official hierarchy, nor ecclesiastical

tradition, but the living experience of those that love Christ, have

his words and keep them. This promise points to and assures the church

of a progressive Christian theology, and corresponds with the apostle

Paul’s declaration, “We know in part and we prophesy in part” (1 Cor.

13:9, 10).

27 Peace[565] I leave with you, my peace I give unto you:

not as the world giveth, give I unto you. Let not your

heart be troubled, neither let it be afraid.

[565] Ephes. 2:14-17; Phil. 4:7.

=27. Peace I leave with you; my peace I give unto you.= As the peace

of a child depends on the presence of his mother, so the peace of

these disciples on the presence of their Lord. He speaks to their

unuttered forebodings, and declares that he will leave this peace in

his departure as a legacy to them. But he will do more than this. Thus

far they have had peace in his presence; he will henceforth impart to

them his own source of strength in sending to them the indwelling

Spirit of God, so that they shall have, as he had, peace in

themselves. “_My peace_” implies the peace which belongs to himself,

is a characteristic of his own experience and a part of his own

nature. So in Phil. 4:7 the “peace of God” is that peace which is

characteristic of the Divine Being. It was this peace which enabled

Christ to stand unmoved and unperturbed in the court of Caiaphas and

the hall of Pilate. It was the fulfillment of this promise which

enabled the apostles to meet in like manner, unfearing and untroubled,

the threats and persecutions of the authorities in Jerusalem

immediately after the day of Pentecost (Acts 4:8, 19, 31; 5:29, 41);

which gave Stephen serenity in the storm of stones (Acts 6:15; 7:59,

60); enabled Peter to sleep in chains (Acts 12:6); gave to Paul and

Silas their songs in the night (Acts 16:25); kept Paul unmoved in the

midst of the mob at Jerusalem (Acts 21:31-40), and in the peril of

shipwreck (Acts 27:21-26, 31-35). Compare also, for expressions of

this peace of Christ in the Christian’s experience, Rom. 5:1-5;

8:35-39; 2 Cor. 4:7-9; Phil. 4:11-13; Heb., ch. 4. This peace is a

characteristic of the divine nature (Phil. 4:7), therefore a

characteristic of Christ, who is called Prince of Peace, because one

of the distinguishing characteristics of his kingdom is peace (Isa.

9:6; Rom. 14:17); therefore a fruit of the Spirit in the experience of

the followers of Christ (Rom. 8:6; Gal. 5:22); therefore the privilege

and duty of every disciple, who because of his peace and his power to

bestow it upon others is called a son of God (Matt. 5:9). It is

therefore not the peculiar luxury of a favored few, but the duty and

privilege of all (Rom. 2:10); not dependent on temperament or

circumstances, but on a faith which receives and recognizes an

indwelling God (Rom. 5:1; Ephes. 2:14; Phil. 4:9); not the occasional

siesta of the wearied worker, but the abiding spirit and sacred power

of his work (Phil. 4:7; Col. 1:11; 3:15). It is not without Spiritual

significance that Christ’s last words, as of “one who is about to go

away and says goodnight and leaves his blessing” (_Luther_), are a

promise of peace.--=Not as the world giveth give I unto you.= The wish

of peace was a customary leave-taking among the Jews (1 Sam. 1:17;

Luke 7:50; Acts 16:36; 1 Pet. 5:14; 3 John 14. Compare Gen. 43:23;

Judges 6:23). Christ distinguishes his promise here from the

salutations, which were often, as with us, mere empty formalities, and

which at best were but wishes or possibly prayers. This salutation is

more than a benediction, it is the promise of an actual gift.--=Let

not your heart be troubled, neither let it be afraid.= He thus returns

to the opening words of his discourse, words of strength-giving and

reassurance (see ver. 1).

28 Ye have heard how I said unto you, I go away, and come

_again_ unto you. If ye loved me, ye would rejoice, because

I said, I[566] go unto the Father: for my[567] Father is

greater than I.

[566] verse 12.

[567] 1 Cor. 15:27, 28.

=28. Ye have heard how I said unto you, I go away= (verses 2, 3,

12).--=If ye loved me ye would rejoice.= There is a gentle rebuke in

this language. It does not involve a denial or even a doubt of their

love, but it recalls them from the selfish thoughts fixed wholly on

their own sorrow to their allegiance and love to him. It may well be

repeated to ourselves in the hour of death--parting from any Christian

friend. Their thought of their own future gives them comfort (ver. 2

and 3); their thought of Christ’s love for and presence with them

gives them peace (ver. 26, 27); their thought of his glory and their

love for him gives them joy. Thus in the fruit of the Spirit joy and

peace follow because they grow out of love (Gal. 5:22). We, as well as

they, should rejoice, not sorrow, because Christ no longer dwells

incarnate on the earth, but has gone to the Father.--=Because I said I

go unto the Father: for my Father is greater than I.= His departure to

be with the greater Father was to be a cause of rejoicing, not merely

to the eleven, but to his church universal. This is not because he is

thus enabled to ensure his disciples a more powerful and perfect

protector, for the protection of the Father is accorded through the

Son, and as a protector the Son is one in power as well as in will

with the Father (John 10:30, note). Moreover, it is our love for

Christ, not the thought of our own interest, not even our spiritual

interest, which is the secret of the joy which the Christian should

experience in the exaltation of his Lord. Nor is the cause of that joy

the fact that Christ was about to enter into glory and blessedness;

for it is of the _greatness_, not of the _blessedness_ of the Father,

nor of his own heavenly condition, Christ speaks; the phrase, “The

Father is greater than I,” cannot, without violation of the meaning,

be rendered, The Father is more blessed than I. It is true that

because the Father is _greater_ than Christ, Christ in going to the

Father went to a condition of greater power for his own redemptive

work, for the up-building of that kingdom to which he and his

followers are consecrated. Christ is more to his followers, more

powerful in his work of redeeming love, in the Spirit than in the

flesh, absent from his disciples and with the Father than absent from

the Father and with the disciples. But more than this, more than in

our ignorance of both the Father and Son we can comprehend, is meant

by the declaration that Christ’s going to the Father was an

exaltation, and in that exaltation we, his followers, ought to rejoice

with and in him, if indeed we love him. The declaration, “_The Father

is greater than I_,” is not inconsistent with the preceding

declaration, “He that hath seen me hath seen the Father,” for that

declaration is interpreted by the one which immediately follows, “I am

in the Father and the Father in me;” he that has a spiritual

apprehension of Christ has a spiritual apprehension of the Father, who

is manifested in and through him. Nor is it inconsistent with Christ’s

declaration, “I and my Father are one,” for Christ as the protector of

his people may be one with the Father, and yet the Father may be

greater than the Son in the eternal relation between the two. Nor is

it inconsistent with John’s declaration that “The Word was God,” for

the _Word_ is not Jesus Christ (see ch. 1:1, note), but God as

manifested to the race, Jesus Christ being the Word _made flesh_ (ch.

1:14). It is inconsistent with any view of Christ’s character which

denies the essential divinity of his nature; for the creature cannot

say of God, without an extraordinarily irreverent egotism, “My Father

is greater than I.” “The creature who should say, ‘God is greater than

I,’ would blaspheme no less than one who should say, ‘I am equal with

God.’ God alone can compare himself with God.”--(_Godet._) It accords

with Christ’s habitual teaching concerning himself, as one who is sent

forth the Father, derives his authority from the Father, does all

things through the power of the Father, in all things obeys the will

of the Father, and will return to the Father again (Matt. 11:26, 27;

20:23; John 5:19, 22, 26, 27; 6:57; 8:18, 29; 10:18, 36; 15:15;

17:18); and with that of the N. T. generally, which constantly

represents Christ as receiving his divine power as Creator, Redeemer,

and Judge from the Father (Ephes. 1:20-22; Phil. 2:9; Heb. 1:8, 9; 1

Cor. 15:28). Jesus Christ is God _manifest in the flesh_, and God in

his absolute essence is greater than any manifestation of him is or

can be. As the artist is greater than his picture, the architect than

his house, the orator than his oration, so God is greater than the

Word through which he utters himself to human apprehension. In thus

interpreting this much debated passage, according to the plain and

natural meaning of the words, and, as it seems to me, the teachings of

Christ and his apostles, I accept substantially the interpretation of

Meyer, who sees in this declaration an illustration of “the absolute

monotheism of Jesus (ch. 17:3), and of the whole N. T., according to

which the Son, although of divine essence, of one nature with the

Father (ch. 1:1; Phil. 2:6; Col. 1:15-18), nevertheless was and is and

remains subordinated to the Father, the immutably higher one, since

the Son as Organ, as Commissioner of the Father, as Intercessor with

Him, etc., has received his whole power in the kingly office from the

Father (ch. 17:5), and, after the accomplishment of the work committed

to him, will restore it to the Father (1 Cor. 15:28).” To the same

effect, but more concisely, Edward H. Sears (_Heart of Christ_): “God

as absolute is more than God as revealed.” Similarly Olshausen and

Ellicott’s Commentary. Observe, however, that Christ’s language here

involves only the relations between the Son as incarnate and the

Father; in saying that the Son _was_ and _remains_ subordinated to the

Father, Meyer attributes to the words here a meaning confessedly

borrowed from other passages.

Two other interpretations have been offered from the orthodox point of

view: (1) That Christ speaks here of himself _as a man_. But this

ancient interpretation, invented in the early controversy with the

Arians, and revived recently by Ryle, has not, I think, despite the

authority of Augustine in its favor, the sanction of a single modern

exegetical scholar of any eminence. It is repudiated by Schaff, Godet,

Luthardt, Meyer, Alford, Tholuck. This easy method of solving the

seeming contradictions of Christ’s mysterious nature is utterly

untenable, for whatever opinion may be entertained respecting his

twofold nature as both God and man, no reader is authorized to say

what acts and words were manifestations of the human and what of the

divine nature. It is utterly inapplicable here, for “this

interpretation implies a mere platitude. Who needs to be told that the

human nature is inferior to the divine?”--(_Schaff._) (2) That Christ

here compares his present earthly condition with that to which he will

attain in going to the Father. This is Calvin’s interpretation.

“Christ does not here make a comparison between the divinity of the

Father and his own, nor between his own human nature and the divine

essence of the Father, but rather between his present state and the

heavenly glory to which he is afterwards to be received.” To the same

effect, substantially, are Alford, Luthardt, and Tholuck. This is

certainly involved in the language; the return from union with

humanity to union with the Father was a change from a lower and lesser

to a higher and greater condition. But much more is involved, for

Christ by his words institutes a comparison, not between his earthly

and his heavenly condition, as does Paul in Phil. 2:6-11, but between

himself and his Father.

29 And now I have told you before it come to pass, that,

when it is come to pass, ye might believe.

30 Hereafter I will not talk much with you: for the

prince[568] of this world cometh, and hath nothing[569] in

me.

[568] ch. 16:11; Ephes. 2:2.

[569] 2 Cor. 5:21; Heb. 4:15; 1 John 3:5.

31 But that the world may know that I love the Father;

and as[570] the Father gave me commandment, even so I do.

Arise, let us go hence.

[570] Ps. 40:8; Phil. 2:8.

=29-31. And now I have told you * * * that when it is come to pass ye

might have faith.= That is, before the Passion he foretells it and

directs the thoughts and hopes of his disciples to a point beyond, to

the results which are to be produced by the crucifixion, so that when

the night of darkness comes these words may remain to keep alive their

faith in him as one not _dead_, but only gone to the companionship of

the Father, and coming again _with the Father_ to be the spiritual and

indwelling companion of his own. Indirectly the office of prophecy is

implied in these words; it is not to give in the present a clear view

of the future, but to sustain faith and hope and courage, and make it

clear to the believer, when the events themselves take place, that

nothing is unexpected and unprovided for by his Father and

Saviour.--=The prince of this world is coming.= See note on ch. 12:31.

“Jesus sees the devil himself in the agents and executors of his

designs (ch. 13:2, 27; 6:70; Luke 4:13).”--(_Meyer._) And yet the cup

which they presented to him he accounts the cup which his Father

giveth him (ch. 18:11), for even the prince of this world is not

beyond the supreme control of God. The language here, as in ch. 12:31,

plainly implies Christ’s belief in a personal devil, and the devil’s

influence over and use of men as his instruments.--=Hath nothing in

me.= Satan never succeeds in the accomplishment of his evil designs

except when he finds _in_ the tempted something that recognizes him

and pays allegiance to him. He that is only _in_ the world but not of

the world may be _under_ the power of Satan, but cannot be _in_ his

power. The declaration here is confirmatory of that implied by ch.

8:46.--=But that the world may know that I love the Father=, etc.,

* * * =arise, let us go hence=. Our English version is erroneously

punctuated. There should be no break in the verse. Christ knew that

Judas had gone out to perfect arrangements for the betrayal, knew the

shame and torture that were before him, knew also the power of the

Father to accomplish the world’s redemption by that suffering if it

was endured to the end, and bade his disciples arise that they might

go forth with him, as he went forth to show the world his love for and

obedience to the Father. Thus, as he has just told his disciples that

they are to show their love to him by their obedience (ver. 21, 23),

he prepares to show his love to the Father by his obedience. But

though they arose, they did not go immediately out. See Prel. Note to

next chapter, and ch. 18:1.

An illustrated commentary on the Gospel according to St. John · 第 14 / 21 章